so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
No game has an instance of 1500. It defeats the purpose of having an instance if everyone on the server is in it. Again you don't redefine the term MMORPG by saying one game is and nothing else. You don't represent the view of all gamers. Sorry.
Not really. Instances cut bandwidth usage. If you have 1500 people trying to access the same area, it is more bandwidth than splitting the area into two instances and dividing the population. Like in EQ1, most I've ever seen in one zone was about 1000 players (pre-instances), but dividing that by ten would mean a huge savings on bandwidth. If you put solo or small groups into their own instances, it's only a tiny amount of bandwidth used. Area calculations on bandwidth per player has a progressive measure to it, as more people are added to an area the bandwitdth increase more than simply by the numbers of each addition but increases exponentially for each player. So having 60 people in one zone, but you instance the zone into six parts with 10 people in each, it will save a good amount of bandwidth compared to having them all in the same zone at the same time. The only extra burden of it is if scripts or NPC's/MOB's are present as they get duplicated, but that is a job for hardware rather than bandwidth for the most part.
EQ2 instanced everything at 100 players, this too to save on bandwidth. It also means that they did not need to buy such expensive servers. Try to put 1000 people into one zone, it would crash the server. It's about cutting service, doing things cheaper, gaining a greater profit. If you put 1k people into an area of WoW, the server would go berserk too, it's intended for smaller groups and solo instances where savings are greater which results in higher profits. So you get incentive to play multi-player style, as the system could not really handle anything else.
Even though i do not enjoy playing WoW or even like the playstyle i will have to disagree with the OP
Massively - check
server capable of handling thousands more than the original 8-16-32-64 player good vs bad arenas or the 8 player adventure games like diablo/neverwinternights etc....
Multiplayer - check
duh, more than 1 player can play at the same time
Online - check
one can only play online
RPG (role playing game) -check
you play the role of your character. clerics play the role of the healer, fighters play the role of the tank, paladins play the hybrid or whatever. you play the role of the character you chose to be.
so yes, an MMORPG can have many forms and styles but if you can put your games into all of the categories above it becomes an MMORPG.
planetside and huxley on the other hand do not fall in the MMORPG but in the MMOFPS.
in other words, take the traditional genres RPG/FPS/RTS/Adventure/Simulator and put them on a server that portraits a persistant world that can handle a significant amount of people at the same time and you have yourself an MMO, then its up to you to add the suffix
the OP's definition is correct though wrongfully named,
"An MMORPG is a game that exists solely as a world for players to shape. Player interaction between themselves, the game world, and each other are integral to what makes an MMO an MMO." - UknownAspect
thats a sandbox (a sub category of MMO Games)
a way that i can see that your argument is incomplete is that i can't find a passage i can quote telling me what you mean by "infantile MMOs" i mean 9dragons and requiem are far from being infantile. or how you can say that WoW IS NOT a MMORPG. you just tell me what it is.
to conclude, OP, i think you confused MMORPG and MMOG with sandbox and themepark
To OP: You are describing a sandbox-style mmorpg, not an mmorpg in general. All that a game needs to be an mmorpg is to have rpg elements (character stats, gear with stats, attribute progression, etc) and a persistent online world. There is nothing in it's definition that states it must be shaped by players - that's sandbox. A game could maybe be called "more sandbox" than another game, but not more "mmorpg". That'd be like calling a movie "more horror" than another movie when you meant to call them both horror and one just more gorey.
To the rest on that camp: there is also nothing in the definition of mmorpg that states "you must have atleast x number of people in one place at one time with no instances to qualify as massively multiplayer." You are imposing more restrictions than the definition calls for.
Edit: As far as the "not an rpg" deal - as far as the game industry is concerned, an RPG is defined as simply a game where the player controls a character/avatar in the game world with the stat progression mechanics I mentioned in my first paragraph. It has nothing to do with the meaning of roleplaying as defined by the mmo playerbase.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
No game has an instance of 1500. It defeats the purpose of having an instance if everyone on the server is in it. Again you don't redefine the term MMORPG by saying one game is and nothing else. You don't represent the view of all gamers. Sorry.
