Originally posted by Vato26 In STO players play the role of ship captain. Playing a role = role playing. STO is a game. Therefore, since there is role playing in STO and STO is a game, it is a Role Playing Game.
lol.. in this case, ALL games are rpgs. In Rome:Total War, you play the role of an emperor. In Doom, you play the role of a marine. In minesweeper, you play the role of a minesweeper.
I'm struggling to think of a game in which you DON'T play a role. Maybe fifa?
Personally i think the game is an rpg, but i don't think it has much multiplayer and hardly any "massive".
Originally posted by Vato26 In STO players play the role of ship captain. Playing a role = role playing. STO is a game. Therefore, since there is role playing in STO and STO is a game, it is a Role Playing Game.
lol.. in this case, ALL games are rpgs. In Rome:Total War, you play the role of an emperor. In Doom, you play the role of a marine. In minesweeper, you play the role of a minesweeper.
I'm struggling to think of a game in which you DON'T play a role. Maybe fifa?
Personally i think the game is an rpg, but i don't think it has much multiplayer and hardly any "massive".
Yes, this game is multiplayer. More than one person plays this game on the same server and they can interact if they want (trading, grouping, PvP, talking). And, as I said previously in this thread, massive is a subjective term.
Yes, this game is multiplayer. More than one person plays this game on the same server and they can interact if they want (trading, grouping, PvP, talking). And, as I said previously in this thread, massive is a subjective term.
It's definitely multiplayer. There are tons of games that are Multiplayer but not MMOs. The RPG part is iffy. You do play a character and sort of a class and you have a level, two kinds really, and you skill up with experience. It could very well be an MMORPG. All multiplayer RPGs, however, are not MMORPGs. Neverwinter Nights is not an MMORPG, but 1 and 2 can have and do have persistent dedicated servers.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Well lets first M ..Massive well Ive been playing since beta and I have explored a lot and I can say its Massive. Second M I definately seen lots of people and grouped with them as well as join a fleet. So that is a Yes for two M's now for the O... I definately went on to play so yes for the O. So yes It IS AN MMO!! If you dont like the game why the heck do you have to right crap about it? Most not have any thing to do with your self... find a life a mate or whatever but stop complaining we got the hint !
To answer that question I think you need to define, at a rudimentary level, what is an MMO? I would say that the one most important aspect of an MMO is that the world is persistant. I.e. you log of but the "world lives on". In STO the only thing that is persistant is your character and equipment (including ships). Everything else in the "world" is static and instanced. Starbases, planets, PvP maps, missions, EVERYTHING else is static, instanced and unchangeable. If you log of and then log back in, the ONLY thing that may have changed are other characters, nothing else. There are no variables that decide how well the war is going, or how a planet is faring, they are all static and unchangeable. In this sense is the game really different from say Diablo 2, played on BNET? There the only thing that was persistant was also your character and your equipment and everything else was static and instanced. Sure, here you are constantly connected to a graphical world when playing but that is just cosmetical as in Diablo 2 you were connected to a chat lobby. So really, is this game an MMO? I would say no. EDIT: Just want to clarify that I am talking about the definition of the term MMORPG. Obiously this site considers the game to be an MMO or it would not be listed here so I am not challenging their definition.
From your definition not a single mmorpg on the market would be considered a mmo. Because none of them have any real persistant changes outside of those made to the characters. A boss mob once killed is not perma dead.
But lets look at the term MMO which stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. Is STO massive ? I would say yes it covers a large amount of area yes these areas are instanced off into seperate bite sized chunks BUT they are there and you can go to the. It does indeed covers a lot of area. Is it multiplayer well again yes your playing on the game with everyone else at the same time. You can interact with them. Lastly is it Online ummm yep.
So from the classic definition STO is a MMO.
Seriously there is really no need to try to redefine a generic term because you decide a games style is not to your taste. That is like claiming that football (soccer for you Americans) isn't really a ball game because you kick the ball instead of bouncing it like basketball and as for baseball ...
See they are all ball games they just follow different rules and methods. Like wise STo and Co are mmo's they just handle it differently than other games. But the essential factors are there. Whether or not you like their methodology used is up to you but like it or hate it , the fact that it is a mmo will not change.
To answer that question I think you need to define, at a rudimentary level, what is an MMO? I would say that the one most important aspect of an MMO is that the world is persistant. I.e. you log of but the "world lives on". In STO the only thing that is persistant is your character and equipment (including ships). Everything else in the "world" is static and instanced. Starbases, planets, PvP maps, missions, EVERYTHING else is static, instanced and unchangeable. If you log of and then log back in, the ONLY thing that may have changed are other characters, nothing else. There are no variables that decide how well the war is going, or how a planet is faring, they are all static and unchangeable. In this sense is the game really different from say Diablo 2, played on BNET? There the only thing that was persistant was also your character and your equipment and everything else was static and instanced. Sure, here you are constantly connected to a graphical world when playing but that is just cosmetical as in Diablo 2 you were connected to a chat lobby. So really, is this game an MMO? I would say no. EDIT: Just want to clarify that I am talking about the definition of the term MMORPG. Obiously this site considers the game to be an MMO or it would not be listed here so I am not challenging their definition.
I wish it was WoW in space.. that would be a 200% improvement to the crap now.. However, STO is nothing like WoW in any shape or form.. IMO.. STO is nothing more then a single player console game with online "co op" features.. ZZZZzzzz Wait.. I like games like such as "motor storm", "halo", "madden football".. etc etc.. and even tiger woods golf, but I would never pay $15 a month to play them
I wish it was WoW in space.. that would be a 200% improvement to the crap now.. However, STO is nothing like WoW in any shape or form.. IMO.. STO is nothing more then a single player console game with online "co op" features.. ZZZZzzzz Wait.. I like games like such as "motor storm", "halo", "madden football".. etc etc.. and even tiger woods golf, but I would never pay $15 a month to play them
Totally agree, STO is nothing more than a SP game, which has MP tagged on. It most certainly doesn`t have the depth of WOW,EQ, WAR.....
Sure I like the game for what it is, and if it were a normal SP game that had some online function then fine, I would buy it, but as an MMO it feels nothing more than something like Diablo II.
I played WOW 3-4 years.
I played STO beta and got bored.
Played WOW (5 years), AOC, AO, EQ2,AC2, Horizons, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, CO, STO(Beta),ROM, Allods, and many other F2P titles. Asl been in beta for many of the main titles and played countless SP games. I have been gaming for 15+ years!
To answer that question I think you need to define, at a rudimentary level, what is an MMO? I would say that the one most important aspect of an MMO is that the world is persistant. I.e. you log of but the "world lives on". In STO the only thing that is persistant is your character and equipment (including ships). Everything else in the "world" is static and instanced. Starbases, planets, PvP maps, missions, EVERYTHING else is static, instanced and unchangeable. If you log of and then log back in, the ONLY thing that may have changed are other characters, nothing else. There are no variables that decide how well the war is going, or how a planet is faring, they are all static and unchangeable. In this sense is the game really different from say Diablo 2, played on BNET? There the only thing that was persistant was also your character and your equipment and everything else was static and instanced. Sure, here you are constantly connected to a graphical world when playing but that is just cosmetical as in Diablo 2 you were connected to a chat lobby. So really, is this game an MMO? I would say no. EDIT: Just want to clarify that I am talking about the definition of the term MMORPG. Obiously this site considers the game to be an MMO or it would not be listed here so I am not challenging their definition.
From your definition not a single mmorpg on the market would be considered a mmo. Because none of them have any real persistant changes outside of those made to the characters. A boss mob once killed is not perma dead.
There are other aspects beside boss mobs. For instance: In WAR there was control for zones which could be affected by players and that went back and forth over time. In DAoC there were keeps that changed owners and relics that gave faction side bonuses. In Eve the control of 0.0 security sectors could change.
So there is definetely alot of games which are persistant and evolves over time.
