Err, excuse me, you tell people to stop splitting hairs and you differentiate between massive and multiplayer and massively multiplayer? If that's not splitting hairs then I'm King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. Prey tell, what is the difference between massive and multiplayer and massively multiplayer?
<>
In the latter, "Massively" modifies "Multiplayer", insinuating that the game can be played by a massive amount of people in the same game environment at the same time.
Exceptionally large amount of people in the same game environment at the same time.
TOR is heavily instanced and zoned. Where does it start and where does it stop being an exceptionally large amount of people in the same game environment at the same time?
I think that's what people have been "splitting hairs" about regarding TOR. It isn't the only game that's guilty of this though. Many other games calling themselves Massively Multiplayer aren't so, to many.
Err, excuse me, you tell people to stop splitting hairs and you differentiate between massive and multiplayer and massively multiplayer? If that's not splitting hairs then I'm King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. Prey tell, what is the difference between massive and multiplayer and massively multiplayer?
<>
In the latter, "Massively" modifies "Multiplayer", insinuating that the game can be played by a massive amount of people in the same game environment at the same time.
Exceptionally large amount of people in the same game environment at the same time.
TOR is heavily instanced and zoned. Where does it start and where does it stop being an exceptionally large amount of people in the same game environment at the same time?
I think that's what people have been "splitting hairs" about regarding TOR. It isn't the only game that's guilty of this though. Many other games calling themselves Massively Multiplayer aren't so, to many.
This may be fodder for a new thread.
/facepalm
There are large amounts of players in the same game environment at the same time. There are also areas that are instanced so that each player(s) can experience the content the way the designers intended. It is fully scripted and directed, but that does not exclude it from the MMO category.
Yeah I am sure you don't want to hear another "I quit" thread.
+1
I'm still having a good time and I look forward to the planned changes and the content they will add. I'm typically not some pvp warrior, and I'm not a huge sword & sorcery fan, so I don't see myself playing GW2 or TERA, so I don't think there's anything else on the horizon I'm looking forward to.
What I'm waiting for is Mass Effect 3, GTA5, and hopefully Dragon Age 3. I don't have any real hope for MMOs for the next few years.
Well.. you wouldn't really call SWTOR an MMO would you?
It's massive. It's multiplayer. It's online. It's even an RPG. It might lack certain elements that you might expect from the genre, but it's definitely an MMO.
I find this game a bit boring actually. There are many aspects that I really like, but at the end of the day, the world is lifeless and boring. I stopped playing at the end of my first month. I may revisit the game sometime in the future, because like I said, there are quite a few things I like about it, so it's not a total loss.
But, I just can't get past the boring. repetitive gameplay and world.
It's a shame really as I really looked forward to this title.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
You have been playing WOW too long bro, you're stuck in the "YOU HAVE TO BE GROUPED ALL THE TIME OTHERWISE IT ISN'T A MMO GAME!" thingy.
MMO isnt all about having to be together, it's optional. It just means a lot of players on the same server.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
This game is not for anyone that wants ANY level of depth in an MMO.
FIXT!
10char
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
You have been playing WOW too long bro, you're stuck in the "YOU HAVE TO BE GROUPED ALL THE TIME OTHERWISE IT ISN'T A MMO GAME!" thingy.
MMO isnt all about having to be together, it's optional. It just means a lot of players on the same server.
WoW is not the game I would have used there. WoW is a solo to cap game with optional grouping for dungeons/pvp also. Pre-wow games are the ones you want to be referring to as having to be grouped.
Yeah I am sure you don't want to hear another "I quit" thread.
+1
I'm still having a good time and I look forward to the planned changes and the content they will add. I'm typically not some pvp warrior, and I'm not a huge sword & sorcery fan, so I don't see myself playing GW2 or TERA, so I don't think there's anything else on the horizon I'm looking forward to.
What I'm waiting for is Mass Effect 3, GTA5, and hopefully Dragon Age 3. I don't have any real hope for MMOs for the next few years.
Well.. you wouldn't really call SWTOR an MMO would you?
It's massive. It's multiplayer. It's online. It's even an RPG. It might lack certain elements that you might expect from the genre, but it's definitely an MMO.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
Err, excuse me, you tell people to stop splitting hairs and you differentiate between massive and multiplayer and massively multiplayer? If that's not splitting hairs then I'm King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. Prey tell, what is the difference between massive and multiplayer and massively multiplayer?
As for the subject of this thread, well I came on here in shock and disbelief because I saw another, yes another, thread from someone quitting on the front page of mmorpg.com. And yes it is another 'I'm quitting SWTOR and had to tell everyone about how it deserves to be doomed to the bargain basement bin at Selfridges' thread. To be fair to Elikal, it is a little different and he was honest enough to appreciate that these threads keep popping up, but it's still the same again.