Not really. Instances cut bandwidth usage. If you have 1500 people trying to access the same area, it is more bandwidth than splitting the area into two instances and dividing the population. Like in EQ1, most I've ever seen in one zone was about 1000 players (pre-instances), but dividing that by ten would mean a huge savings on bandwidth. If you put solo or small groups into their own instances, it's only a tiny amount of bandwidth used. Area calculations on bandwidth per player has a progressive measure to it, as more people are added to an area the bandwitdth increase more than simply by the numbers of each addition but increases exponentially for each player. So having 60 people in one zone, but you instance the zone into six parts with 10 people in each, it will save a good amount of bandwidth compared to having them all in the same zone at the same time. The only extra burden of it is if scripts or NPC's/MOB's are present as they get duplicated, but that is a job for hardware rather than bandwidth for the most part.
EQ2 instanced everything at 100 players, this too to save on bandwidth. It also means that they did not need to buy such expensive servers. Try to put 1000 people into one zone, it would crash the server. It's about cutting service, doing things cheaper, gaining a greater profit. If you put 1k people into an area of WoW, the server would go berserk too, it's intended for smaller groups and solo instances where savings are greater which results in higher profits. So you get incentive to play multi-player style, as the system could not really handle anything else.
two question:1)does (ms)remote differential compression have a use in an idea that we are talking about(humor me please)
2)why would (ms)have devlopped donnybrook if they didnt believe in massivelly amount in one map !
it is intended for that goal mainly!(ty for taking the time to humor me)
I know, I know, ridiculous claim, but hear me out. In the raw sense of the term "MMORPG", yes WoW and its ilk fall into that category.
But where the glaring difference comes in, is in the ideals of what an MMO should be. MMOs, since their inception have really been pushing the boundaries with gameplay and bridging the gap between player and developer. These worlds, embodied in these games, exist to be conquered by the playerbase. It started with adventuring together in groups, to solving puzzles together, defeating bosses together. Then comes along crafting, social scheduling, interaction with different groups (guild politics), and PvP.
Every new game, every different feature is pushing this genre forward by giving the player more power, more custimization, more individuality among different game types.
An MMORPG is a game that exists solely as a world for players to shape. Player interaction between themselves, the game world, and each other are integral to what makes an MMO an MMO.
Games like WoW and other PVE focused games are infantile MMOs, not TRUE MMOs. The sandbox games are the closest. Games like EVE, Darkfall, Wurm, Love, etc. allow the players to change the course of the game. Individuals, not developers. YES there can be story in a sandbox, WHY is there no hybrid MMO. With EVE's reintroduction to live events putting more steps into advancing stories depending on player input, we are taking mosre steps to advance the culture of MMOs and player involvement.
This is what makes an MMO an MMO, the players with the power.
I heard you out. You're right, it is a ridiculous claim.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
No game has an instance of 1500. It defeats the purpose of having an instance if everyone on the server is in it. Again you don't redefine the term MMORPG by saying one game is and nothing else. You don't represent the view of all gamers. Sorry.
Not really. Instances cut bandwidth usage. If you have 1500 people trying to access the same area, it is more bandwidth than splitting the area into two instances and dividing the population. Like in EQ1, most I've ever seen in one zone was about 1000 players (pre-instances), but dividing that by ten would mean a huge savings on bandwidth. If you put solo or small groups into their own instances, it's only a tiny amount of bandwidth used. Area calculations on bandwidth per player has a progressive measure to it, as more people are added to an area the bandwitdth increase more than simply by the numbers of each addition but increases exponentially for each player. So having 60 people in one zone, but you instance the zone into six parts with 10 people in each, it will save a good amount of bandwidth compared to having them all in the same zone at the same time. The only extra burden of it is if scripts or NPC's/MOB's are present as they get duplicated, but that is a job for hardware rather than bandwidth for the most part.