But lets look at the term MMO which stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. Is STO massive ? I would say yes it covers a large amount of area yes these areas are instanced off into seperate bite sized chunks BUT they are there and you can go to the. It does indeed covers a lot of area. Is it multiplayer well again yes your playing on the game with everyone else at the same time. You can interact with them. Lastly is it Online ummm yep.
What you just did now is that you defined the therm but picking apart the words which it consists of, that is not how words are always defined. I like to go by the definition Wikipedia has:
"MORPGs are distinguished from single-player or small multi-player RPGs by the number of players, and by the game's persistent world, usually hosted by the game's publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game."
I put particular emphasis on the last part of the sentance: "..to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game." I dont feel STO is doing that as the only things that change over time are the characters and nothing else in the world. And monthly patches is not the same thing, if so then every single game would have that "feature" since almost all games are patched (including Diablo and even single player games).
So from the classic definition STO is a MMO.
No, according to your definition it is.
Seriously there is really no need to try to redefine a generic term because you decide a games style is not to your taste. That is like claiming that football (soccer for you Americans) isn't really a ball game because you kick the ball instead of bouncing it like basketball and as for baseball ...
Not true. It would however be like claiming a sport where there is no ball to be a ball game.
See they are all ball games they just follow different rules and methods. Like wise STo and Co are mmo's they just handle it differently than other games. But the essential factors are there. Whether or not you like their methodology used is up to you but like it or hate it , the fact that it is a mmo will not change.
I dont agree since we are talking about missing features and element which are part of the definition.
Champions Online and STO is missing one of the key features of MMO and that is that they dont change over time. The world is completely static and as such could be an offline game or a Diablo type game where the only part of the world which is actually persisted is your character and its belongings, nothing else in the world is actually persistant.
That for me is what defines an MMORPG and apparently also the definition shared by Wikipedia authors.
But we can use another definition from webopedia.com:
"Short for massively multiplayer online role-playing game it is a type of game genre. MMORPGs are online role-playing multiplayer games which allow thousands of gamers to play in the game's evolving virtual world at the same time via the Internet."
Again, notice the evolving part and also thousands of gamers. Questionable if thousands of gamers are playing in a virtual world in STO because everything is instanced, and I mean everything. So everyonee are playing in instances which are shut of from the rest of the online "world". That too is another strong argument for disqualifying STO as an MMO.
To answer that question I think you need to define, at a rudimentary level, what is an MMO? I would say that the one most important aspect of an MMO is that the world is persistant. I.e. you log of but the "world lives on". In STO the only thing that is persistant is your character and equipment (including ships). Everything else in the "world" is static and instanced. Starbases, planets, PvP maps, missions, EVERYTHING else is static, instanced and unchangeable. If you log of and then log back in, the ONLY thing that may have changed are other characters, nothing else. There are no variables that decide how well the war is going, or how a planet is faring, they are all static and unchangeable. In this sense is the game really different from say Diablo 2, played on BNET? There the only thing that was persistant was also your character and your equipment and everything else was static and instanced. Sure, here you are constantly connected to a graphical world when playing but that is just cosmetical as in Diablo 2 you were connected to a chat lobby. So really, is this game an MMO? I would say no. EDIT: Just want to clarify that I am talking about the definition of the term MMORPG. Obiously this site considers the game to be an MMO or it would not be listed here so I am not challenging their definition.
From your definition not a single mmorpg on the market would be considered a mmo. Because none of them have any real persistant changes outside of those made to the characters. A boss mob once killed is not perma dead.
There are other aspects beside boss mobs. For instance: In WAR there was control for zones which could be affected by players and that went back and forth over time. In DAoC there were keeps that changed owners and relics that gave faction side bonuses. In Eve the control of 0.0 security sectors could change.
So there is definetely alot of games which are persistant and evolves over time.
You are only looking at the PvP aspect and how it evolves over time. You forget that basically all PvE is static. The only things that changes in a PvE centric game is housing zones (LoTRO and DAoC) or economy (auction houses... which even STO has (still developing the economy though). Therefore, STO fits your definition of an MMO as it has a constantly evolving system (auction house economy).
But lets look at the term MMO which stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. Is STO massive ? I would say yes it covers a large amount of area yes these areas are instanced off into seperate bite sized chunks BUT they are there and you can go to the. It does indeed covers a lot of area. Is it multiplayer well again yes your playing on the game with everyone else at the same time. You can interact with them. Lastly is it Online ummm yep.
What you just did now is that you defined the therm but picking apart the words which it consists of, that is not how words are always defined. I like to go by the definition Wikipedia has:
"MORPGs are distinguished from single-player or small multi-player RPGs by the number of players, and by the game's persistent world, usually hosted by the game's publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game."
I put particular emphasis on the last part of the sentance: "..to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game." I dont feel STO is doing that as the only things that change over time are the characters and nothing else in the world. And monthly patches is not the same thing, if so then every single game would have that "feature" since almost all games are patched (including Diablo and even single player games).
1. Economy in STO changes... thus refuting your statements.
2. Why doesn't patches count? Just because you don't want them to count as it would invalidate your defacing statements at STO? They fit this phrase EXACTLY: "and by the game's persistent world, usually hosted by the game's publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game." Patches do just that.
So from the classic definition STO is a MMO.
No, according to your definition it is.
There is no "classic" definition of what an MMO actually is. Literal terminology works however... well, except for "Massive" as that is subjective.
Seriously there is really no need to try to redefine a generic term because you decide a games style is not to your taste. That is like claiming that football (soccer for you Americans) isn't really a ball game because you kick the ball instead of bouncing it like basketball and as for baseball ...
Not true. It would however be like claiming a sport where there is no ball to be a ball game.
See they are all ball games they just follow different rules and methods. Like wise STo and Co are mmo's they just handle it differently than other games. But the essential factors are there. Whether or not you like their methodology used is up to you but like it or hate it , the fact that it is a mmo will not change.
I dont agree since we are talking about missing features and element which are part of the definition.
Champions Online and STO is missing one of the key features of MMO and that is that they dont change over time. The world is completely static and as such could be an offline game or a Diablo type game where the only part of the world which is actually persisted is your character and its belongings, nothing else in the world is actually persistant.
I have proven you false on this one.
That for me is what defines an MMORPG and apparently also the definition shared by Wikipedia authors.
But we can use another definition from webopedia.com:
"Short for massively multiplayer online role-playing game it is a type of game genre. MMORPGs are online role-playing multiplayer games which allow thousands of gamers to play in the game's evolving virtual world at the same time via the Internet."
Again, notice the evolving part and also thousands of gamers. Questionable if thousands of gamers are playing in a virtual world in STO because everything is instanced, and I mean everything. So everyonee are playing in instances which are shut of from the rest of the online "world". That too is another strong argument for disqualifying STO as an MMO.
And, "thousands of gamers" is an arbitrary limit. Arbitrary because some people, who, more than likely are not experts on the subject, decided to put it down as a hard set requirement, based on what they believe (subjective), for a definition that not everyone accepts.
If you get technical, you could easily say STO is an MMORPG. However, by doing so you'd have to start lumping games like Diablo 2, Guild Wars, DDO in there as if they are MMORPGs. Which, if you took the terms 'massively multiplayer online role-playing game' literally, they all could be considered MMORPGs because alot of people may believe that they have a massive amount of players that play online. Then again, taking things literally would also mean that when I'm playing Blizzard's Starcraft online, I'm playing the role of some sort of general or leader, building up my troops and then sending them into battle. Is Starcraft an MMORPG?
Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO.
In all honesty though, these companies like Cryptic or Funcom, etc say that instancing makes the world more personal, or better or some other fluff. In truth, they do it because making anything appear remotely non-zoned (let alone non-instanced) is highly difficult, and becomes even more difficult with expectations of higher participants.
Simply put, Cryptic went a cheaper, easier route. Does it justify $15 a month? That, in itself, is subjective as well. Look at it this way. If Bioware/EA charged $15 a month to play Dragon Age:Origins (they required you to log in online, etc etc) then well, if you felt the game was worth forking over $15 a month then to you it's worth it. So, in essence, if someone is enjoying STO and wants to pay Cryptic for a HI-MMORPG then well, that is their choice and there is nothing wrong with it.
