At what point do these games stop being classified as MMO's?

joe2119

With major games currently implementing group building tools such as dungeon finder, that remove both parts of the community and world from the game by taking the interaction and effort out of forming groups and reducing the world to an instanced treadmill, I can't help but wonder are these games still really MMO's or have they simply become a console game where you matchmake and don't talk or interact with any of the players and just worry about your personal gains?

These games have lost the worlds, which are a vital component of what makes an MMO. There is nothing "massive" about an instance run with 5 people that don't even bother talking, why even play an online game? There is nothing "massive" about a 10v10 person capture the flag match. Thats console trash, you can play CoD for that kind of action.

As an example recently I was tanking an instance with one of these premade groups and at every boss I would ask, "Do you guys know this fight?". There was a long silence as one of the dps'ers was jumping back and forth, I could tell his ADD was wearing on him. Finally I got a response, "y". I said, "why? "because if you don't know the fight I'll explain it." The player responded, "no you noob, y is for yes, GO ALREADY!". These games have now built a mentality and a system in which running these dungeons requires no interactions with the other players what so ever other than they just need to press the right buttons and do their jobs. Strategy, planning, and cooperation are gone. Tanking is now so simple it requires no thought or effort what so ever, simply just run into things and in most games they stick to you like glue, crowd control is gone, effective pulling is LONG gone. All that remains is dps and healing, dps is simply pressing the buttons in the right order as fast as you can, healing is simply pressing the same button over and over again and in most games mana is never really a problem.

"Massive" is the world, a living breathing community where people build a reputation, One you can interact with and influence, "massive" is meeting up with people questing, offering to help them, making friends that you can later do dungeons with, build guilds with, raid with. "Massive" is large scale world pvp in which you actually effect the game world and change it for the better or worse. Not some basin in which you're stuck in racking up "points" till you with the "match".

Why even bother hosting these world servers if the majority of the players don't seem to use them... or rather don't need to use it due to the fact that these group finder tools reward you for using them, actually encouraging you to let the game play part of itself for you. Doesn't this seem backwards? If you're going to take the quick and easy route you certainly shouldn't recieve more benefits than the people that are investing time and putting a group together the old fashion way and actually interacting with their game world.

I understand that at the core these are still businesses and their goal is to make the most money possible and the best way to do that is to attract the most customers which means offering game play for players of all types. They should not however reward the players that are putting in less effort and time with bonus rewards for using the group finder tools. People that take the time to form groups should be the ones to recieve a bonus. I'm currently a full time student so I strongly respect this option when I'm in classes, but it makes these games feel hollow and lifeless, I'd much rather have a single fun dungeon run in which I interact with some people rather than 5 treadmill like runs in which I don't utter a word and just hold the W key while pressing 1-5 at the right time. Might as well just play a single player game.

These games have just become giant bragging contests, the only point of the world is so you can brag to other people. You're in these worlds so you can show off your personal gear and your accomplishments to other people that honestly don't give a crap. Gone is the bond building, meeting people, and actually being part of an online community.

This is really for a separate post, but now who is to blame? The developers for encouraging and allowing this behavior, as you can now simply run straight through instances without any planning or strategy?  OR is it the players? for encouraging and allowing this behavior, constantly crying that the game is too hard, and being overall jackasses and therefore encouraging this behavior even more?

So at what point do these games simply become MO's, multiplayer online games? What makes them massive anymore other than the number of subscribers? Is there hope for the genre or is it fading?

Also, how do all these darn games keep coming out the same? Why would players leave a game they're TIRED of to go to a game that is almost exactly the same? They will still be tired of it once they realize it's simply a different art style and the core gameplay is the exact same thing!

waynejr2

They stop when you start defining them in a specific way.   MMO and virtual world are two different things.  If you confuse one for the other you will have problems.

joe2119

Originally posted by waynejr2

They stop when you start defining them in a specific way.   MMO and virtual world are two different things.  If you confuse one for the other you will have problems.

and without the world how are these games massive?