I can understand his reasons, and I've been there in games, but I never felt the need to pop on to mmorpg.com and start a thread saying I cancelled my subscription to EQ2 today because I was bored. If I started a thread on a well known internet forum everytime I cancelled a subscription or stopped playing a game then I'd spend a good amount of time doing just that. I got bored of playing patience on my phone a while back, so I guess I should have come on here and told everyone about it. You know what you all would have said? You would have said 'tell it to the hand'.
If Elikal had just said that he was bored currently then I might have been able to stomach it, but he goes on to suggest the game isn't deserving of people's money, as so many others of these type of thread do. It's almost as if people think that by posting this they're contibuting to some moral and righteous crusade to rid the world of SWTOR.
Elikal was one of the pre-release doomsayers. That he even bothered to buy the game after he had been in beta is beyond my comprehension. This whole thing smacks of narcissism and the TOR Hate Bandwagon.
Elikal was one of the pre-release doomsayers. That he even bothered to buy the game after he had been in beta is beyond my comprehension. This whole thing smacks of narcissism and the TOR Hate Bandwagon.
Bingo.
I played beta and decided to wait atleast for 6 months to buy and try the game. I rarely pre order games anymore. But yeah it is hard to take these people seriously who hated the game before release, went ahead and bought the game any ways and still hated it and now they want to tell us how they feel. Well i guess everyone already knows.
If i bitch and moan about a game before release to no end and still buy it..i just lose serious credibility and would never make a post about it. Why? because i can only blame myself.
Yeah I am sure you don't want to hear another "I quit" thread.
+1
I'm still having a good time and I look forward to the planned changes and the content they will add. I'm typically not some pvp warrior, and I'm not a huge sword & sorcery fan, so I don't see myself playing GW2 or TERA, so I don't think there's anything else on the horizon I'm looking forward to.
What I'm waiting for is Mass Effect 3, GTA5, and hopefully Dragon Age 3. I don't have any real hope for MMOs for the next few years.
Well.. you wouldn't really call SWTOR an MMO would you?
It's massive. It's multiplayer. It's online. It's even an RPG. It might lack certain elements that you might expect from the genre, but it's definitely an MMO.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
Really? lacks ALL of the elements that make an MMO.....
Spaces representing the world(s) of the game in which players "exist" with other players - no?
Content that requires co-operatiion with other players (World Bosses, Flashpoints & Operations) - no?
Chat channels that allow players to converse with each other - no?
A player driven economy of base resources and end-use products made by those players - no?
Forums where players of the game can share feedback on the game - no?
Your term " is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
Could be applied to a huge amount of games, since everything that requires more than just you can be relegated to "co-op" no matter the upper-limit of players involved it's still co-op is it not, or where does the line officially get drawn?
As an old EverQuest player I used to enjoy 72-person raids (prior to those there were open-world raids that could include many more than this, 10th Coldain ring war event, Avatar of War were 2 notable ones. Then they went to 54, no idea what it is now.
WoW had 40 person raids, went down to 24
SWTOR has 16 person raids
So is WoW an MMO? is EverQuest? do they also lack ALL of the elements that make an MMO...
I have only seen posts about TOR and feel that people are far too harsh on this game. It is still in its infancy and has lots of potential.
No..no it does not. It's a WoW clone. If Bioware showed any indication of doing anything interesting or original, we'd have seen it after the 300 MILLION that got pumped into making it. But we didn't. We saw a boring singleplayer clone. They can add all the content they want, but themeparks run out of steam when they have no new ideas, unless they find a brand new audience of non MMO gamers, like WoW did. But all nonMMO gamers are already playing WoW.
SWTOR has no interesting ideas to build off of, so to say it has potential is a real stretch. We're harsh on the game because it bills itself as an MMO, but has none of the features of an MMO. We're harsh because it had more money pumped into it than any MMO in history and it has NOTHING to show for it.
Mmm icic. I will take heed the words of those who have played it.
Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play?
I was a BIG SWTOR Fanboy pre launch and had been looking forward to this for ages. I played non stop for the first month or so and got a BH, Trooper and JK to cap............. but once you get there there just isnt anything to do. Gaps between playing got longer and longer and when I hadnt played it for a week I cancelled by sub.
HOWEVER
I still dont understand why OP bought the game. He was posting about how much he disliked it for months before release and yet bought it anyway. Lost all credibility in my eyes.
Now that you have stopped playing, will the constant hate posts stop?
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Yeah I am sure you don't want to hear another "I quit" thread.
+1
I'm still having a good time and I look forward to the planned changes and the content they will add. I'm typically not some pvp warrior, and I'm not a huge sword & sorcery fan, so I don't see myself playing GW2 or TERA, so I don't think there's anything else on the horizon I'm looking forward to.
What I'm waiting for is Mass Effect 3, GTA5, and hopefully Dragon Age 3. I don't have any real hope for MMOs for the next few years.