If you get technical, you could easily say STO is an MMORPG. However, by doing so you'd have to start lumping games like Diablo 2, Guild Wars, DDO in there as if they are MMORPGs. Which, if you took the terms 'massively multiplayer online role-playing game' literally, they all could be considered MMORPGs because alot of people may believe that they have a massive amount of players that play online. Then again, taking things literally would also mean that when I'm playing Blizzard's Starcraft online, I'm playing the role of some sort of general or leader, building up my troops and then sending them into battle. Is Starcraft an MMORPG? Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO. The more you parrot the same statements does not equate truthfulness of said statements. There is no "traditional" definition of what an MMORPG is. If you take the literal terms of MMO, then STO is an MMO. It is also an RPG as there is a role to be played within the game. No matter how much you or the rest of the anti-STO MMO crowd spins it, you cannot accurately refute these points. The main difference between Guild Wars and STO is that STO actually has an economy attached within the game. The last time I played GW... which was probably 2+ years ago... there was no internal economy. This would be the same issue with Diablo 2. The economy did not exist within the game... it existed within battle.net. Also, the city zones are the only places that you could interact with other players that were not in your group in GW. STO offers more openness in this structure as there are many zones outside of the city (or starbases) that people can interact with each other when not in groups. In all honesty though, these companies like Cryptic or Funcom, etc say that instancing makes the world more personal, or better or some other fluff. In truth, they do it because making anything appear remotely non-zoned (let alone non-instanced) is highly difficult, and becomes even more difficult with expectations of higher participants. Simply put, Cryptic went a cheaper, easier route. Does it justify $15 a month? That, in itself, is subjective as well. Look at it this way. If Bioware/EA charged $15 a month to play Dragon Age:Origins (they required you to log in online, etc etc) then well, if you felt the game was worth forking over $15 a month then to you it's worth it. So, in essence, if someone is enjoying STO and wants to pay Cryptic for a HI-MMORPG then well, that is their choice and there is nothing wrong with it.
is this game a MMO? YES Is this MMO game fun? YES and MY opinion i love it and is having fun playing it. Dont like it leave it play another game but just dont sit there and talk bad about it. Some would say ooh shut up fanboi and go back first off im not a fanboi if i was I would also be playing Champions Online, ( which im not actually i do not like champions online).
If you get technical, you could easily say STO is an MMORPG. However, by doing so you'd have to start lumping games like Diablo 2, Guild Wars, DDO in there as if they are MMORPGs. Which, if you took the terms 'massively multiplayer online role-playing game' literally, they all could be considered MMORPGs because alot of people may believe that they have a massive amount of players that play online. Then again, taking things literally would also mean that when I'm playing Blizzard's Starcraft online, I'm playing the role of some sort of general or leader, building up my troops and then sending them into battle. Is Starcraft an MMORPG? Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO. The more you parrot the same statements does not equate truthfulness of said statements. There is no "traditional" definition of what an MMORPG is. If you take the literal terms of MMO, then STO is an MMO. It is also an RPG as there is a role to be played within the game. No matter how much you or the rest of the anti-STO MMO crowd spins it, you cannot accurately refute these points. The main difference between Guild Wars and STO is that STO actually has an economy attached within the game. The last time I played GW... which was probably 2+ years ago... there was no internal economy. This would be the same issue with Diablo 2. The economy did not exist within the game... it existed within battle.net. Also, the city zones are the only places that you could interact with other players that were not in your group in GW. STO offers more openness in this structure as there are many zones outside of the city (or starbases) that people can interact with each other when not in groups. In all honesty though, these companies like Cryptic or Funcom, etc say that instancing makes the world more personal, or better or some other fluff. In truth, they do it because making anything appear remotely non-zoned (let alone non-instanced) is highly difficult, and becomes even more difficult with expectations of higher participants. Simply put, Cryptic went a cheaper, easier route. Does it justify $15 a month? That, in itself, is subjective as well. Look at it this way. If Bioware/EA charged $15 a month to play Dragon Age:Origins (they required you to log in online, etc etc) then well, if you felt the game was worth forking over $15 a month then to you it's worth it. So, in essence, if someone is enjoying STO and wants to pay Cryptic for a HI-MMORPG then well, that is their choice and there is nothing wrong with it.
GW has the material, rare material and scroll NPC traders which IMO are the best way of making the economy simple and functional. So yes it has an internal economy, though it isn't extended for every item, but featuring an auction house does not make a game a MMO. As far as I remember Darkfall has no auction house (someone confirm this please so I can elaborate further).
Let's have another look at Guild Wars, the difference is that it features instant travel instead of the sector space. Their LFG system is less automatized, it's not "the next level" like STO or WOW (as in the grouping being automatically done with close to zero input from players), but is visible to all instances of a same area (also used for trade messages). The usage of instances in both games is the same - 100%.
They never called it a MMO, so it all boils down to a company calling it a MMO for the sake of charging a monthly fee or getting advertisement attention (like "Free to play MMOG", that's done simply for marketing a.k.a. "luring people to play your game" along with showing pretty concept art girls in graphics not even close to the game itself). And being listed here doesn't count, the definition here is also subjective.
So this discussion is just theory, the industry does need to set some parameters though, or this stretching will keep going on until everything with online playability gets called a MMO, which will destroy any point in the term for classification.
To answer that question I think you need to define, at a rudimentary level, what is an MMO? I would say that the one most important aspect of an MMO is that the world is persistant. I.e. you log of but the "world lives on". In STO the only thing that is persistant is your character and equipment (including ships). Everything else in the "world" is static and instanced. Starbases, planets, PvP maps, missions, EVERYTHING else is static, instanced and unchangeable. If you log of and then log back in, the ONLY thing that may have changed are other characters, nothing else. There are no variables that decide how well the war is going, or how a planet is faring, they are all static and unchangeable. In this sense is the game really different from say Diablo 2, played on BNET? There the only thing that was persistant was also your character and your equipment and everything else was static and instanced. Sure, here you are constantly connected to a graphical world when playing but that is just cosmetical as in Diablo 2 you were connected to a chat lobby. So really, is this game an MMO? I would say no. EDIT: Just want to clarify that I am talking about the definition of the term MMORPG. Obiously this site considers the game to be an MMO or it would not be listed here so I am not challenging their definition.
Wrong. Sto is an mmorpg and you will have to accept that. Like others pointed out wiki is somthing you cannot trust as changes can be made instantly on it. wiki does not define what mmorpgs are.
lets see. By what you say that means FFXI is NOT AN MMORPG. it all made out of zones , the world is not presistant. people do the same quest they been doing 7 years ago. BY your terms FFXI is not an mmorpg. only when Square adds things to it via patches and expantions the game "evolves"
What about everquest 2 if one Zone was overpopulated another "zone" will take over other players (atleast when it launched) in other words eq2 did use instances to keep the population from not overflowing in one zone.
now the big example. WOW . sure most of the world is there to explore. but has it changed at all? NO it has not, only patches to add more quests or flight paths were the only things changed in the old parts of wow. I can log in now make a new toon and ill still be doing the same quests, no matter how many time i kill hogger he will still respawn and people will do the same quests. Only when blizzard releases patches or expantions is when somthing in the game changes. Like when burning crusade came out. the blood elves captured some god of sorts(dont remember) and enslaved it to be paladins. then bliz released a content update where that god was freed and you had to kill him.
what i mean is all games do not have changes unless the devs add them. Horizons had many changes to its landscapes due to gm events, nothing now changes after all that has happened.
STO is a mmorpg. I meet people in every area i go, i have grouped up with people the same way i have in other mmorpgs. It may be all instanced but your never alone unless you want to. I am in a fleet (guild) and group up constantly so the community is there. Now you claim the game is static. Yes it is like wow, like ffxi , and like plenty of games out there. and its up to the devs to release content to change it. Can they add sectors in pvp to fight over? They can. The game just came out and while its not your cup of tea, it is to plenty of other people.