EQ2 instanced everything at 100 players, this too to save on bandwidth. It also means that they did not need to buy such expensive servers. Try to put 1000 people into one zone, it would crash the server. It's about cutting service, doing things cheaper, gaining a greater profit. If you put 1k people into an area of WoW, the server would go berserk too, it's intended for smaller groups and solo instances where savings are greater which results in higher profits. So you get incentive to play multi-player style, as the system could not really handle anything else.
two question:1)does (ms)remote differential compression have a use in an idea that we are talking about(humor me please)
2)why would (ms)have devlopped donnybrook if they didnt believe in massivelly amount in one map !
it is intended for that goal mainly!(ty for taking the time to humor me)
Compressing packets? Sure, not new at all. In fact with UDP you save quite an amount of bandwidth, but still you have to deal with the exponential bandwidth usage with populations, compression or protocol only helps, not resolves.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
No game has an instance of 1500. It defeats the purpose of having an instance if everyone on the server is in it. Again you don't redefine the term MMORPG by saying one game is and nothing else. You don't represent the view of all gamers. Sorry.
Not really. Instances cut bandwidth usage. If you have 1500 people trying to access the same area, it is more bandwidth than splitting the area into two instances and dividing the population. Like in EQ1, most I've ever seen in one zone was about 1000 players (pre-instances), but dividing that by ten would mean a huge savings on bandwidth. If you put solo or small groups into their own instances, it's only a tiny amount of bandwidth used. Area calculations on bandwidth per player has a progressive measure to it, as more people are added to an area the bandwitdth increase more than simply by the numbers of each addition but increases exponentially for each player. So having 60 people in one zone, but you instance the zone into six parts with 10 people in each, it will save a good amount of bandwidth compared to having them all in the same zone at the same time. The only extra burden of it is if scripts or NPC's/MOB's are present as they get duplicated, but that is a job for hardware rather than bandwidth for the most part.
EQ2 instanced everything at 100 players, this too to save on bandwidth. It also means that they did not need to buy such expensive servers. Try to put 1000 people into one zone, it would crash the server. It's about cutting service, doing things cheaper, gaining a greater profit. If you put 1k people into an area of WoW, the server would go berserk too, it's intended for smaller groups and solo instances where savings are greater which results in higher profits. So you get incentive to play multi-player style, as the system could not really handle anything else.
two question:1)does (ms)remote differential compression have a use in an idea that we are talking about(humor me please)
2)why would (ms)have devlopped donnybrook if they didnt believe in massivelly amount in one map !
it is intended for that goal mainly!(ty for taking the time to humor me)
Compressing packets? Sure, not new at all. In fact with UDP you save quite an amount of bandwidth, but still you have to deal with the exponential bandwidth usage with populations, compression or protocol only helps, not resolves.
mm!donnybrook rise the number of player from say 32 to 1000 in one map!ms made that 2 or 3 years ago free techno
for massive amount of player on a single map .not sure about remote differential compression since i dont think one game use it ,same for donnybrook but techno is there.and if eve could put 1700 player in jita 4 month or so ago when they checked that i dont see reason for wow not to be able to use solution from ms that has been out for years .
I agree completely. Wow has been shallow since the day it was released, and hasn't improved in depth since. Like you say, it's technically a mmo, but it's really just more of an online game. Obviously, we are the minority here, and that's ok. After all, the term "true mmo" isn't really defined anyways, so it's really what you make of it (although you should change your title to make that clear).
To me, wow misses on many intangible factors, basically what I'd call the "heart" of a mmo. There's little variety in gameplay, everything you work for is obsolete in a year, with bind on pickup the economy is a commodity market, when you reach max level there's very little land left for you to play in (except instances of course), and in the end the game comes down to raids or battlegrounds. In the end that's just not what I consider a mmo, it's way too restrictive; and to me freedom and variety are the most important factors of a mmo, factors wow clearly misses the mark on.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
Obviously the amount of details shown in wow and eve in terms of graphic and data is alot difference.