Well.. you wouldn't really call SWTOR an MMO would you?
It's massive. It's multiplayer. It's online. It's even an RPG. It might lack certain elements that you might expect from the genre, but it's definitely an MMO.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
Okay so what elements is it missing? I want you to name them off and prove its not an MMO or are you just jumping on the band wagon to label it a single player game becasue you think it makes you look cool? Everything every other MMO has is in SWTOR its not missing anything. I have yet to see a single intelligent arguement that proves SWTOR isnt an MMO, all I have seen are a bunch of trolls doing their best to bash a game that they dont like for no other reason than to just not like it.
I am more suprised its taken Elikial this long to make this post, if any of you know of him on this forum, then its rather amusing this post took so long to appear.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
You have been playing WOW too long bro, you're stuck in the "YOU HAVE TO BE GROUPED ALL THE TIME OTHERWISE IT ISN'T A MMO GAME!" thingy.
MMO isnt all about having to be together, it's optional. It just means a lot of players on the same server.
Grouping? In WoW? The majority of WoW is instanced and singleplayer now too. Almost no one groups in WoW.
And no, it's not all about grouping. Every zone in SWTOR is instanced, you cannot get more than about 40 people per zone, or a new shard of that zone is created. Almost ALL of the content is in instances, meaning you never see people. I don't think you have any idea what an MMO is. Because SWTOR certainly isn't one, and WoW is barely one now with all thephasing and dungeon finder bs.
No, lots of people on the same server? What? No. There's plenty of games that have a lot of people on the same server, the point that makes it an MMO is that they are all in the same virtual world together. The more instancing an MMO has, the less of an MMO it is.
In DAoC not only were there no instances, but the content from PvE to PvP encouraged you to work together with other people. There were raids that sometimes took 200 people. In RvR there were fights that got up to 800 people. Thats MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER. When I can go into a dungeon, find several groups of random people, join up with them and hunt with them for the night, that's a multiplayer world. When I die by myself in a wing of the same dungeon, and a stranger can run by and rez me, that's part of the massively multiplayer.
What isn't massively multiplayer, by any means, is soloing a quest chain in a series of instances, with cut scenes, with my NPC companions, and...once in a blue moon, a real life friend. That, my friends, is a singleplayer game with optional COOP. The genre to which SWTOR more belongs. If playing with 2 other people is massively multiplayer, then what is BF3?
I actually love TOR. It's set in the SW IP and has everything that other MMORPG's have. It took me almost a solid 2 months to level to 50 and after that i took about a 2 week break from it, as to not have mmo burnout.
With that being said, i can say that, what TOR lacks is the open world feel and meaty things to do outside of combat, that a game like SWG or even the new Archeage looks to have. To me that is the only real drawbacks to TOR. Bugs and such are things that can be worked around until they are fixed. A better mixture of thempark and sandbox where the lines where blurred a bunch more would have added to this title and made it that much more of a solid MMORPG.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
You have been playing WOW too long bro, you're stuck in the "YOU HAVE TO BE GROUPED ALL THE TIME OTHERWISE IT ISN'T A MMO GAME!" thingy.
MMO isnt all about having to be together, it's optional. It just means a lot of players on the same server.
Grouping? In WoW? The majority of WoW is instanced and singleplayer now too. Almost no one groups in WoW.
And no, it's not all about grouping. Every zone in SWTOR is instanced, you cannot get more than about 40 people per zone, or a new shard of that zone is created. Almost ALL of the content is in instances, meaning you never see people. I don't think you have any idea what an MMO is. Because SWTOR certainly isn't one, and WoW is barely one now with all thephasing and dungeon finder bs.
No, lots of people on the same server? What? No. There's plenty of games that have a lot of people on the same server, the point that makes it an MMO is that they are all in the same virtual world together. The more instancing an MMO has, the less of an MMO it is.
In DAoC not only were there no instances, but the content from PvE to PvP encouraged you to work together with other people. There were raids that sometimes took 200 people. In RvR there were fights that got up to 800 people. Thats MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER. When I can go into a dungeon, find several groups of random people, join up with them and hunt with them for the night, that's a multiplayer world. When I die by myself in a wing of the same dungeon, and a stranger can run by and rez me, that's part of the massively multiplayer.
What isn't massively multiplayer, by any means, is soloing a quest chain in a series of instances, with cut scenes, with my NPC companions, and...once in a blue moon, a real life friend. That, my friends, is a singleplayer game with optional COOP. The genre to which SWTOR more belongs. If playing with 2 other people is massively multiplayer, then what is BF3?
Man i sooooooo miss Darkness Falls, the absolute best dungeon experience i have ever had, i hate to say this but i really hope Anet rips off the DF idea and puts it in GW2 somehow.