I do not see STO as the best game out there, It is avarage for me, but for now its fun and it is keeping my attention. There are thousands playing it, lots of new commers and queue lines. The game has its popularity even if its avarage.
Im sorry bro but you are NO one to define what the game is.
Not true. It would however be like claiming a sport where there is no ball to be a ball game. Hockey, swimming, gymnastics etc have no ball. Yet they are sports. Champions Online and STO is missing one of the key features of MMO and that is that they dont change over time. The world is completely static and as such could be an offline game or a Diablo type game where the only part of the world which is actually persisted is your character and its belongings, nothing else in the world is actually persistant. That for me is what defines an MMORPG and apparently also the definition shared by Wikipedia authors.
Apparently not considering that Wikipedia itself classifies STO as a MMORPG
Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO.
This is what I was getting at, these new games with instancing and limited persistence (or none), lacking crafting and other traditional MMORPG elements to me are the evolution of true MMORPGs but I think of them more as MMOs as a new label.
STO is most definitely not an MMORPG, it is most definitely an MMO.
What is the difference - an MMORPG in the traditional sense is a seamless, large, persistent world game with limited instancing and all or many of the various trappings (crafting, housing, etc). But it seems MMORPGs are giving way of late to a new creature, MMOs, which take the massively multiplayer part and the idea of persistence and progression (even if only in part) and make a new genre very similar to traditional MMORPGs but not quite the same.
In STO players play the role of ship captain. Playing a role = role playing. STO is a game. Therefore, since there is role playing in STO and STO is a game, it is a Role Playing Game.
Umm... no... there is NO rule that states that an MMORPG must have a seamless world. If I am wrong, which I know I am not, provide proof of the proper definition of an MMORPG that states this. Otherwise, your definition is flawed and only fits what YOU think an MMORPG should be... not what an MMORPG is.
Seriously, all of these "STO is not an MMO" or "STO is not an RPG" crap posts are getting tiresome. It is an MMORPG. That is fact. If you don't like it.... tough.
You are getting hung up on the words in the acronym. STO is most definitely not an MMORPG in the sense of what traditional MMORPGS are. But that said, it is most definitely a MMO as MMORPGs are moving towards a broader genre these days with greater variety in features and pricing models, I call these MMOs.
MMOs to me represent the broader category of games that have grown from the traditional MMORPG genre. They share some to many of the traditional elements of an MMORPG but often have heavy instancing, more linear play, and in some to many ways do not have all the traditional elements of the old school MMORPGs. Truth be told, and in defense of STO, I think traditional MMORPGs are dead in terms of being part of a bygon era when development costs allowed them to fully come to fruition, these days with costs being what they are and gamers being jaded or otherwise unimpressed by the vastness of those traditional games anymore I think all we will see coming out anymore is the broader category of MMOs.
Mind you, I say STO is an MMO, not an MMORPG, in a purely innocuous way and am not insulting the game by labeling an MMO. I just think it is time we realize that the genre has changed and the change form MMORPG to MMO is simply to represent that change. Clearly the old model, both in game features and pay models, are changing and not likely to go back - so I think these new games (starting around last year sometime - with what most call the third gen games) the traditional MMORPGs gave way to the new category MMOs.
If you log of and then log back in, the ONLY thing that may have changed are other characters, nothing else. There are no variables that decide how well the war is going, or how a planet is faring, they are all static and unchangeable. In this sense is the game really different from say Diablo 2, played on BNET? There the only thing that was persistant was also your character and your equipment and everything else was static and instanced. Sure, here you are constantly connected to a graphical world when playing but that is just cosmetical as in Diablo 2 you were connected to a chat lobby. So really, is this game an MMO? I would say no.
But the vast majority of so called mmos are also like this, regardless of whether they are instanced or not. Virtually none of them allow you to do anything at all other than alter your own character and make progress through a copy of a story that only applies to you and no-one else. In most mmos you cant have any effect on the gameworld or its players which is why I find most of them become boring fairly quickly.
In WoW for example you can log out one day and log back in a month or even a year later and nothing will have changed. Its just a static world that will never change (unless the devs change it) and the fact that it is a so called "open world" doesnt really make it any more of an mmo than STO with its "instanced world". They are both static games and all you can do in them is level up. This is a large part of the reason why I have not bothered playing any mmos for ages. Loads of people playing their own copies of a single player game together with a chat channel as the only thing linking them together. Seems pretty pointless.
I havent tried it yet but Global Agenda has an instanced world and yet it seems to be more persistent than any crappy open-world game I have seen. Instances dont stop a game from being an mmo and having an open seamless world doesnt neccessarily mean anything of value.
STO is most definitely not an MMORPG, it is most definitely an MMO.
What is the difference - an MMORPG in the traditional sense is a seamless, large, persistent world game with limited instancing and all or many of the various trappings (crafting, housing, etc). But it seems MMORPGs are giving way of late to a new creature, MMOs, which take the massively multiplayer part and the idea of persistence and progression (even if only in part) and make a new genre very similar to traditional MMORPGs but not quite the same.
In STO players play the role of ship captain. Playing a role = role playing. STO is a game. Therefore, since there is role playing in STO and STO is a game, it is a Role Playing Game.
Umm... no... there is NO rule that states that an MMORPG must have a seamless world. If I am wrong, which I know I am not, provide proof of the proper definition of an MMORPG that states this. Otherwise, your definition is flawed and only fits what YOU think an MMORPG should be... not what an MMORPG is.
Seriously, all of these "STO is not an MMO" or "STO is not an RPG" crap posts are getting tiresome. It is an MMORPG. That is fact. If you don't like it.... tough.
You are getting hung up on the words in the acronym. STO is most definitely not an MMORPG in the sense of what traditional MMORPGS are. But that said, it is most definitely a MMO as MMORPGs are moving towards a broader genre these days with greater variety in features and pricing models, I call these MMOs.
MMOs to me represent the broader category of games that have grown from the traditional MMORPG genre. They share some to many of the traditional elements of an MMORPG but often have heavy instancing, more linear play, and in some to many ways do not have all the traditional elements of the old school MMORPGs. Truth be told, and in defense of STO, I think traditional MMORPGs are dead in terms of being part of a bygon era when development costs allowed them to fully come to fruition, these days with costs being what they are and gamers being jaded or otherwise unimpressed by the vastness of those traditional games anymore I think all we will see coming out anymore is the broader category of MMOs.
Mind you, I say STO is an MMO, not an MMORPG, in a purely innocuous way and am not insulting the game by labeling an MMO. I just think it is time we realize that the genre has changed and the change form MMORPG to MMO is simply to represent that change. Clearly the old model, both in game features and pay models, are changing and not likely to go back - so I think these new games (starting around last year sometime - with what most call the third gen games) the traditional MMORPGs gave way to the new category MMOs.
So you created your terms of what an MMO and MMORPG is does not mean they are. that is your opinion not the true fact.
Wow is an mmorpg, I can create a Tauren, gnome, nightelf and if i want to i can study the lore and role play as such.
In Istaria I can be a dragon and role play as such.
In FFXI, i can be a taru taru or a galka and role play as such.
All these are MMORPG's the role playing game allows me to role play a character I created from the options of the game.
what can you do in STO. oh i can make a Vulcan , a klingon, heck even a Cardassian (there is a thread on how to make them via the alien spieces). I can role play. In fact have you been on the kingon faction? There are tons of players who role play klingons and even talk like them sometimes. The fact is, people actually are ROLE PLAYING their characters. The fact that i can create my race, My lore for my race and how it fits in the sto universe and role play by the lore i made makes this game an MMO and RPG. all the elements are there no matter how you try to deny it.
just because it does not have the holy trinity does not take out the MMO or the RPG from the game.
accept sto as it is n MMORPG. and even a good one to introduce more people to the genre.