If it's ever possible in eve to show 1500 different space shuttle on your screen showing all the detailed movement of all the ship let me know.
Well eve has a space backdrop, not a foliage coverd terrain with lots of shadows and shader effects ect.
Wow has the advantage of a 24-bit character model engin.
Both games should have the ability to show more people on screen than a top of the line dx10 game. Both games you will probably need to turn down the graphics settings regardless of your system for massive pvp.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
Obviously the amount of details shown in wow and eve in terms of graphic and data is alot difference.
If it's ever possible in eve to show 1500 different space shuttle on your screen showing all the detailed movement of all the ship let me know.
Not in the least that EVE doesn't even have such trivial things like a world, a gravity, a landscape and some trees and feet to look at.
Being trapped into a cockpit chair in empty space forever ... is not exactly my idea either of the "ultimate" (true) mmo.
On topic:
Of course WOW is an mmorpg. In fact it has more playing options and bigger content than other mmorpg for the moment.
Or do we seperate "its" features from other games again? "It is just Pve and Pvp". Yep, Silly.
As to the guy above that "everything is redundant after one year". No, it isn't, because achievements, titles and status symbols have long surpassed "purple gear" in both Pve and Pvp part of the game.
I worked hard for my Justicar and Battlemaster titles. The first ones I got years ago and they are timeless. Just as any other good mmorpg would have it. (if you can find any that still have players in them at least).
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
OP is right, WoW is not an MMORPG - at least not at endgame. Neither are all the other heavily instanced games that claim to be so.
WoW consists of a 3D lobby (the open world, where you level in and nothing else) which serves as the entrance into instances. These being PvE instances (dungeons) or PvP instances.
I remember when I hit 60: All I did was standing around in Ironforge, until a group was together for dungeons, and later on for PvE instances. All I ever did in the socalled "world", was travel to dungeons. I had direct access to PvP from IF, and when I began PvP'ing exclusively, I never set foot outside of IF again. Then quit in disgust.
If all you play WoW for, is to level up, you can call it an MMO, but at endlevel (where the game should really begin?) it ceases to be that.
LOl, though I do not agree with your opinion on this one Mr Daywolf, this is a damb funny post, there's no denying it.
Hah! you mean the part where I said it is an mmo? OP has some good points, but I don't necessarily agree with it all. If you can get 100 people into the same area, I'd say it's an mmo. However, WoW is really designed to play like a multi-player RPG (like Diablo), but has the technology to pass for an mmorpg to some degree, thus you pay a sub for it I really don’t see it hard to come to that conclusion, it’s pretty common now a days, it’s old game design used in RPG’s for years as Blizzard had mastered even before WoW.
Originally posted by drbaltazar
mm!donnybrook rise the number of player from say 32 to 1000 in one map!ms made that 2 or 3 years ago free techno
That's always in theory, no matter what server side network system is used. I've seen some claim 66k, but when tested it hardly made 50 people. You don't see that in WoW though, it would be bad business, lost revenue. And also when you maximize your player population ability, you always loose performance (no matter how many are logged in), at least in all the servers I've seen from source code side.
Dude, just admit you were smoking crack when you made this OP and we'll be good.
Nobody died and made YOU the definer of MMO's.
Call WoW a bad MMO for any number of reasons. Call any other a GREAT MMO for any number of reasons. But STOP TRYING TO PRETEND YOU GET TO DEFINE WHAT IS AN MMO AND WHAT ISN'T.
WoW meets any REASONABLE persons views of what an MMO is. A persistant world? yep. The ability to interact with hundreds if not thousands of other players? yep. That's only the beginning of its "qualifications". But clearly, it is an MMO.
Good? Bad? It's the one with the subs. Get over it. Play the game you like and be happy.
OP is right, WoW is not an MMORPG - at least not at endgame. Neither are all the other heavily instanced games that claim to be so.
WoW consists of a 3D lobby (the open world, where you level in and nothing else) which serves as the entrance into instances. These being PvE instances (dungeons) or PvP instances.