MM doesn't stand for massive and multiplayer. It stands for massively multiplayer. Which SWTOR isn't. But, if we're just going to go by a word for word break down, you realize you could call DOOM an RPG right? Its a game where you play a role, is it not? Stop splitting hairs. SWTOR is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
You have been playing WOW too long bro, you're stuck in the "YOU HAVE TO BE GROUPED ALL THE TIME OTHERWISE IT ISN'T A MMO GAME!" thingy.
MMO isnt all about having to be together, it's optional. It just means a lot of players on the same server.
Grouping? In WoW? The majority of WoW is instanced and singleplayer now too. Almost no one groups in WoW.
And no, it's not all about grouping. Every zone in SWTOR is instanced, you cannot get more than about 40 people per zone, or a new shard of that zone is created. Almost ALL of the content is in instances, meaning you never see people. I don't think you have any idea what an MMO is. Because SWTOR certainly isn't one, and WoW is barely one now with all thephasing and dungeon finder bs.
No, lots of people on the same server? What? No. There's plenty of games that have a lot of people on the same server, the point that makes it an MMO is that they are all in the same virtual world together. The more instancing an MMO has, the less of an MMO it is.
In DAoC not only were there no instances, but the content from PvE to PvP encouraged you to work together with other people. There were raids that sometimes took 200 people. In RvR there were fights that got up to 800 people. Thats MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER. When I can go into a dungeon, find several groups of random people, join up with them and hunt with them for the night, that's a multiplayer world. When I die by myself in a wing of the same dungeon, and a stranger can run by and rez me, that's part of the massively multiplayer.
What isn't massively multiplayer, by any means, is soloing a quest chain in a series of instances, with cut scenes, with my NPC companions, and...once in a blue moon, a real life friend. That, my friends, is a singleplayer game with optional COOP. The genre to which SWTOR more belongs. If playing with 2 other people is massively multiplayer, then what is BF3?
Man i sooooooo miss Darkness Falls, the absolute best dungeon experience i have ever had, i hate to say this but i really hope Anet rips off the DF idea and puts it in GW2 somehow.
Darkness Falls is something that would never exist in TOR. TOR doesn't have any public dungeons, much less dungeons where the other faction can show up depending on how well they're doing in PvP. PvP influencing the game world? MADNESS!
And to those saying instancing is an arbitrary place to draw the line... it really isn't. When the term MMORPG was coined, it talked about a very specific set of games. Those games had massive servers were a massive number of people played together in a shared social experience. When you put things in a game that take out that massive social experience, you're just left with an online RPG. The good folks at Arenanet knew this, and thats why they don't call Guild Wars an MMO. Its a CRPG. Much like SWTOR. But far more companies would like to call their CRPGs MMOs so they can justify the monthly fee. MMO has become a buzz word that's lost all meaning. I saw a side scrolling beatumup where only 4 people ever play at once called an MMO. By the company that made it AND the players. I saw the same happened with League of Legends, hell THIS website calls it an MMO for some reason. Age of Empires Online, which at most allows 2 people to play together at the same time, is called an MMO by some.
So, when a word has lost all meaning, I stick with the original INTENDED meaning. Shared virtual worlds with a massive (thousands) number of people. Because thats what it means. If we want to be idiotic and break down the acronym into pieces and go "dur, well that game is online and multiplayer, it must be an MMO!" we can do the same with any genre. With that logic I can call Goldeneye or Halo an RPG. But no sane person does, because RPG means more than just what its acronym stands for.
So many people here are trying to tell me what an MMO is and all they do are list RPG features, like quests and factions and experience points. Seriously?
Man i sooooooo miss Darkness Falls, the absolute best dungeon experience i have ever had, i hate to say this but i really hope Anet rips off the DF idea and puts it in GW2 somehow.
Darkness Falls is something that would never exist in TOR. TOR doesn't have any public dungeons, much less dungeons where the other faction can show up depending on how well they're doing in PvP. PvP influencing the game world? MADNESS!
And to those saying instancing is an arbitrary place to draw the line... it really isn't. When the term MMORPG was coined, it talked about a very specific set of games. Those games had massive servers were a massive number of people played together in a shared social experience. When you put things in a game that take out that massive social experience, you're just left with an online RPG. The good folks at Arenanet knew this, and thats why they don't call Guild Wars an MMO. Its a CRPG. Much like SWTOR. But far more companies would like to call their CRPGs MMOs so they can justify the monthly fee. MMO has become a buzz word that's lost all meaning. I saw a side scrolling beatumup where only 4 people ever play at once called an MMO. By the company that made it AND the players. I saw the same happened with League of Legends, hell THIS website calls it an MMO for some reason. Age of Empires Online, which at most allows 2 people to play together at the same time, is called an MMO by some.
So, when a word has lost all meaning, I stick with the original INTENDED meaning. Shared virtual worlds with a massive (thousands) number of people. Because thats what it means. If we want to be idiotic and break down the acronym into pieces and go "dur, well that game is online and multiplayer, it must be an MMO!" we can do the same with any genre. With that logic I can call Goldeneye or Halo an RPG. But no sane person does, because RPG means more than just what its acronym stands for.