There is a huge community of players in STO that are currently role playing as Klingons or Vulcans or Liberated Borgs, etc. RPG is just that...a game in which you can role play within. STO can clearly be an RPG. If anything, STO can be considered a huge RPG, since there are thousands of weird Star Trek fans that will gravite to the game just to act out their Star Trek fantasies.
In truth, MMO and MMORPG are really no different. RPG just states that the act of role-playing is possible within a given game. And just because you, yourself, do not role play in a game, doesn't make it any less RPG.
Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO.
This is what I was getting at, these new games with instancing and limited persistence (or none), lacking crafting and other traditional MMORPG elements to me are the evolution of true MMORPGs but I think of them more as MMOs as a new label.
Evolution suggests an improvement. So in that regard I dont see how games like STO are an evolution, rather they are degeneration of the original genre.
STO is completely instanced and lacks a persistant world.
Due to its instanced nature it lacks social aspects that other games have, such as creating groups and guilds. They are possible to do but completely unneccessary in STO
STO has a monhtly fee and an RMT (one that most likely will follow COs path of offering content gaps for money).
Finally, Champions Online went from rank 25 in XFire to below 200 now in less than 6 months. Even though XFire is not a reliable way of measuring a games success it is clear that Champions Online lost tons of subscribers (as evident by the ghost zones in that game).
So I am really hard pressed to see games like STO as an improvment of the genre. But hey time will tell if people are willing to pay 15$/month when there are similar, overinstanced games, like Guild Wars which has no subscription fees. Somehow I doubt it because people usually wise up when it comes to their money, most people anyway.
Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO.
This is what I was getting at, these new games with instancing and limited persistence (or none), lacking crafting and other traditional MMORPG elements to me are the evolution of true MMORPGs but I think of them more as MMOs as a new label.
Evolution suggests an improvement. So in that regard I dont see how games like STO are an evolution, rather they are degeneration of the original genre. That's your opinion. However, it is not shared by everyone that plays MMORPG's. Evolution means change... which is what is happening within the MMORPG market.
STO is completely instanced and lacks a persistant world.
Due to its instanced nature it lacks social aspects that other games have, such as creating groups and guilds. They are possible to do but completely unneccessary in STO Completely false.
STO has a monhtly fee and an RMT (one that most likely will follow COs path of offering content gaps for money). Yeah, let's actually see what will happen before you pronounce "Cryptic is gonna nickle n' dime you with content!" I know, for a fact, that you are using your hatred of Cryptic to "predict" this outcome.
Finally, Champions Online went from rank 25 in XFire to below 200 now in less than 6 months. Even though XFire is not a reliable way of measuring a games success it is clear that Champions Online lost tons of subscribers (as evident by the ghost zones in that game). Then why are you using it? Oh... that's right. You use it because you want to bash Cryptic at any point you can. You'll even use "statistics" that you claim are not reliable. The hate is thick within you.
So I am really hard pressed to see games like STO as an improvment of the genre. But hey time will tell if people are willing to pay 15$/month when there are similar, overinstanced games, like Guild Wars which has no subscription fees. Somehow I doubt it because people usually wise up when it comes to their money, most people anyway.
STO is most definitely not an MMORPG, it is most definitely an MMO.
What is the difference - an MMORPG in the traditional sense is a seamless, large, persistent world game with limited instancing and all or many of the various trappings (crafting, housing, etc). But it seems MMORPGs are giving way of late to a new creature, MMOs, which take the massively multiplayer part and the idea of persistence and progression (even if only in part) and make a new genre very similar to traditional MMORPGs but not quite the same.
In STO players play the role of ship captain. Playing a role = role playing. STO is a game. Therefore, since there is role playing in STO and STO is a game, it is a Role Playing Game.
Umm... no... there is NO rule that states that an MMORPG must have a seamless world. If I am wrong, which I know I am not, provide proof of the proper definition of an MMORPG that states this. Otherwise, your definition is flawed and only fits what YOU think an MMORPG should be... not what an MMORPG is.
Seriously, all of these "STO is not an MMO" or "STO is not an RPG" crap posts are getting tiresome. It is an MMORPG. That is fact. If you don't like it.... tough.
You are getting hung up on the words in the acronym. STO is most definitely not an MMORPG in the sense of what traditional MMORPGS are. But that said, it is most definitely a MMO as MMORPGs are moving towards a broader genre these days with greater variety in features and pricing models, I call these MMOs.
Again... the usage of "traditional" when trying to define what an MMORPG actually is. Newsflash: There are no "traditional" definitions for MMORPGs. And, if there were, tradition means history. And, history always is replaced with the current.
MMOs to me represent the broader category of games that have grown from the traditional MMORPG genre. They share some to many of the traditional elements of an MMORPG but often have heavy instancing, more linear play, and in some to many ways do not have all the traditional elements of the old school MMORPGs. Truth be told, and in defense of STO, I think traditional MMORPGs are dead in terms of being part of a bygon era when development costs allowed them to fully come to fruition, these days with costs being what they are and gamers being jaded or otherwise unimpressed by the vastness of those traditional games anymore I think all we will see coming out anymore is the broader category of MMOs.
Oh, I agree that the old school MMORPG systems are pretty much dead. The reason being is that today's MMORPG consumers understand that they do not want to have another job playing an MMORPG.
Mind you, I say STO is an MMO, not an MMORPG, in a purely innocuous way and am not insulting the game by labeling an MMO. I just think it is time we realize that the genre has changed and the change form MMORPG to MMO is simply to represent that change. Clearly the old model, both in game features and pay models, are changing and not likely to go back - so I think these new games (starting around last year sometime - with what most call the third gen games) the traditional MMORPGs gave way to the new category MMOs.
No... there is role-playing in this game. Therefore, despite your wanting to reclassify new MMORPG's into another brand, STO is an RPG. Since you claim it is an MMO and it is, in fact, an RPG, it is an MMORPG.
Not true. It would however be like claiming a sport where there is no ball to be a ball game. Hockey, swimming, gymnastics etc have no ball. Yet they are sports. Champions Online and STO is missing one of the key features of MMO and that is that they dont change over time. The world is completely static and as such could be an offline game or a Diablo type game where the only part of the world which is actually persisted is your character and its belongings, nothing else in the world is actually persistant. That for me is what defines an MMORPG and apparently also the definition shared by Wikipedia authors.
Apparently not considering that Wikipedia itself classifies STO as a MMORPG
Comments
lol.. in this case, ALL games are rpgs. In Rome:Total War, you play the role of an emperor. In Doom, you play the role of a marine. In minesweeper, you play the role of a minesweeper.
I'm struggling to think of a game in which you DON'T play a role. Maybe fifa?
Personally i think the game is an rpg, but i don't think it has much multiplayer and hardly any "massive".
lol.. in this case, ALL games are rpgs. In Rome:Total War, you play the role of an emperor. In Doom, you play the role of a marine. In minesweeper, you play the role of a minesweeper.
I'm struggling to think of a game in which you DON'T play a role. Maybe fifa?
Personally i think the game is an rpg, but i don't think it has much multiplayer and hardly any "massive".
Yes, this game is multiplayer. More than one person plays this game on the same server and they can interact if they want (trading, grouping, PvP, talking). And, as I said previously in this thread, massive is a subjective term.
It's definitely multiplayer. There are tons of games that are Multiplayer but not MMOs. The RPG part is iffy. You do play a character and sort of a class and you have a level, two kinds really, and you skill up with experience. It could very well be an MMORPG. All multiplayer RPGs, however, are not MMORPGs. Neverwinter Nights is not an MMORPG, but 1 and 2 can have and do have persistent dedicated servers.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Well lets first M ..Massive well Ive been playing since beta and I have explored a lot and I can say its Massive. Second M I definately seen lots of people and grouped with them as well as join a fleet. So that is a Yes for two M's now for the O... I definately went on to play so yes for the O. So yes It IS AN MMO!! If you dont like the game why the heck do you have to right crap about it? Most not have any thing to do with your self... find a life a mate or whatever but stop complaining we got the hint !