Castillle

MMOS are defined by how the majority views them.

 

S4 league is a MMO3PS

Its a lobby based game. 

 

UT3 is a lobby based shooter but you can play single player and it is NOT defined as an MMO.

 

Therefore :

An MMO is a game where you have to be online to play and that it can only be played online with other people.  But Warcraft can be played alone! But you sure have to be online to play it!

That would change the definition to :

"An MMO is a game where you have to be online at all time to play"

 

Source :

Go to mmohut.com and see the lists of mmos that are pretty much just lobby games.

 

Edit::

Now you say "how are these games massive"? Massive is not in the MMO acronym.

 

Its

"Massively Multiplayer Online"

That means the multiplayer aspect is massive and that its online. 

Now if you look at the definition of thaat it would mean that "Its multiplayer is a very large aspect and its online"

So why in the blue hell are all these solo focused online games calling themselves massively multiplayer when its so obviously massively single player???

 

Now anyways taking that into account there is absolutely no way you can call soloing in WoW "massively multiplayer" Unless you two are affecting each other in some way.  You can either read that as "Were racing to get to 60 first" or "Were both playing in the same world"  BUT the problem with that logic is this situation :

"My friend and I are both playing FF11 and were on different parts of the world not affecting or even noticing each other.  Are we still playing together? Or are we just playing the same game at the same time?  Or are we just playing a single player game at the same time with no connection to each other aside from the fact that we can run to each other?  Would you still consider us partaking in "Multiplayer gameplay" when were both soloing on the other side of the world? "

 

Another thing is Soloing.  If majority of the players are soloing and not affecting each other in any noticeable way then that would actually REMOVE the "Massively Multiplayer" tag because majority of the game would be considered single player leading to the term "Massively Solo" o.o

thinktank001

I think the line starts to blur when games use individual instances for groups or a person.  

Krellen

There are just many type of MMO's now.  MMO use to be all similar in that they built worlds to explore.  There are still games being built like that, but there are many more being built differently.  Some games will focus on group finders and be more lobby games and other ones will have worlds.  People will just have to play what they like, but they allc an still be called MMO.

I played Everquest and Vanilla WOW, but I left WOW before the dungeon finder thing.  WOW was still a virtual world when I was playing it.  My first encounter with the matchmaker thing, other than PVP in wow, is in DCUO.  My playstyle is different now and I am likeng it and think it is fine.  I set dinner for my daughter and jump in and run a Duo while she easts.  I think it works in this Superhero type game, even if the zone with the most logged time is the Watchtower. 

But, a fantasy style game I would miss having a world like in Everquest and WOW to explore and have random interactions with other players.  That is what pulled me into MMO's to begin with.  If every action is a scripted matchmaking encounter it will be very boring.

Quirhid

The real question is: When will the purists give up?

Castillle

Do ai get a cookie for attacking the acronym?

*puppy eyes*

waynejr2

Originally posted by joe2119

Originally posted by waynejr2

They stop when you start defining them in a specific way.   MMO and virtual world are two different things.  If you confuse one for the other you will have problems.

and without the world how are these games massive?

 Back in the 90s when graphics muds were starting to get old and newer games were comming along, the Massive had nothing to do with size of the world.  It had to do with concurrent network connections. 

 

[edited: that's what I get for not having my eyes in]

Meltdown

Originally posted by Castillle

Do ai get a cookie for attacking the acronym?

*puppy eyes*

Maybe half a cookie

Some people argue that MMO means 100+ people in one location... meh chat rooms can do that. But some argue that MMO means that there is a persistant world that you impact, this has some weight too it. Although in FPS games you can have stats, levels, persistant changes to your character, each time you load up a map its the same as the last time you played it. In an MMO ideally this wouldn't be the case, and possibly be why the direction current MMOs are going are pointing more towards singleplayer games... because each time you run that dungeon or do that quest, its exactly the same.