So many people here are trying to tell me what an MMO is and all they do are list RPG features, like quests and factions and experience points. Seriously?
Typically Massive refers to over a thousand (in the mmo terms) a thousand players playing on one server at one time was the origional idea... (Ala UO age)
We still have a thousand plus players on one server, they just can't all meet up at once, due to mostly technical limitations.
I loved DF, and I really enjoyed public dungeons, FFXI, DAOC, EQ style.
YET, Instancing has its place in online games, without it we really couldn't have modern MMO's.
Do you really think a 3D UO with the mechanics copied to the letter with good nice graphics could run? What about when you had a guild fight of 40 vs 40 people?
It would take a lot of special work to make this sort of thing viable... only recently have they had 500 vs 500 people in an FPS.
Give them a few years to come up with the tech to make what you want a reality.
Man i sooooooo miss Darkness Falls, the absolute best dungeon experience i have ever had, i hate to say this but i really hope Anet rips off the DF idea and puts it in GW2 somehow.
Darkness Falls is something that would never exist in TOR. TOR doesn't have any public dungeons, much less dungeons where the other faction can show up depending on how well they're doing in PvP. PvP influencing the game world? MADNESS!
And to those saying instancing is an arbitrary place to draw the line... it really isn't. When the term MMORPG was coined, it talked about a very specific set of games. Those games had massive servers were a massive number of people played together in a shared social experience. When you put things in a game that take out that massive social experience, you're just left with an online RPG. The good folks at Arenanet knew this, and thats why they don't call Guild Wars an MMO. Its a CRPG. Much like SWTOR. But far more companies would like to call their CRPGs MMOs so they can justify the monthly fee. MMO has become a buzz word that's lost all meaning. I saw a side scrolling beatumup where only 4 people ever play at once called an MMO. By the company that made it AND the players. I saw the same happened with League of Legends, hell THIS website calls it an MMO for some reason. Age of Empires Online, which at most allows 2 people to play together at the same time, is called an MMO by some.
So, when a word has lost all meaning, I stick with the original INTENDED meaning. Shared virtual worlds with a massive (thousands) number of people. Because thats what it means. If we want to be idiotic and break down the acronym into pieces and go "dur, well that game is online and multiplayer, it must be an MMO!" we can do the same with any genre. With that logic I can call Goldeneye or Halo an RPG. But no sane person does, because RPG means more than just what its acronym stands for.
So many people here are trying to tell me what an MMO is and all they do are list RPG features, like quests and factions and experience points. Seriously?
Typically Massive refers to over a thousand (in the mmo terms) a thousand players playing on one server at one time was the origional idea... (Ala UO age)
We still have a thousand plus players on one server, they just can't all meet up at once, due to mostly technical limitations.
I loved DF, and I really enjoyed public dungeons, FFXI, DAOC, EQ style.
YET, Instancing has its place in online games, without it we really couldn't have modern MMO's.
Do you really think a 3D UO with the mechanics copied to the letter with good nice graphics could run? What about when you had a guild fight of 40 vs 40 people?
It would take a lot of special work to make this sort of thing viable... only recently have they had 500 vs 500 people in an FPS.
Give them a few years to come up with the tech to make what you want a reality.
Sorry but.. how can you claim you played DAoC and then try to say that the reason we have instancing is because tech isn't there... DAoC didn't have instancing and it managed 500 man fights on DIAL UP MODEMS. Theres a little company in Greece, made up of 30 people who created a game in which there's no instancing, real time twitch based FPS combat, and an UNLIMITED number of people can fight eachother. I've been involved in 200 man sieges in that game. The tech has been there for a long time. A loooong time. Instancing has its place. And it's place is to be used as little as possible. Sadly, with the WoW model of game design (one that is heavily flawed at its core) instancing becomes necessary to counteract the bad game design.
WoW is based on EQ. Both EQ and WoW needed instances to fix the problems inherent in the game design. DAoC however, had no instances, and functioned perfectly, because it was built well. But its much easier for devs to copy WoW, and shove in so much instancing that it barely resembles an MMO, then to carefully think about good game design the way old devs did.
Why do people use these board for therapy. Elikal, .you've already posted the same exact thing over and over again. Couldn't you have just gone back to one of your other identical threads and posted a follow up there?
Garvon, you have been a hater of this game for the longest time. You don't want to call it an MMO and cling to the ridiculous its a Co-Op game? Great. You are just flat out wrong. What difference does it make if the instance only allows like 40...which by the way is untrue but people like to post lies). If you can group with any one of those people in groups of up to 4, can join a PVP scenario of groups up to 8, can do Flashpoints, can trade, do General Chat and reach any one of them, its not co-op If you can ride past any one of these people and say hi and emote to them, its not a co-op. Your definition of Co-op is just another way to add more flaming to a game you never liked to begin with.