From your definition not a single mmorpg on the market would be considered a mmo. Because none of them have any real persistant changes outside of those made to the characters. A boss mob once killed is not perma dead.
But lets look at the term MMO which stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. Is STO massive ? I would say yes it covers a large amount of area yes these areas are instanced off into seperate bite sized chunks BUT they are there and you can go to the. It does indeed covers a lot of area. Is it multiplayer well again yes your playing on the game with everyone else at the same time. You can interact with them. Lastly is it Online ummm yep.
So from the classic definition STO is a MMO.
Seriously there is really no need to try to redefine a generic term because you decide a games style is not to your taste. That is like claiming that football (soccer for you Americans) isn't really a ball game because you kick the ball instead of bouncing it like basketball and as for baseball ...
See they are all ball games they just follow different rules and methods. Like wise STo and Co are mmo's they just handle it differently than other games. But the essential factors are there. Whether or not you like their methodology used is up to you but like it or hate it , the fact that it is a mmo will not change.
Gadareth
Sounds like WoW in space to me.
I wish it was WoW in space.. that would be a 200% improvement to the crap now.. However, STO is nothing like WoW in any shape or form.. IMO.. STO is nothing more then a single player console game with online "co op" features.. ZZZZzzzz Wait.. I like games like such as "motor storm", "halo", "madden football".. etc etc.. and even tiger woods golf, but I would never pay $15 a month to play them
Totally agree, STO is nothing more than a SP game, which has MP tagged on. It most certainly doesn`t have the depth of WOW,EQ, WAR.....
Sure I like the game for what it is, and if it were a normal SP game that had some online function then fine, I would buy it, but as an MMO it feels nothing more than something like Diablo II.
I played WOW 3-4 years.
I played STO beta and got bored.
Played WOW (5 years), AOC, AO, EQ2,AC2, Horizons, Saga of Ryzom, SWG, CO, STO(Beta),ROM, Allods, and many other F2P titles. Asl been in beta for many of the main titles and played countless SP games. I have been gaming for 15+ years!
From your definition not a single mmorpg on the market would be considered a mmo. Because none of them have any real persistant changes outside of those made to the characters. A boss mob once killed is not perma dead.
There are other aspects beside boss mobs. For instance: In WAR there was control for zones which could be affected by players and that went back and forth over time. In DAoC there were keeps that changed owners and relics that gave faction side bonuses. In Eve the control of 0.0 security sectors could change.
So there is definetely alot of games which are persistant and evolves over time.
But lets look at the term MMO which stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. Is STO massive ? I would say yes it covers a large amount of area yes these areas are instanced off into seperate bite sized chunks BUT they are there and you can go to the. It does indeed covers a lot of area. Is it multiplayer well again yes your playing on the game with everyone else at the same time. You can interact with them. Lastly is it Online ummm yep.
What you just did now is that you defined the therm but picking apart the words which it consists of, that is not how words are always defined. I like to go by the definition Wikipedia has:
"MORPGs are distinguished from single-player or small multi-player RPGs by the number of players, and by the game's persistent world, usually hosted by the game's publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game."
I put particular emphasis on the last part of the sentance: "..to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game." I dont feel STO is doing that as the only things that change over time are the characters and nothing else in the world. And monthly patches is not the same thing, if so then every single game would have that "feature" since almost all games are patched (including Diablo and even single player games).
So from the classic definition STO is a MMO.
No, according to your definition it is.
Seriously there is really no need to try to redefine a generic term because you decide a games style is not to your taste. That is like claiming that football (soccer for you Americans) isn't really a ball game because you kick the ball instead of bouncing it like basketball and as for baseball ...
Not true. It would however be like claiming a sport where there is no ball to be a ball game.
See they are all ball games they just follow different rules and methods. Like wise STo and Co are mmo's they just handle it differently than other games. But the essential factors are there. Whether or not you like their methodology used is up to you but like it or hate it , the fact that it is a mmo will not change.
I dont agree since we are talking about missing features and element which are part of the definition.
Champions Online and STO is missing one of the key features of MMO and that is that they dont change over time. The world is completely static and as such could be an offline game or a Diablo type game where the only part of the world which is actually persisted is your character and its belongings, nothing else in the world is actually persistant.
That for me is what defines an MMORPG and apparently also the definition shared by Wikipedia authors.
But we can use another definition from webopedia.com:
"Short for massively multiplayer online role-playing game it is a type of game genre. MMORPGs are online role-playing multiplayer games which allow thousands of gamers to play in the game's evolving virtual world at the same time via the Internet."
Again, notice the evolving part and also thousands of gamers. Questionable if thousands of gamers are playing in a virtual world in STO because everything is instanced, and I mean everything. So everyonee are playing in instances which are shut of from the rest of the online "world". That too is another strong argument for disqualifying STO as an MMO.
My gaming blog
From your definition not a single mmorpg on the market would be considered a mmo. Because none of them have any real persistant changes outside of those made to the characters. A boss mob once killed is not perma dead.
There are other aspects beside boss mobs. For instance: In WAR there was control for zones which could be affected by players and that went back and forth over time. In DAoC there were keeps that changed owners and relics that gave faction side bonuses. In Eve the control of 0.0 security sectors could change.
So there is definetely alot of games which are persistant and evolves over time.
You are only looking at the PvP aspect and how it evolves over time. You forget that basically all PvE is static. The only things that changes in a PvE centric game is housing zones (LoTRO and DAoC) or economy (auction houses... which even STO has (still developing the economy though). Therefore, STO fits your definition of an MMO as it has a constantly evolving system (auction house economy).
But lets look at the term MMO which stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. Is STO massive ? I would say yes it covers a large amount of area yes these areas are instanced off into seperate bite sized chunks BUT they are there and you can go to the. It does indeed covers a lot of area. Is it multiplayer well again yes your playing on the game with everyone else at the same time. You can interact with them. Lastly is it Online ummm yep.
What you just did now is that you defined the therm but picking apart the words which it consists of, that is not how words are always defined. I like to go by the definition Wikipedia has:
"MORPGs are distinguished from single-player or small multi-player RPGs by the number of players, and by the game's persistent world, usually hosted by the game's publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game."
I put particular emphasis on the last part of the sentance: "..to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game." I dont feel STO is doing that as the only things that change over time are the characters and nothing else in the world. And monthly patches is not the same thing, if so then every single game would have that "feature" since almost all games are patched (including Diablo and even single player games).
1. Economy in STO changes... thus refuting your statements.
2. Why doesn't patches count? Just because you don't want them to count as it would invalidate your defacing statements at STO? They fit this phrase EXACTLY: "and by the game's persistent world, usually hosted by the game's publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game." Patches do just that.
So from the classic definition STO is a MMO.
No, according to your definition it is.
There is no "classic" definition of what an MMO actually is. Literal terminology works however... well, except for "Massive" as that is subjective.
Seriously there is really no need to try to redefine a generic term because you decide a games style is not to your taste. That is like claiming that football (soccer for you Americans) isn't really a ball game because you kick the ball instead of bouncing it like basketball and as for baseball ...
Not true. It would however be like claiming a sport where there is no ball to be a ball game.
See they are all ball games they just follow different rules and methods. Like wise STo and Co are mmo's they just handle it differently than other games. But the essential factors are there. Whether or not you like their methodology used is up to you but like it or hate it , the fact that it is a mmo will not change.
I dont agree since we are talking about missing features and element which are part of the definition.
Champions Online and STO is missing one of the key features of MMO and that is that they dont change over time. The world is completely static and as such could be an offline game or a Diablo type game where the only part of the world which is actually persisted is your character and its belongings, nothing else in the world is actually persistant.
I have proven you false on this one.
That for me is what defines an MMORPG and apparently also the definition shared by Wikipedia authors.