I remember when I hit 60: All I did was standing around in Ironforge, until a group was together for dungeons, and later on for PvE instances. All I ever did in the socalled "world", was travel to dungeons. I had direct access to PvP from IF, and when I began PvP'ing exclusively, I never set foot outside of IF again. Then quit in disgust.
If all you play WoW for, is to level up, you can call it an MMO, but at endlevel (where the game should really begin?) it ceases to be that.
All gathering professions are into the open world.
The complete economy of WOW is based on them.
All seasonal content puts you into the world, all daily quests, all world achievements and basically what you say is that you didn't do either of them.
Your choice, but that's your choice: the land masses are there and ... just to be sure the land is epxloited , Blizzard puts in a nice "needed" leveling profession back into CATA: Archeology.
More then ever you'll need to exploit the open world zones to ... do the end game in CATA (PAth of Titans). So ... argument failed (again of course).
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
Obviously the amount of details shown in wow and eve in terms of graphic and data is alot difference.
If it's ever possible in eve to show 1500 different space shuttle on your screen showing all the detailed movement of all the ship let me know.
Well eve has a space backdrop, not a foliage coverd terrain with lots of shadows and shader effects ect.
Wow has the advantage of a 24-bit character model engin.
Both games should have the ability to show more people on screen than a top of the line dx10 game. Both games you will probably need to turn down the graphics settings regardless of your system for massive pvp.
ya you are right there the average user cannot have the view of a good system as thats for sure and lets face its the dude that do see it with little to no lag as a lot of speed on the upload front(witch is the main thing to what in gaming
you can have only 5 mb/sec download speed but if its the same in the upload speed you can pretty mutch say good buy to lag!and has we know the upload is limited pretty mutch everywhere you go .take me 10mb/se download but a crappy .640mb/se upload so yes if im not carefull even with my fair machine i will lag this mean no shadow!
sure hope to see game use donnybrook or their version of it soon!since its a free concept from ms (at least for now)
OP is right, WoW is not an MMORPG - at least not at endgame. Neither are all the other heavily instanced games that claim to be so.
WoW consists of a 3D lobby (the open world, where you level in and nothing else) which serves as the entrance into instances. These being PvE instances (dungeons) or PvP instances.
I remember when I hit 60: All I did was standing around in Ironforge, until a group was together for dungeons, and later on for PvE instances. All I ever did in the socalled "world", was travel to dungeons. I had direct access to PvP from IF, and when I began PvP'ing exclusively, I never set foot outside of IF again. Then quit in disgust.
If all you play WoW for, is to level up, you can call it an MMO, but at endlevel (where the game should really begin?) it ceases to be that.
LOl, though I do not agree with your opinion on this one Mr Daywolf, this is a damb funny post, there's no denying it.
Hah! you mean the part where I said it is an mmo? OP has some good points, but I don't necessarily agree with it all. If you can get 100 people into the same area, I'd say it's an mmo. However, WoW is really designed to play like a multi-player RPG (like Diablo), but has the technology to pass for an mmorpg to some degree, thus you pay a sub for it I really don’t see it hard to come to that conclusion, it’s pretty common now a days, it’s old game design used in RPG’s for years as Blizzard had mastered even before WoW.
Yep, This bit right here was the part I was not agreeing with. Explaine to me how that makes it difernt to any other theampark game on the market? Or are you saying that no games released since wow in this sub niche of the genre are true mmos? not trying to put words in your mouth here Mr Wolf, just asking for clarification.
so wow might call itself a mmo but every gamer knows that eve is the true representation of what is a mmo in the view of gamer
Obviously the amount of details shown in wow and eve in terms of graphic and data is alot difference.