And the whole instancing thing is a bunch of BS. This game is just as open as just about any other game out there. Yes, they had more instancing at launch for good reason and you know it...because the alternative was server issues like that buggy mess Vanguard had at release. The planets which represent a zone are so huge and are much larger than most of age of conans zones, or EQ2s zones, and are right up there with the level of instancing with WOW and LOTRO which most people feel are pretty open. STO is more instanced. You clinging to the its all instanced is just another lie.
Why do people use these board for therapy. Elikal, .you've already posted the same exact thing over and over again. Couldn't you have just gone back to one of your other identical threads and posted a follow up there?
Garvon, you have been a hater of this game for the longest time. You don't want to call it an MMO and cling to the ridiculous its a Co-Op game? Great. You are just flat out wrong. What difference does it make if the instance only allows like 40...which by the way is untrue but people like to post lies). If you can group with any one of those people in groups of up to 4, can join a PVP scenario of groups up to 8, can do Flashpoints, can trade, do General Chat and reach any one of them, its not co-op If you can ride past any one of these people and say hi and emote to them, its not a co-op. Your definition of Co-op is just another way to add more flaming to a game you never liked to begin with.
And the whole instancing thing is a bunch of BS. This game is just as open as just about any other game out there. Yes, they had more instancing at launch for good reason and you know it...because the alternative was server issues like that buggy mess Vanguard had at release. The planets which represent a zone are so huge and are much larger than most of age of conans zones, or EQ2s zones, and are right up there with the level of instancing with WOW and LOTRO which most people feel are pretty open. STO is more instanced. You clinging to the its all instanced is just another lie.
Having other players online dos not make it an MMO, nor the abilities like grouping or chat. Hey, you can chat with MSN regardless of what game you play. Does that make the game a MMO?
There have been many games with multiplayer options and thousands of players, where you grouped up and played against other players or environment, like Command and Conquer back in the days. Only main difference from TOR is that you can see other players in some part of the game, when running the instances it's not that much difference from running a 8 people pvp match in Command and Conquer. When the match is done, you are back in the Lobby, aka, the Fleet in TOR.
When you have almost no dependency to other people, things you do has no impact on other players, you can run most of the game solo with companions, then it's clearly not a MMO. Before Bioware went MMO, not many questioned that. To say that TOR is a true MMO, with the meaning of the words "MMO" from before December 2011, is to be in denial.
Edit: And don't even try to play "the haters card", this is my first post regarding TOR. I have made my own experience by playing for two months, and I canceled today.
Comments
This game is not for anyone that wants a certain level of depth in an MMO.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
In the latter, "Massively" modifies "Multiplayer", insinuating that the game can be played by a massive amount of people in the same game environment at the same time.
Exceptionally large amount of people in the same game environment at the same time.
TOR is heavily instanced and zoned. Where does it start and where does it stop being an exceptionally large amount of people in the same game environment at the same time?
I think that's what people have been "splitting hairs" about regarding TOR. It isn't the only game that's guilty of this though. Many other games calling themselves Massively Multiplayer aren't so, to many.
This may be fodder for a new thread.
/facepalm
There are large amounts of players in the same game environment at the same time. There are also areas that are instanced so that each player(s) can experience the content the way the designers intended. It is fully scripted and directed, but that does not exclude it from the MMO category.
Exactly. You're paying them to punish you for something they got wrong. It's ridiculous.
You're kidding right?
I find this game a bit boring actually. There are many aspects that I really like, but at the end of the day, the world is lifeless and boring. I stopped playing at the end of my first month. I may revisit the game sometime in the future, because like I said, there are quite a few things I like about it, so it's not a total loss.
But, I just can't get past the boring. repetitive gameplay and world.
It's a shame really as I really looked forward to this title.
You have been playing WOW too long bro, you're stuck in the "YOU HAVE TO BE GROUPED ALL THE TIME OTHERWISE IT ISN'T A MMO GAME!" thingy.
MMO isnt all about having to be together, it's optional. It just means a lot of players on the same server.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
FIXT!
10char
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
WoW is not the game I would have used there. WoW is a solo to cap game with optional grouping for dungeons/pvp also. Pre-wow games are the ones you want to be referring to as having to be grouped.
Elikal was one of the pre-release doomsayers. That he even bothered to buy the game after he had been in beta is beyond my comprehension. This whole thing smacks of narcissism and the TOR Hate Bandwagon.
Bingo.
I played beta and decided to wait atleast for 6 months to buy and try the game. I rarely pre order games anymore. But yeah it is hard to take these people seriously who hated the game before release, went ahead and bought the game any ways and still hated it and now they want to tell us how they feel. Well i guess everyone already knows.
If i bitch and moan about a game before release to no end and still buy it..i just lose serious credibility and would never make a post about it. Why? because i can only blame myself.