Instancing seemed to play a big part here. Before instancing a dungeon would never be the same as the last time you saw it. Perhaps a group just came through and cleared a bunch of stuff out, maybe its full of pvpers, maybe all the monsters were kited into a corner, or trained to zone in and weren't where you expected. Either way something has changed from the last time you were there.

If you want to attack the acronym itself, I think there is reason enough to either stop using it, or redefine it. Massively Multiplayer should be a description of the game world itself, and not of the players.

arieste

Originally posted by joe2119

With major games currently implementing group building tools such as dungeon finder, that remove both parts of the community and world from the game by taking the interaction and effort out of forming groups and reducing the world to an instanced treadmill, I can't help but wonder are these games still really MMO's or have they simply become a console game where you matchmake and don't talk or interact with any of the players and just worry about your personal gains?

These games have lost the worlds, which are a vital component of what makes an MMO. There is nothing "massive" about an instance run with 5 people that don't even bother talking, why even play an online game? There is nothing "massive" about a 10v10 person capture the flag match. Thats console trash, you can play CoD for that kind of action.

As an example recently I was tanking an instance with one of these premade groups and at every boss I would ask, "Do you guys know this fight?". There was a long silence as one of the dps'ers was jumping back and forth, I could tell his ADD was wearing on him. Finally I got a response, "y". I said, "why? "because if you don't know the fight I'll explain it." The player responded, "no you noob, y is for yes, GO ALREADY!". These games have now built a mentality and a system in which running these dungeons requires no interactions with the other players what so ever other than they just need to press the right buttons and do their jobs. Strategy, planning, and cooperation are gone. Tanking is now so simple it requires no thought or effort what so ever, simply just run into things and in most games they stick to you like glue, crowd control is gone, effective pulling is LONG gone. All that remains is dps and healing, dps is simply pressing the buttons in the right order as fast as you can, healing is simply pressing the same button over and over again and in most games mana is never really a problem.

"Massive" is the world, a living breathing community where people build a reputation, One you can interact with and influence, "massive" is meeting up with people questing, offering to help them, making friends that you can later do dungeons with, build guilds with, raid with. "Massive" is large scale world pvp in which you actually effect the game world and change it for the better or worse. Not some basin in which you're stuck in racking up "points" till you with the "match".

Why even bother hosting these world servers if the majority of the players don't seem to use them... or rather don't need to use it due to the fact that these group finder tools reward you for using them, actually encouraging you to let the game play part of itself for you. Doesn't this seem backwards? If you're going to take the quick and easy route you certainly shouldn't recieve more benefits than the people that are investing time and putting a group together the old fashion way and actually interacting with their game world.

I understand that at the core these are still businesses and their goal is to make the most money possible and the best way to do that is to attract the most customers which means offering game play for players of all types. They should not however reward the players that are putting in less effort and time with bonus rewards for using the group finder tools. People that take the time to form groups should be the ones to recieve a bonus. I'm currently a full time student so I strongly respect this option when I'm in classes, but it makes these games feel hollow and lifeless, I'd much rather have a single fun dungeon run in which I interact with some people rather than 5 treadmill like runs in which I don't utter a word and just hold the W key while pressing 1-5 at the right time. Might as well just play a single player game.

These games have just become giant bragging contests, the only point of the world is so you can brag to other people. You're in these worlds so you can show off your personal gear and your accomplishments to other people that honestly don't give a crap. Gone is the bond building, meeting people, and actually being part of an online community.

This is really for a separate post, but now who is to blame? The developers for encouraging and allowing this behavior, as you can now simply run straight through instances without any planning or strategy?  OR is it the players? for encouraging and allowing this behavior, constantly crying that the game is too hard, and being overall jackasses and therefore encouraging this behavior even more?

So at what point do these games simply become MO's, multiplayer online games? What makes them massive anymore other than the number of subscribers? Is there hope for the genre or is it fading?