If it's ever possible in eve to show 1500 different space shuttle on your screen showing all the detailed movement of all the ship let me know.
they can do it have do it ,not sure now since they ve been hard at work on upgrading their gear and programing for their patch and all(they had shut down a big chunk of their server dont know if they are back up!check their site they own the world recorn for concurrent user cant recall i think it was 60 000 .1700 in jita alone!and the news i say is old news since i havent checked their website in months!
then we will have to add a word to split wow from eve
dont get me wrong wow is a great multiplayer gamer
but i consider eve a good massive multiplayer game
i wish i knew a word to add to eve mmo to make sure poeple didnt say they are in the same boat but frankly i dont know what word could be added to mmo.mmmo(nha that suck lol)like i say wow had it in the original wow but they lost it at their first expension!its sad!
Comments
Not really. Instances cut bandwidth usage. If you have 1500 people trying to access the same area, it is more bandwidth than splitting the area into two instances and dividing the population. Like in EQ1, most I've ever seen in one zone was about 1000 players (pre-instances), but dividing that by ten would mean a huge savings on bandwidth. If you put solo or small groups into their own instances, it's only a tiny amount of bandwidth used. Area calculations on bandwidth per player has a progressive measure to it, as more people are added to an area the bandwitdth increase more than simply by the numbers of each addition but increases exponentially for each player. So having 60 people in one zone, but you instance the zone into six parts with 10 people in each, it will save a good amount of bandwidth compared to having them all in the same zone at the same time. The only extra burden of it is if scripts or NPC's/MOB's are present as they get duplicated, but that is a job for hardware rather than bandwidth for the most part.
EQ2 instanced everything at 100 players, this too to save on bandwidth. It also means that they did not need to buy such expensive servers. Try to put 1000 people into one zone, it would crash the server. It's about cutting service, doing things cheaper, gaining a greater profit. If you put 1k people into an area of WoW, the server would go berserk too, it's intended for smaller groups and solo instances where savings are greater which results in higher profits. So you get incentive to play multi-player style, as the system could not really handle anything else.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
Even though i do not enjoy playing WoW or even like the playstyle i will have to disagree with the OP
Massively - check
server capable of handling thousands more than the original 8-16-32-64 player good vs bad arenas or the 8 player adventure games like diablo/neverwinternights etc....
Multiplayer - check
duh, more than 1 player can play at the same time
Online - check
one can only play online
RPG (role playing game) -check
you play the role of your character. clerics play the role of the healer, fighters play the role of the tank, paladins play the hybrid or whatever. you play the role of the character you chose to be.
so yes, an MMORPG can have many forms and styles but if you can put your games into all of the categories above it becomes an MMORPG.
planetside and huxley on the other hand do not fall in the MMORPG but in the MMOFPS.
in other words, take the traditional genres RPG/FPS/RTS/Adventure/Simulator and put them on a server that portraits a persistant world that can handle a significant amount of people at the same time and you have yourself an MMO, then its up to you to add the suffix
the OP's definition is correct though wrongfully named,
"An MMORPG is a game that exists solely as a world for players to shape. Player interaction between themselves, the game world, and each other are integral to what makes an MMO an MMO." - UknownAspect
thats a sandbox (a sub category of MMO Games)
a way that i can see that your argument is incomplete is that i can't find a passage i can quote telling me what you mean by "infantile MMOs" i mean 9dragons and requiem are far from being infantile. or how you can say that WoW IS NOT a MMORPG. you just tell me what it is.
to conclude, OP, i think you confused MMORPG and MMOG with sandbox and themepark
When you add those dots between sentences it makes everything you type read like lines said by William Shatner.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
To OP: You are describing a sandbox-style mmorpg, not an mmorpg in general. All that a game needs to be an mmorpg is to have rpg elements (character stats, gear with stats, attribute progression, etc) and a persistent online world. There is nothing in it's definition that states it must be shaped by players - that's sandbox. A game could maybe be called "more sandbox" than another game, but not more "mmorpg". That'd be like calling a movie "more horror" than another movie when you meant to call them both horror and one just more gorey.
To the rest on that camp: there is also nothing in the definition of mmorpg that states "you must have atleast x number of people in one place at one time with no instances to qualify as massively multiplayer." You are imposing more restrictions than the definition calls for.