Really? lacks ALL of the elements that make an MMO.....
Spaces representing the world(s) of the game in which players "exist" with other players - no?
Content that requires co-operatiion with other players (World Bosses, Flashpoints & Operations) - no?
Chat channels that allow players to converse with each other - no?
A player driven economy of base resources and end-use products made by those players - no?
Forums where players of the game can share feedback on the game - no?
Your term " is a singleplayer game with some optional coop at best. It is NOT an MMO. It lacks ALL the elements one expects from an MMO, except being online.
Could be applied to a huge amount of games, since everything that requires more than just you can be relegated to "co-op" no matter the upper-limit of players involved it's still co-op is it not, or where does the line officially get drawn?
As an old EverQuest player I used to enjoy 72-person raids (prior to those there were open-world raids that could include many more than this, 10th Coldain ring war event, Avatar of War were 2 notable ones. Then they went to 54, no idea what it is now.
WoW had 40 person raids, went down to 24
SWTOR has 16 person raids
So is WoW an MMO? is EverQuest? do they also lack ALL of the elements that make an MMO...
Which elements DO make an MMO then?
Mmm icic. I will take heed the words of those who have played it.
Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play?
Similar thing happened to me,
I was a BIG SWTOR Fanboy pre launch and had been looking forward to this for ages. I played non stop for the first month or so and got a BH, Trooper and JK to cap............. but once you get there there just isnt anything to do. Gaps between playing got longer and longer and when I hadnt played it for a week I cancelled by sub.
HOWEVER
I still dont understand why OP bought the game. He was posting about how much he disliked it for months before release and yet bought it anyway. Lost all credibility in my eyes.
Now that you have stopped playing, will the constant hate posts stop?
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Okay so what elements is it missing? I want you to name them off and prove its not an MMO or are you just jumping on the band wagon to label it a single player game becasue you think it makes you look cool? Everything every other MMO has is in SWTOR its not missing anything. I have yet to see a single intelligent arguement that proves SWTOR isnt an MMO, all I have seen are a bunch of trolls doing their best to bash a game that they dont like for no other reason than to just not like it.
ROFL
I am more suprised its taken Elikial this long to make this post, if any of you know of him on this forum, then its rather amusing this post took so long to appear.
Lolipops !
Grouping? In WoW? The majority of WoW is instanced and singleplayer now too. Almost no one groups in WoW.
And no, it's not all about grouping. Every zone in SWTOR is instanced, you cannot get more than about 40 people per zone, or a new shard of that zone is created. Almost ALL of the content is in instances, meaning you never see people. I don't think you have any idea what an MMO is. Because SWTOR certainly isn't one, and WoW is barely one now with all thephasing and dungeon finder bs.
No, lots of people on the same server? What? No. There's plenty of games that have a lot of people on the same server, the point that makes it an MMO is that they are all in the same virtual world together. The more instancing an MMO has, the less of an MMO it is.
In DAoC not only were there no instances, but the content from PvE to PvP encouraged you to work together with other people. There were raids that sometimes took 200 people. In RvR there were fights that got up to 800 people. Thats MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER. When I can go into a dungeon, find several groups of random people, join up with them and hunt with them for the night, that's a multiplayer world. When I die by myself in a wing of the same dungeon, and a stranger can run by and rez me, that's part of the massively multiplayer.
What isn't massively multiplayer, by any means, is soloing a quest chain in a series of instances, with cut scenes, with my NPC companions, and...once in a blue moon, a real life friend. That, my friends, is a singleplayer game with optional COOP. The genre to which SWTOR more belongs. If playing with 2 other people is massively multiplayer, then what is BF3?
I actually love TOR. It's set in the SW IP and has everything that other MMORPG's have. It took me almost a solid 2 months to level to 50 and after that i took about a 2 week break from it, as to not have mmo burnout.
With that being said, i can say that, what TOR lacks is the open world feel and meaty things to do outside of combat, that a game like SWG or even the new Archeage looks to have. To me that is the only real drawbacks to TOR. Bugs and such are things that can be worked around until they are fixed. A better mixture of thempark and sandbox where the lines where blurred a bunch more would have added to this title and made it that much more of a solid MMORPG.
Man i sooooooo miss Darkness Falls, the absolute best dungeon experience i have ever had, i hate to say this but i really hope Anet rips off the DF idea and puts it in GW2 somehow.
Lolipops !
Darkness Falls is something that would never exist in TOR. TOR doesn't have any public dungeons, much less dungeons where the other faction can show up depending on how well they're doing in PvP. PvP influencing the game world? MADNESS!