Also, how do all these darn games keep coming out the same? Why would players leave a game they're TIRED of to go to a game that is almost exactly the same? They will still be tired of it once they realize it's simply a different art style and the core gameplay is the exact same thing!

"Massively Multiplayer" is different from just "Multiplayer" by the virtue of the number of simultaneous players supported in a play session.  For example, if today's multi-player games are capped at 64 players at a time, then anything over that would be considered "Massively Multiplayer".

 

"Online" refers to a persistent world.  Meaning that when you log out, the game world still exists.

 

Whether someone is soloing or duo'ing or being in an instanced part of a world has nothing whatsoever to do with a game being massively multi-player.  The best example I use is that going to a movie theater and watching a movie with 1000 other people is still a social experience, even if i do not know any of those people or talk to them while I'm there.  It is vastly different from watching the movie at home by myself or in a theater by myself.

Soloing a quest in Baldur's Gate is vastly different from soloing a quest in Rift because in Rift I know there are many other people who have either done or are doing the quest.  I might be able to run into them or ask them for help or talk to them while i'm doing it.  It doesn't matter that i choose to NOT do any of those, what matter is that i have the option to.  In Baldur's Gate, there is no chance of me running into another person on the same quest.

 

What makes a world is just having other sharing it with you.  Interacting with those people in any way is purely optional.  Just like the real world.   The billions of us on this planet, don't all need to be doing shit together all the time in order for our world to still be the world that it is.

 

Also, how do all these darn games keep coming out the same? Why would players leave a game they're TIRED of to go to a game that is almost exactly the same? They will still be tired of it once they realize it's simply a different art style and the core gameplay is the exact same thing!

As far as that... well, blame WoW.  Same gameplay as before, zero innovation of any kind.  20 times the number of subs of any other game.  If not more.   

 

People are stupid.  People buy bad products just because other people have them (look at the iPad).  

Business is not about selling something amazing for million dollars.  It's about selling a piece of crap for $1 to one billion people.  

 

Right now development is not about the "art" of making the best possible game, it's about business of making something that sells.  ANd what sells is copies of what came before.

 

One day - just like in happened in music and film and literature - there will be more games made for "Art" and "excellence".  These will be better games.  But the'll never be the best sellers.   More people will always watch Transformers and Avatar than Winter's Bone.  That's the world we live in.

VengeSunsoar

They stop being MMO's when they are no longer massively multiplary, or on-line.

Pretty simple.

Venge

Castillle

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

They stop being MMO's when they are no longer massively multiplary, or on-line.

Pretty simple.

Venge

Yah but...What makes a game "Massively Multiplayer"? o.o 

Meltdown

I think we should start using the definition I just got from google:

"M.M.O. is a Wu-Tang Clan affiliated rap group. The acronym usually stands for Money Makin' Operation."

Money Makin' Operation sounds appropriate.

VengeSunsoar

When it's able to handle more concurrent on-line connections than mult-player games - I think it's greater than 64 right?

Venge

arieste

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

When it's able to handle more concurrent on-line connections than mult-player games - I think it's greater than 64 right?

Venge

I think 64 is what it was when the MMOs got started, these days MOs can probably handle more than 64, but not by much.  It's probably still under 250.

GroovyFlower

Most sandbox are still true mmorpg, so dont play themeparks and problem solved for now:)

Paradigm68

Despite the defintions I think the reality is an mmorpg is whatever a publisher calls an mmorpg.  Take the new Marvel game. Granted it's geared towards kids, but you don't get to make your own character. You choose from a pool of existing Marvel characters. (Hello all you Wolverines and Spider-Men!)   Now to me this is clearly an multiplayer online game but in no way is it an MMORPG. However it's called one and listed here on this site. Go figure.

Castillle

Originally posted by Meltdown

Originally posted by Castillle

Do ai get a cookie for attacking the acronym?