Edit: As far as the "not an rpg" deal - as far as the game industry is concerned, an RPG is defined as simply a game where the player controls a character/avatar in the game world with the stat progression mechanics I mentioned in my first paragraph. It has nothing to do with the meaning of roleplaying as defined by the mmo playerbase.
LOL
Kor: Do you also welcome me?
Captain Kirk: You're here; there's nothing I can do about it.
Kor: [smiles] Good, honest hatred. Very refreshing.
Hmm.. the WoW... demo.. IS... different ...from the rest... of the game. All games ...dooo ......that.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
two question:1)does (ms)remote differential compression have a use in an idea that we are talking about(humor me please)
2)why would (ms)have devlopped donnybrook if they didnt believe in massivelly amount in one map !
it is intended for that goal mainly!(ty for taking the time to humor me)
I heard you out. You're right, it is a ridiculous claim.
And your ideals are the only right ones?
Why did I even respond to this failure of a thread..
LOl, though I do not agree with your opinion on this one Mr Daywolf, this is a damb funny post, there's no denying it.
Compressing packets? Sure, not new at all. In fact with UDP you save quite an amount of bandwidth, but still you have to deal with the exponential bandwidth usage with populations, compression or protocol only helps, not resolves.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
mm!donnybrook rise the number of player from say 32 to 1000 in one map!ms made that 2 or 3 years ago free techno
for massive amount of player on a single map .not sure about remote differential compression since i dont think one game use it ,same for donnybrook but techno is there.and if eve could put 1700 player in jita 4 month or so ago when they checked that i dont see reason for wow not to be able to use solution from ms that has been out for years .
I agree completely. Wow has been shallow since the day it was released, and hasn't improved in depth since. Like you say, it's technically a mmo, but it's really just more of an online game. Obviously, we are the minority here, and that's ok. After all, the term "true mmo" isn't really defined anyways, so it's really what you make of it (although you should change your title to make that clear).
To me, wow misses on many intangible factors, basically what I'd call the "heart" of a mmo. There's little variety in gameplay, everything you work for is obsolete in a year, with bind on pickup the economy is a commodity market, when you reach max level there's very little land left for you to play in (except instances of course), and in the end the game comes down to raids or battlegrounds. In the end that's just not what I consider a mmo, it's way too restrictive; and to me freedom and variety are the most important factors of a mmo, factors wow clearly misses the mark on.
Obviously the amount of details shown in wow and eve in terms of graphic and data is alot difference.
If it's ever possible in eve to show 1500 different space shuttle on your screen showing all the detailed movement of all the ship let me know.
Well eve has a space backdrop, not a foliage coverd terrain with lots of shadows and shader effects ect.
Wow has the advantage of a 24-bit character model engin.
Both games should have the ability to show more people on screen than a top of the line dx10 game. Both games you will probably need to turn down the graphics settings regardless of your system for massive pvp.
Not in the least that EVE doesn't even have such trivial things like a world, a gravity, a landscape and some trees and feet to look at.
Being trapped into a cockpit chair in empty space forever ... is not exactly my idea either of the "ultimate" (true) mmo.
On topic:
Of course WOW is an mmorpg. In fact it has more playing options and bigger content than other mmorpg for the moment.
Or do we seperate "its" features from other games again? "It is just Pve and Pvp". Yep, Silly.
As to the guy above that "everything is redundant after one year". No, it isn't, because achievements, titles and status symbols have long surpassed "purple gear" in both Pve and Pvp part of the game.
I worked hard for my Justicar and Battlemaster titles. The first ones I got years ago and they are timeless. Just as any other good mmorpg would have it. (if you can find any that still have players in them at least).
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
OP is right, WoW is not an MMORPG - at least not at endgame. Neither are all the other heavily instanced games that claim to be so.
WoW consists of a 3D lobby (the open world, where you level in and nothing else) which serves as the entrance into instances. These being PvE instances (dungeons) or PvP instances.