And to those saying instancing is an arbitrary place to draw the line... it really isn't. When the term MMORPG was coined, it talked about a very specific set of games. Those games had massive servers were a massive number of people played together in a shared social experience. When you put things in a game that take out that massive social experience, you're just left with an online RPG. The good folks at Arenanet knew this, and thats why they don't call Guild Wars an MMO. Its a CRPG. Much like SWTOR. But far more companies would like to call their CRPGs MMOs so they can justify the monthly fee. MMO has become a buzz word that's lost all meaning. I saw a side scrolling beatumup where only 4 people ever play at once called an MMO. By the company that made it AND the players. I saw the same happened with League of Legends, hell THIS website calls it an MMO for some reason. Age of Empires Online, which at most allows 2 people to play together at the same time, is called an MMO by some.
So, when a word has lost all meaning, I stick with the original INTENDED meaning. Shared virtual worlds with a massive (thousands) number of people. Because thats what it means. If we want to be idiotic and break down the acronym into pieces and go "dur, well that game is online and multiplayer, it must be an MMO!" we can do the same with any genre. With that logic I can call Goldeneye or Halo an RPG. But no sane person does, because RPG means more than just what its acronym stands for.
So many people here are trying to tell me what an MMO is and all they do are list RPG features, like quests and factions and experience points. Seriously?
Typically Massive refers to over a thousand (in the mmo terms) a thousand players playing on one server at one time was the origional idea... (Ala UO age)
We still have a thousand plus players on one server, they just can't all meet up at once, due to mostly technical limitations.
I loved DF, and I really enjoyed public dungeons, FFXI, DAOC, EQ style.
YET, Instancing has its place in online games, without it we really couldn't have modern MMO's.
Do you really think a 3D UO with the mechanics copied to the letter with good nice graphics could run? What about when you had a guild fight of 40 vs 40 people?
It would take a lot of special work to make this sort of thing viable... only recently have they had 500 vs 500 people in an FPS.
Give them a few years to come up with the tech to make what you want a reality.
I already paypal´d CujoSWAoA 250 because I didn´t buy the CE and didn´t sub for 6 months.
Sorry but.. how can you claim you played DAoC and then try to say that the reason we have instancing is because tech isn't there... DAoC didn't have instancing and it managed 500 man fights on DIAL UP MODEMS. Theres a little company in Greece, made up of 30 people who created a game in which there's no instancing, real time twitch based FPS combat, and an UNLIMITED number of people can fight eachother. I've been involved in 200 man sieges in that game. The tech has been there for a long time. A loooong time. Instancing has its place. And it's place is to be used as little as possible. Sadly, with the WoW model of game design (one that is heavily flawed at its core) instancing becomes necessary to counteract the bad game design.
WoW is based on EQ. Both EQ and WoW needed instances to fix the problems inherent in the game design. DAoC however, had no instances, and functioned perfectly, because it was built well. But its much easier for devs to copy WoW, and shove in so much instancing that it barely resembles an MMO, then to carefully think about good game design the way old devs did.
Why do people use these board for therapy. Elikal, .you've already posted the same exact thing over and over again. Couldn't you have just gone back to one of your other identical threads and posted a follow up there?
Garvon, you have been a hater of this game for the longest time. You don't want to call it an MMO and cling to the ridiculous its a Co-Op game? Great. You are just flat out wrong. What difference does it make if the instance only allows like 40...which by the way is untrue but people like to post lies). If you can group with any one of those people in groups of up to 4, can join a PVP scenario of groups up to 8, can do Flashpoints, can trade, do General Chat and reach any one of them, its not co-op If you can ride past any one of these people and say hi and emote to them, its not a co-op. Your definition of Co-op is just another way to add more flaming to a game you never liked to begin with.
And the whole instancing thing is a bunch of BS. This game is just as open as just about any other game out there. Yes, they had more instancing at launch for good reason and you know it...because the alternative was server issues like that buggy mess Vanguard had at release. The planets which represent a zone are so huge and are much larger than most of age of conans zones, or EQ2s zones, and are right up there with the level of instancing with WOW and LOTRO which most people feel are pretty open. STO is more instanced. You clinging to the its all instanced is just another lie.
There Is Always Hope!
Having other players online dos not make it an MMO, nor the abilities like grouping or chat. Hey, you can chat with MSN regardless of what game you play. Does that make the game a MMO?
There have been many games with multiplayer options and thousands of players, where you grouped up and played against other players or environment, like Command and Conquer back in the days. Only main difference from TOR is that you can see other players in some part of the game, when running the instances it's not that much difference from running a 8 people pvp match in Command and Conquer. When the match is done, you are back in the Lobby, aka, the Fleet in TOR.
When you have almost no dependency to other people, things you do has no impact on other players, you can run most of the game solo with companions, then it's clearly not a MMO. Before Bioware went MMO, not many questioned that. To say that TOR is a true MMO, with the meaning of the words "MMO" from before December 2011, is to be in denial.
Edit: And don't even try to play "the haters card", this is my first post regarding TOR. I have made my own experience by playing for two months, and I canceled today.