*puppy eyes*

Maybe half a cookie

Some people argue that MMO means 100+ people in one location... meh chat rooms can do that. But some argue that MMO means that there is a persistant world that you impact, this has some weight too it. Although in FPS games you can have stats, levels, persistant changes to your character, each time you load up a map its the same as the last time you played it. In an MMO ideally this wouldn't be the case, and possibly be why the direction current MMOs are going are pointing more towards singleplayer games... because each time you run that dungeon or do that quest, its exactly the same.

Instancing seemed to play a big part here. Before instancing a dungeon would never be the same as the last time you saw it. Perhaps a group just came through and cleared a bunch of stuff out, maybe its full of pvpers, maybe all the monsters were kited into a corner, or trained to zone in and weren't where you expected. Either way something has changed from the last time you were there.

If you want to attack the acronym itself, I think there is reason enough to either stop using it, or redefine it. Massively Multiplayer should be a description of the game world itself, and not of the players.

I disagree on the underlined part.  I think Massively Multiplayer should be a description of the game itself.  When you play you should get even a small sense of the multiplayer gameplay of it instead of giving you a sense of "alone-ness".  Now if its an RPG then there is some leeway but the game should still first and foremost satisfy the multiplayer aspect.  Thats one of the main reasons why I will be giving GW2 a go.  Because its focusing on making the "Massively Multiplayer feel" easier to achieve.  Currently, I end up playing Co op RPGS instead of MMORPGs if I want to feel like Im playing a Multiplayer game rather than a single player game with the steam chat open o.o

 

TBH I enjoyed the persistent world NWN servers more than a lot of these so called "Massively Multiplayer Online" games o.o I enjoyed UT2004/UT3 RPG mods more than Global Agenda.  Ofc S4 was pretty fun....If only they had more maps lol.

 

Now as for what Paradigm said :

A lot of Korean MMORPGS actually do what marvel did.  I mean...Look at Vindictus and yes.  Publishers will call their games whatever and well have to change the definition of what an MMO is depending on what they do and if majority of the people follow it.  Which is why when you try to get a full definition of what makes an MMO and tally in everything all it is is

"A game where you can play with other people but you can only play while online"

 

Which is  around what I said in the first post if you ignore the part about going with strict definitions of what the term "Massively Multiplayer Online" is supposed to mean.

 

People what we have are not Massively Multiplayer Online.  We have....MuhMoh...Or to be exact!  MuhMORPeGs

waynejr2

Originally posted by Meltdown

I think we should start using the definition I just got from google:

"M.M.O. is a Wu-Tang Clan affiliated rap group. The acronym usually stands for Money Makin' Operation."

Money Makin' Operation sounds appropriate.

 There you have it.

Castillle

Originally posted by waynejr2

Originally posted by Meltdown

I think we should start using the definition I just got from google:

"M.M.O. is a Wu-Tang Clan affiliated rap group. The acronym usually stands for Money Makin' Operation."

Money Makin' Operation sounds appropriate.

 There you have it.

Whoa I cant believe I missed that quote you got!!

 

I agree! MMO = Money Makin' Operation! o.o  Much better than MuhMoh

waynejr2

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

When it's able to handle more concurrent on-line connections than mult-player games - I think it's greater than 64 right?

Venge

 The number is what I am trying to recall now.  Back then marketing departments were trying to trump each other, they would put out numbers.  The number I recall is 500 and that I think was from the M59 crowd.

Meltdown

Isn't that what I said? It's more about the game and the persistant world than the "number of people". Read it again. 

waynejr2

Originally posted by Meltdown

Isn't that what I said? It's more about the game and the persistant world than the "number of people". Read it again. 

 I don't know who you are replying to but the origins of the Massive in mmorpg is number of concurrent network connections.

Palebane

In my opinion the games stop being classified as MMOs when the only time you spend with other players is inside instances. When the only interaction you have with the community is through the auction hall and giving buffs, it just an online game, not an MMO or a MMORPG.
 

---

When will the purists give up?

---

When everyone else is dead.

firefly2003

An actually decent thread my compliments Tired of all the TOR VS GW2 fanboi threads...