But we can use another definition from webopedia.com:
"Short for massively multiplayer online role-playing game it is a type of game genre. MMORPGs are online role-playing multiplayer games which allow thousands of gamers to play in the game's evolving virtual world at the same time via the Internet."
Again, notice the evolving part and also thousands of gamers. Questionable if thousands of gamers are playing in a virtual world in STO because everything is instanced, and I mean everything. So everyonee are playing in instances which are shut of from the rest of the online "world". That too is another strong argument for disqualifying STO as an MMO.
And, "thousands of gamers" is an arbitrary limit. Arbitrary because some people, who, more than likely are not experts on the subject, decided to put it down as a hard set requirement, based on what they believe (subjective), for a definition that not everyone accepts.
If you get technical, you could easily say STO is an MMORPG. However, by doing so you'd have to start lumping games like Diablo 2, Guild Wars, DDO in there as if they are MMORPGs. Which, if you took the terms 'massively multiplayer online role-playing game' literally, they all could be considered MMORPGs because alot of people may believe that they have a massive amount of players that play online. Then again, taking things literally would also mean that when I'm playing Blizzard's Starcraft online, I'm playing the role of some sort of general or leader, building up my troops and then sending them into battle. Is Starcraft an MMORPG?
Speaking on the grounds of what was traditionally considered an MMORPG, STO wouldn't make the list of MMORPGs. That is why there is a debate here today, and has been for many years since Guild Wars, about what an MMORPG actually is. In my personal opinion, we might need to have further classifications of MMORPGs, like a Heavily Instanced MMORPG or Massive Co-op RPG like Diablo 2 or STO.
In all honesty though, these companies like Cryptic or Funcom, etc say that instancing makes the world more personal, or better or some other fluff. In truth, they do it because making anything appear remotely non-zoned (let alone non-instanced) is highly difficult, and becomes even more difficult with expectations of higher participants.
Simply put, Cryptic went a cheaper, easier route. Does it justify $15 a month? That, in itself, is subjective as well. Look at it this way. If Bioware/EA charged $15 a month to play Dragon Age:Origins (they required you to log in online, etc etc) then well, if you felt the game was worth forking over $15 a month then to you it's worth it. So, in essence, if someone is enjoying STO and wants to pay Cryptic for a HI-MMORPG then well, that is their choice and there is nothing wrong with it.
splat
is this game a MMO? YES Is this MMO game fun? YES and MY opinion i love it and is having fun playing it. Dont like it leave it play another game but just dont sit there and talk bad about it. Some would say ooh shut up fanboi and go back first off im not a fanboi if i was I would also be playing Champions Online, ( which im not actually i do not like champions online).
GW has the material, rare material and scroll NPC traders which IMO are the best way of making the economy simple and functional. So yes it has an internal economy, though it isn't extended for every item, but featuring an auction house does not make a game a MMO. As far as I remember Darkfall has no auction house (someone confirm this please so I can elaborate further).
Let's have another look at Guild Wars, the difference is that it features instant travel instead of the sector space. Their LFG system is less automatized, it's not "the next level" like STO or WOW (as in the grouping being automatically done with close to zero input from players), but is visible to all instances of a same area (also used for trade messages). The usage of instances in both games is the same - 100%.
They never called it a MMO, so it all boils down to a company calling it a MMO for the sake of charging a monthly fee or getting advertisement attention (like "Free to play MMOG", that's done simply for marketing a.k.a. "luring people to play your game" along with showing pretty concept art girls in graphics not even close to the game itself). And being listed here doesn't count, the definition here is also subjective.
So this discussion is just theory, the industry does need to set some parameters though, or this stretching will keep going on until everything with online playability gets called a MMO, which will destroy any point in the term for classification.
Wrong. Sto is an mmorpg and you will have to accept that. Like others pointed out wiki is somthing you cannot trust as changes can be made instantly on it. wiki does not define what mmorpgs are.
lets see. By what you say that means FFXI is NOT AN MMORPG. it all made out of zones , the world is not presistant. people do the same quest they been doing 7 years ago. BY your terms FFXI is not an mmorpg. only when Square adds things to it via patches and expantions the game "evolves"
What about everquest 2 if one Zone was overpopulated another "zone" will take over other players (atleast when it launched) in other words eq2 did use instances to keep the population from not overflowing in one zone.
now the big example. WOW . sure most of the world is there to explore. but has it changed at all? NO it has not, only patches to add more quests or flight paths were the only things changed in the old parts of wow. I can log in now make a new toon and ill still be doing the same quests, no matter how many time i kill hogger he will still respawn and people will do the same quests. Only when blizzard releases patches or expantions is when somthing in the game changes. Like when burning crusade came out. the blood elves captured some god of sorts(dont remember) and enslaved it to be paladins. then bliz released a content update where that god was freed and you had to kill him.
what i mean is all games do not have changes unless the devs add them. Horizons had many changes to its landscapes due to gm events, nothing now changes after all that has happened.
STO is a mmorpg. I meet people in every area i go, i have grouped up with people the same way i have in other mmorpgs. It may be all instanced but your never alone unless you want to. I am in a fleet (guild) and group up constantly so the community is there. Now you claim the game is static. Yes it is like wow, like ffxi , and like plenty of games out there. and its up to the devs to release content to change it. Can they add sectors in pvp to fight over? They can. The game just came out and while its not your cup of tea, it is to plenty of other people.
I do not see STO as the best game out there, It is avarage for me, but for now its fun and it is keeping my attention. There are thousands playing it, lots of new commers and queue lines. The game has its popularity even if its avarage.
Im sorry bro but you are NO one to define what the game is.
Apparently not considering that Wikipedia itself classifies STO as a MMORPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_trek_online
"Star Trek Online, often abbreviated as STO, is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) developed by Cryptic "
Apprently Wikipedia authors have a different interpretation of their definition than you do.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
This is what I was getting at, these new games with instancing and limited persistence (or none), lacking crafting and other traditional MMORPG elements to me are the evolution of true MMORPGs but I think of them more as MMOs as a new label.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Seriously, all of these "STO is not an MMO" or "STO is not an RPG" crap posts are getting tiresome. It is an MMORPG. That is fact. If you don't like it.... tough.
You are getting hung up on the words in the acronym. STO is most definitely not an MMORPG in the sense of what traditional MMORPGS are. But that said, it is most definitely a MMO as MMORPGs are moving towards a broader genre these days with greater variety in features and pricing models, I call these MMOs.
MMOs to me represent the broader category of games that have grown from the traditional MMORPG genre. They share some to many of the traditional elements of an MMORPG but often have heavy instancing, more linear play, and in some to many ways do not have all the traditional elements of the old school MMORPGs. Truth be told, and in defense of STO, I think traditional MMORPGs are dead in terms of being part of a bygon era when development costs allowed them to fully come to fruition, these days with costs being what they are and gamers being jaded or otherwise unimpressed by the vastness of those traditional games anymore I think all we will see coming out anymore is the broader category of MMOs.
Mind you, I say STO is an MMO, not an MMORPG, in a purely innocuous way and am not insulting the game by labeling an MMO. I just think it is time we realize that the genre has changed and the change form MMORPG to MMO is simply to represent that change. Clearly the old model, both in game features and pay models, are changing and not likely to go back - so I think these new games (starting around last year sometime - with what most call the third gen games) the traditional MMORPGs gave way to the new category MMOs.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
But the vast majority of so called mmos are also like this, regardless of whether they are instanced or not. Virtually none of them allow you to do anything at all other than alter your own character and make progress through a copy of a story that only applies to you and no-one else. In most mmos you cant have any effect on the gameworld or its players which is why I find most of them become boring fairly quickly.
In WoW for example you can log out one day and log back in a month or even a year later and nothing will have changed. Its just a static world that will never change (unless the devs change it) and the fact that it is a so called "open world" doesnt really make it any more of an mmo than STO with its "instanced world". They are both static games and all you can do in them is level up. This is a large part of the reason why I have not bothered playing any mmos for ages. Loads of people playing their own copies of a single player game together with a chat channel as the only thing linking them together. Seems pretty pointless.