I remember when I hit 60: All I did was standing around in Ironforge, until a group was together for dungeons, and later on for PvE instances. All I ever did in the socalled "world", was travel to dungeons. I had direct access to PvP from IF, and when I began PvP'ing exclusively, I never set foot outside of IF again. Then quit in disgust.
If all you play WoW for, is to level up, you can call it an MMO, but at endlevel (where the game should really begin?) it ceases to be that.
Hah! you mean the part where I said it is an mmo? OP has some good points, but I don't necessarily agree with it all. If you can get 100 people into the same area, I'd say it's an mmo. However, WoW is really designed to play like a multi-player RPG (like Diablo), but has the technology to pass for an mmorpg to some degree, thus you pay a sub for it
I really don’t see it hard to come to that conclusion, it’s pretty common now a days, it’s old game design used in RPG’s for years as Blizzard had mastered even before WoW.
That's always in theory, no matter what server side network system is used. I've seen some claim 66k, but when tested it hardly made 50 people. You don't see that in WoW though, it would be bad business, lost revenue. And also when you maximize your player population ability, you always loose performance (no matter how many are logged in), at least in all the servers I've seen from source code side.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
I HEARD you out.
Dude, just admit you were smoking crack when you made this OP and we'll be good.
Nobody died and made YOU the definer of MMO's.
Call WoW a bad MMO for any number of reasons. Call any other a GREAT MMO for any number of reasons. But STOP TRYING TO PRETEND YOU GET TO DEFINE WHAT IS AN MMO AND WHAT ISN'T.
WoW meets any REASONABLE persons views of what an MMO is. A persistant world? yep. The ability to interact with hundreds if not thousands of other players? yep. That's only the beginning of its "qualifications". But clearly, it is an MMO.
Good? Bad? It's the one with the subs. Get over it. Play the game you like and be happy.
All gathering professions are into the open world.
The complete economy of WOW is based on them.
All seasonal content puts you into the world, all daily quests, all world achievements and basically what you say is that you didn't do either of them.
Your choice, but that's your choice: the land masses are there and ... just to be sure the land is epxloited , Blizzard puts in a nice "needed" leveling profession back into CATA: Archeology.
More then ever you'll need to exploit the open world zones to ... do the end game in CATA (PAth of Titans). So ... argument failed (again of course).
Want a real mmorpg? Play WOW with experience turned off mode and be Pve_Pvp King at any level without a rat race.
ya you are right there the average user cannot have the view of a good system as thats for sure and lets face its the dude that do see it with little to no lag as a lot of speed on the upload front(witch is the main thing to what in gaming
you can have only 5 mb/sec download speed but if its the same in the upload speed you can pretty mutch say good buy to lag!and has we know the upload is limited pretty mutch everywhere you go .take me 10mb/se download but a crappy .640mb/se upload so yes if im not carefull even with my fair machine i will lag this mean no shadow!
sure hope to see game use donnybrook or their version of it soon!since its a free concept from ms (at least for now)
yep i sure miss vanilla wow endgame!
Yep, This bit right here was the part I was not agreeing with. Explaine to me how that makes it difernt to any other theampark game on the market? Or are you saying that no games released since wow in this sub niche of the genre are true mmos? not trying to put words in your mouth here Mr Wolf, just asking for clarification.
they can do it have do it ,not sure now since they ve been hard at work on upgrading their gear and programing for their patch and all(they had shut down a big chunk of their server dont know if they are back up!check their site they own the world recorn for concurrent user cant recall i think it was 60 000 .1700 in jita alone!and the news i say is old news since i havent checked their website in months!
This has got to be the most rediculous anti-wow post i've ever read. Seriously... if you don't like WoW, don't play it.
then we will have to add a word to split wow from eve
dont get me wrong wow is a great multiplayer gamer
but i consider eve a good massive multiplayer game
i wish i knew a word to add to eve mmo to make sure poeple didnt say they are in the same boat but frankly i dont know what word could be added to mmo.mmmo(nha that suck lol)like i say wow had it in the original wow but they lost it at their first expension!its sad!