I havent tried it yet but Global Agenda has an instanced world and yet it seems to be more persistent than any crappy open-world game I have seen. Instances dont stop a game from being an mmo and having an open seamless world doesnt neccessarily mean anything of value.
Seriously, all of these "STO is not an MMO" or "STO is not an RPG" crap posts are getting tiresome. It is an MMORPG. That is fact. If you don't like it.... tough.
You are getting hung up on the words in the acronym. STO is most definitely not an MMORPG in the sense of what traditional MMORPGS are. But that said, it is most definitely a MMO as MMORPGs are moving towards a broader genre these days with greater variety in features and pricing models, I call these MMOs.
MMOs to me represent the broader category of games that have grown from the traditional MMORPG genre. They share some to many of the traditional elements of an MMORPG but often have heavy instancing, more linear play, and in some to many ways do not have all the traditional elements of the old school MMORPGs. Truth be told, and in defense of STO, I think traditional MMORPGs are dead in terms of being part of a bygon era when development costs allowed them to fully come to fruition, these days with costs being what they are and gamers being jaded or otherwise unimpressed by the vastness of those traditional games anymore I think all we will see coming out anymore is the broader category of MMOs.
Mind you, I say STO is an MMO, not an MMORPG, in a purely innocuous way and am not insulting the game by labeling an MMO. I just think it is time we realize that the genre has changed and the change form MMORPG to MMO is simply to represent that change. Clearly the old model, both in game features and pay models, are changing and not likely to go back - so I think these new games (starting around last year sometime - with what most call the third gen games) the traditional MMORPGs gave way to the new category MMOs.
So you created your terms of what an MMO and MMORPG is does not mean they are. that is your opinion not the true fact.
Wow is an mmorpg, I can create a Tauren, gnome, nightelf and if i want to i can study the lore and role play as such.
In Istaria I can be a dragon and role play as such.
In FFXI, i can be a taru taru or a galka and role play as such.
All these are MMORPG's the role playing game allows me to role play a character I created from the options of the game.
what can you do in STO. oh i can make a Vulcan , a klingon, heck even a Cardassian (there is a thread on how to make them via the alien spieces). I can role play. In fact have you been on the kingon faction? There are tons of players who role play klingons and even talk like them sometimes. The fact is, people actually are ROLE PLAYING their characters. The fact that i can create my race, My lore for my race and how it fits in the sto universe and role play by the lore i made makes this game an MMO and RPG. all the elements are there no matter how you try to deny it.
just because it does not have the holy trinity does not take out the MMO or the RPG from the game.
accept sto as it is n MMORPG. and even a good one to introduce more people to the genre.
There is a huge community of players in STO that are currently role playing as Klingons or Vulcans or Liberated Borgs, etc. RPG is just that...a game in which you can role play within. STO can clearly be an RPG. If anything, STO can be considered a huge RPG, since there are thousands of weird Star Trek fans that will gravite to the game just to act out their Star Trek fantasies.
In truth, MMO and MMORPG are really no different. RPG just states that the act of role-playing is possible within a given game. And just because you, yourself, do not role play in a game, doesn't make it any less RPG.
Just my thoughts. I don't role play.
This is what I was getting at, these new games with instancing and limited persistence (or none), lacking crafting and other traditional MMORPG elements to me are the evolution of true MMORPGs but I think of them more as MMOs as a new label.
Evolution suggests an improvement. So in that regard I dont see how games like STO are an evolution, rather they are degeneration of the original genre.
STO is completely instanced and lacks a persistant world.
Due to its instanced nature it lacks social aspects that other games have, such as creating groups and guilds. They are possible to do but completely unneccessary in STO
STO has a monhtly fee and an RMT (one that most likely will follow COs path of offering content gaps for money).
Finally, Champions Online went from rank 25 in XFire to below 200 now in less than 6 months. Even though XFire is not a reliable way of measuring a games success it is clear that Champions Online lost tons of subscribers (as evident by the ghost zones in that game).
So I am really hard pressed to see games like STO as an improvment of the genre. But hey time will tell if people are willing to pay 15$/month when there are similar, overinstanced games, like Guild Wars which has no subscription fees. Somehow I doubt it because people usually wise up when it comes to their money, most people anyway.
My gaming blog
This is what I was getting at, these new games with instancing and limited persistence (or none), lacking crafting and other traditional MMORPG elements to me are the evolution of true MMORPGs but I think of them more as MMOs as a new label.
Evolution suggests an improvement. So in that regard I dont see how games like STO are an evolution, rather they are degeneration of the original genre. That's your opinion. However, it is not shared by everyone that plays MMORPG's. Evolution means change... which is what is happening within the MMORPG market.
STO is completely instanced and lacks a persistant world.
Due to its instanced nature it lacks social aspects that other games have, such as creating groups and guilds. They are possible to do but completely unneccessary in STO Completely false.
STO has a monhtly fee and an RMT (one that most likely will follow COs path of offering content gaps for money). Yeah, let's actually see what will happen before you pronounce "Cryptic is gonna nickle n' dime you with content!" I know, for a fact, that you are using your hatred of Cryptic to "predict" this outcome.
Finally, Champions Online went from rank 25 in XFire to below 200 now in less than 6 months. Even though XFire is not a reliable way of measuring a games success it is clear that Champions Online lost tons of subscribers (as evident by the ghost zones in that game). Then why are you using it? Oh... that's right. You use it because you want to bash Cryptic at any point you can. You'll even use "statistics" that you claim are not reliable. The hate is thick within you.
So I am really hard pressed to see games like STO as an improvment of the genre. But hey time will tell if people are willing to pay 15$/month when there are similar, overinstanced games, like Guild Wars which has no subscription fees. Somehow I doubt it because people usually wise up when it comes to their money, most people anyway.
Seriously, all of these "STO is not an MMO" or "STO is not an RPG" crap posts are getting tiresome. It is an MMORPG. That is fact. If you don't like it.... tough.
You are getting hung up on the words in the acronym. STO is most definitely not an MMORPG in the sense of what traditional MMORPGS are. But that said, it is most definitely a MMO as MMORPGs are moving towards a broader genre these days with greater variety in features and pricing models, I call these MMOs.
Again... the usage of "traditional" when trying to define what an MMORPG actually is. Newsflash: There are no "traditional" definitions for MMORPGs. And, if there were, tradition means history. And, history always is replaced with the current.
MMOs to me represent the broader category of games that have grown from the traditional MMORPG genre. They share some to many of the traditional elements of an MMORPG but often have heavy instancing, more linear play, and in some to many ways do not have all the traditional elements of the old school MMORPGs. Truth be told, and in defense of STO, I think traditional MMORPGs are dead in terms of being part of a bygon era when development costs allowed them to fully come to fruition, these days with costs being what they are and gamers being jaded or otherwise unimpressed by the vastness of those traditional games anymore I think all we will see coming out anymore is the broader category of MMOs.
Oh, I agree that the old school MMORPG systems are pretty much dead. The reason being is that today's MMORPG consumers understand that they do not want to have another job playing an MMORPG.
Mind you, I say STO is an MMO, not an MMORPG, in a purely innocuous way and am not insulting the game by labeling an MMO. I just think it is time we realize that the genre has changed and the change form MMORPG to MMO is simply to represent that change. Clearly the old model, both in game features and pay models, are changing and not likely to go back - so I think these new games (starting around last year sometime - with what most call the third gen games) the traditional MMORPGs gave way to the new category MMOs.
No... there is role-playing in this game. Therefore, despite your wanting to reclassify new MMORPG's into another brand, STO is an RPG. Since you claim it is an MMO and it is, in fact, an RPG, it is an MMORPG.
Apparently not considering that Wikipedia itself classifies STO as a MMORPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_trek_online
"Star Trek Online, often abbreviated as STO, is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) developed by Cryptic "
Apprently Wikipedia authors have a different interpretation of their definition than you do.
Reposted since this was ignored in the back and forth.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft