Originally posted by Caldrin If an MMORPG uses instances there are usually 100s or 100s of players in that instance so thats pretty big really and you could use the world massive there...
5 people is not 100s.
10 people is not 100s.
20 people is not 100s.
40 people is not 100s.
80 people is not 100s.
In the end, it doesn't really matter whether you think it's a MMO or not. In the end, it doesn't really matter whether I think it's a MMO or not. MMO's a subjective term.
I feel that it is. You feel that it is not. I can't tell you that you should feel otherwise. Likewise, you can't tell somebody else they feel otherwise. All we can do is share our thoughts on the matter...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Originally posted by Caldrin If an MMORPG uses instances there are usually 100s or 100s of players in that instance so thats pretty big really and you could use the world massive there...
5 people is not 100s.
10 people is not 100s.
20 people is not 100s.
40 people is not 100s.
80 people is not 100s.
In the end, it doesn't really matter whether you think it's a MMO or not. In the end, it doesn't really matter whether I think it's a MMO or not. MMO's a subjective term.
I feel that it is. You feel that it is not. I can't tell you that you should feel otherwise. Likewise, you can't tell somebody else they feel otherwise. All we can do is share our thoughts on the matter...
I mean the amount of players the game can support in the same place not the amonut of people currently logged in or subbed..
But the bottom part of your post is totally true, we all have our own views and feelings..
For me Massivly Multiplayer means means a lot more than just 5-100 people in the same game at the same time.. How anyone could think 24 people counts as a MMO im not sure but hey like you said we all ahve our own views..
For me Massivly Multiplayer means means a lot more than just 5-100 people in the same game at the same time.. How anyone could think 24 people counts as a MMO im not sure but hey like you said we all ahve our own views..
Well, just to elaborate on how it does for me... I'm looking at it from the angle that each of those 24 person battles is just an instanced battlefield. It's no different than having folks involved in instanced battles not changing that the game is still an MMO even though they're in an instance where the "massive" aspect no longer applies directly. It still exists within the game world - just not in what's currently on their screen. In that sense, with what MWO proposes to do - no, the "massive" will not exist within what folks see on their screen - but, the "massive" aspect would still apply to the "game world"...which in this case would be the universe itself.
Which gets into what one typically sees in a standard MMO. How many people are ever actually in your vicinity? It usually not a massive number. Oh, there might be a massive number on the server - but they're not in your vicinity. And sure, you could run around and try to find them all...but in doing so, you leave behind all of those you had previously found. So you're never really looking at a massive amount. They're out there somewhere... just like what's proposed with MWO.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
For me Massivly Multiplayer means means a lot more than just 5-100 people in the same game at the same time.. How anyone could think 24 people counts as a MMO im not sure but hey like you said we all ahve our own views..
Well, just to elaborate on how it does for me... I'm looking at it from the angle that each of those 24 person battles is just an instanced battlefield. It's no different than having folks involved in instanced battles not changing that the game is still an MMO even though they're in an instance where the "massive" aspect no longer applies directly. It still exists within the game world - just not in what's currently on their screen. In that sense, with what MWO proposes to do - no, the "massive" will not exist within what folks see on their screen - but, the "massive" aspect would still apply to the "game world"...which in this case would be the universe itself.
Which gets into what one typically sees in a standard MMO. How many people are ever actually in your vicinity? It usually not a massive number. Oh, there might be a massive number on the server - but they're not in your vicinity. And sure, you could run around and try to find them all...but in doing so, you leave behind all of those you had previously found. So you're never really looking at a massive amount. They're out there somewhere... just like what's proposed with MWO.
But can you leave the instanced battlefield and go into the world where other people are? In real MMOs, YES you can!
Can you, in MWO EVER go run around looking and finding groups of people in the game world?
Also, in a real MMO, you CAN be looking at a massive amount. I've already stated two examples of this at least, possibly three. With MWO, you CANNOT ever look at a massive amount, only look at 23 other fools in your same game match.
In addition, the part of MWO that you keep saying makes it massively multiplayer, is an IDEA that is NOT in the game, and may not even make it into the game. To elaborate, I have an idea to mod Morrowind into an MMO. Does that IDEA make Morrowind an MMO now?
The thing is MWO has no kind or universe in game to effect...
The matches are totally seperate, they are not instances as you cant move between them like you can in proper MMO games that use instances..
They are seperate matches once they start they are locked to the players and once they end thats it gone forever.. exactly like a COD multiplayer match..
so the max amount of people who are playing a match in MWO is 24 at the moment.. not massive in any way..
There will be comunity warfare changing the shape of the persistant universe later on. Aside of that each instanced battle map contains more than 3 times the amount of players than the usual WoW-Instance/Zone and you can chat with them. This 3D-Lobby with enable general chat called Stormwind or Orgirmmar do not make WoW more MMO as outside of this its nothing but a small scale multiplayer online game with NO persistant effect on the world.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
There will be comunity warfare changing the shape of the persistant universe later on. Aside of that each instanced battle map contains more than 3 times the amount of players than the usual WoW-Instance/Zone and you can chat with them. This 3D-Lobby with enable general chat called Stormwind or Orgirmmar do not make WoW more MMO as outside of this its nothing but a small scale multiplayer online game with NO persistant effect on the world.
I feel like you're joking around and I'm falling for it but...
PVP has been possible in Orgrimmar.
WoW zones can have hundreds of players more than a MWO match can hold.
The WoW world is persistant, even if the effects on it are not.
But the thing is that unlike CoD, MWO are going to have a persistent world.
And i just want to know... How would you kadepsyson suggest they make a working world that still fits the lore and setting.
Any way, as i said i agree. Until they get community warfare in place it is not a MMO. BUt as they get that in place it will have all the signifyers of a MMO (altho not a "Old-School" MMO.)
But the thing is that unlike CoD, MWO are going to have a persistent world.
And i just want to know... How would you kadepsyson suggest they make a working world that still fits the lore and setting.
Any way, as i said i agree. Until they get community warfare in place it is not a MMO. BUt as they get that in place it will have all the signifyers of a MMO (altho not a "Old-School" MMO.)
I'm not suggesting that they make it into an MMO. I think the game they are making, 12v12 matches, fits, and isn't an MMO, which is perfectly fine for this game.
I am a little confused on how you say it will have a persistent world, then go right on to ask me how it can be possible to have a working world?
Because you seem to very fixated on the physical "world" as in walking around in a physical area. While i consider that community warfare will provide the persistant world.
Originally posted by tawess Because you seem to very fixated on the physical "world" as in walking around in a physical area. While i consider that community warfare will provide the persistant world.
I can lift a world map of Earth and hold it in my hands. I can't lift the world Earth with my hands.
That's the difference between looking at a map, that colors change on, and having a game world.
Larger scale battles = far more process killing. It works decently in older games since computer speccs tend to go up a lot, but newer games sporting fancy graphics will lose more and more people as things get more crowded. The more complex combat is, the harsher it is on your system, and the more network it takes to relay all the events happening all at once.
Originally posted by tawess Because you seem to very fixated on the physical "world" as in walking around in a physical area. While i consider that community warfare will provide the persistant world.
I can lift a world map of Earth and hold it in my hands. I can't lift the world Earth with my hands.
That's the difference between looking at a map, that colors change on, and having a game world.
As much is i would like to have Luthien / Siam / Rasalhauge / New Avalon / Tharkad / Atreus / Outreach in game as social hubs they would fill no other purpoes. But that is in your mind al that is missing to make this a MMO?
MMO still just means "Massive Multiplayer Online"and with community Warfare inplace those criterias will be filled. We can argue for ever about what the "massive" part actually means and while i on a conceptual level agree with you i have come to accept that the meaning and use of the MMO*insert what ever* will change over time.
Originally posted by tawess Because you seem to very fixated on the physical "world" as in walking around in a physical area. While i consider that community warfare will provide the persistant world.
I can lift a world map of Earth and hold it in my hands. I can't lift the world Earth with my hands.
That's the difference between looking at a map, that colors change on, and having a game world.
As much is i would like to have Luthien / Siam / Rasalhauge / New Avalon / Tharkad / Atreus / Outreach in game as social hubs they would fill no other purpoes. But that is in your mind al that is missing to make this a MMO?
MMO still just means "Massive Multiplayer Online"and with community Warfare inplace those criterias will be filled. We can argue for ever about what the "massive" part actually means and while i on a conceptual level agree with you i have come to accept that the meaning and use of the MMO*insert what ever* will change over time.
Well the multiplayer isn't massive though. It's just 24 people at a time. A persistant WORLD helps fit it into some definitions, but without being massively multiplayer, it'd just be a multiplayer online game.
Originally posted by Mackeh Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8 I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etcNo wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.
MORPG.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Originally posted by Mackeh Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8
I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.
Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc
No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.
MORPG.
Heck, even the "RP" part of it is debatable. You role-play a mechwarrior about as much as I role-play a Spartan in Halo. Perhaps less.
IF they ever get the community warefare in place then depending on how exactly it works then sure maybe it could be classed as an MMO... but as it stands right now MWO is not an MMO and its as simple as that...
Well thats why everyone return after some time to wow. Smoooth and awesome bg, some of zones are very large like tol barad and wintergrasp, best open world pvp with huge raids on opponent cities. I like MechWarrior online but 8vs8 only bg is just not enough
Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8
I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.
Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc
No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.
Well you do realize Wow is probably the lowest tech PC big name title in this genre?You can enjoy MANY things in WOW but TECh is NOT one of them.
I have seen mech warrior and to be honest ,it is far from a high tech state of the art game either.
However i really cannot get into commenting on how misleading dveloipers have become to sell their games.It is no wonder so many gamers come away unhappy and complaining about games,it is becuase many try to lie or mislead them.
Myself personally,i enjoy 1 on 1 the best for the msot skillfull type competition,The bigger the less interested i am.
Example i was around when FPS and Esports started back in the days of Quake and unreal.The MOST i would ever play was 4 players,anymore i found the game play less skillfull with more backstabbing or players getting clean up duty on the battle leftovers.I love the battle of wits between two players ,trying to outwit each otehr.
So imo i would have no problem at all with their setup.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Just read that this state of the art 2012 MMO will have 12 v 12 which may be scaled back to 8 v 8
I was playing 40 v 40 in WOW 6 years ago and 25 v 25 in the 90's in Quake.
Such small minded developers we have now, they have the best servers the fastest broadband yet they are only capable of churning out small minded games, WOT, MWO, WOP etc
No wonder the Blizzard devs are so smug, they are light years ahead of most other companies.
Zerg vs Tatical, which do you prefer? As for me, i prefer the tatical aspect of smaller battles.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
It is am mmo. There are going to be consequences to the state of the political climate to the universe if you lose that 1 fight or 1 planet.
It is just not implemented yet because it is still in early BETA
You do know it is still in early BETA rite?
Really don't like the direction of mmo's are going then. I mean you sit at a launcher, you can not communicate with any players you need to use forums or third party voip. even then how do you make friends in game? so you sit at a launcher totally discconnected from all other players and then launch into an 8v8 battle that lasts 6-10 minutes then you are kicked back to the launcher. yup feels like an mmo to me.
Edit: what's wrong with just calling a game a multiplayer game or an online game that has feature x. Like creating a story form the won or lost battles. I mean I feel the gaming industry just wants to slap the term MMo on any game just so they can charge monthly fees or sell stuff for real money in game if it's "ftp".
Maybe wiki should rediffine MMO to mean any game that takes real money from the player throughout it's lifecycle.
Comments
5 people is not 100s.
10 people is not 100s.
20 people is not 100s.
40 people is not 100s.
80 people is not 100s.
In the end, it doesn't really matter whether you think it's a MMO or not. In the end, it doesn't really matter whether I think it's a MMO or not. MMO's a subjective term.
I feel that it is. You feel that it is not. I can't tell you that you should feel otherwise. Likewise, you can't tell somebody else they feel otherwise. All we can do is share our thoughts on the matter...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
I think its somthing they will do as a lot of people want it but they are just worknig on standard match play stuff at the moment.
I must admit i have not been keeping up with the dev blogs since i got access to PS2 but im sure its somthing they still really want to do..
I mean the amount of players the game can support in the same place not the amonut of people currently logged in or subbed..
But the bottom part of your post is totally true, we all have our own views and feelings..
For me Massivly Multiplayer means means a lot more than just 5-100 people in the same game at the same time.. How anyone could think 24 people counts as a MMO im not sure but hey like you said we all ahve our own views..
Well, just to elaborate on how it does for me... I'm looking at it from the angle that each of those 24 person battles is just an instanced battlefield. It's no different than having folks involved in instanced battles not changing that the game is still an MMO even though they're in an instance where the "massive" aspect no longer applies directly. It still exists within the game world - just not in what's currently on their screen. In that sense, with what MWO proposes to do - no, the "massive" will not exist within what folks see on their screen - but, the "massive" aspect would still apply to the "game world"...which in this case would be the universe itself.
Which gets into what one typically sees in a standard MMO. How many people are ever actually in your vicinity? It usually not a massive number. Oh, there might be a massive number on the server - but they're not in your vicinity. And sure, you could run around and try to find them all...but in doing so, you leave behind all of those you had previously found. So you're never really looking at a massive amount. They're out there somewhere... just like what's proposed with MWO.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
But can you leave the instanced battlefield and go into the world where other people are? In real MMOs, YES you can!
Can you, in MWO EVER go run around looking and finding groups of people in the game world?
Also, in a real MMO, you CAN be looking at a massive amount. I've already stated two examples of this at least, possibly three. With MWO, you CANNOT ever look at a massive amount, only look at 23 other fools in your same game match.
In addition, the part of MWO that you keep saying makes it massively multiplayer, is an IDEA that is NOT in the game, and may not even make it into the game. To elaborate, I have an idea to mod Morrowind into an MMO. Does that IDEA make Morrowind an MMO now?
The thing is MWO has no kind or universe in game to effect...
The matches are totally seperate, they are not instances as you cant move between them like you can in proper MMO games that use instances..
They are seperate matches once they start they are locked to the players and once they end thats it gone forever.. exactly like a COD multiplayer match..
so the max amount of people who are playing a match in MWO is 24 at the moment.. not massive in any way..
There will be comunity warfare changing the shape of the persistant universe later on.
Aside of that each instanced battle map contains more than 3 times the amount of players than the usual WoW-Instance/Zone and you can chat with them.
This 3D-Lobby with enable general chat called Stormwind or Orgirmmar do not make WoW more MMO as outside of this its nothing but a small scale multiplayer online game with NO persistant effect on the world.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
I feel like you're joking around and I'm falling for it but...
PVP has been possible in Orgrimmar.
WoW zones can have hundreds of players more than a MWO match can hold.
The WoW world is persistant, even if the effects on it are not.
MWO is still not an MMO
But the thing is that unlike CoD, MWO are going to have a persistent world.
And i just want to know... How would you kadepsyson suggest they make a working world that still fits the lore and setting.
Any way, as i said i agree. Until they get community warfare in place it is not a MMO. BUt as they get that in place it will have all the signifyers of a MMO (altho not a "Old-School" MMO.)
This have been a good conversation
I'm not suggesting that they make it into an MMO. I think the game they are making, 12v12 matches, fits, and isn't an MMO, which is perfectly fine for this game.
I am a little confused on how you say it will have a persistent world, then go right on to ask me how it can be possible to have a working world?
This have been a good conversation
I can lift a world map of Earth and hold it in my hands. I can't lift the world Earth with my hands.
That's the difference between looking at a map, that colors change on, and having a game world.
Well easy discription.
MWO you select your team in a multiplayer lobby, you select your mech, and launching means starting the map.
the map is just an arena, you are not able to move around a world. you got just this map, after the battle the game returns to the multiplayer lobby.
no persistant world
So MWO ist not a MMO. Not even a MMOFPS.
Planetside got a persistant world, so this is an MMO. well -> MMOFPS.
As much is i would like to have Luthien / Siam / Rasalhauge / New Avalon / Tharkad / Atreus / Outreach in game as social hubs they would fill no other purpoes. But that is in your mind al that is missing to make this a MMO?
MMO still just means "Massive Multiplayer Online"and with community Warfare inplace those criterias will be filled. We can argue for ever about what the "massive" part actually means and while i on a conceptual level agree with you i have come to accept that the meaning and use of the MMO*insert what ever* will change over time.
This have been a good conversation
Well the multiplayer isn't massive though. It's just 24 people at a time. A persistant WORLD helps fit it into some definitions, but without being massively multiplayer, it'd just be a multiplayer online game.
MORPG.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Heck, even the "RP" part of it is debatable. You role-play a mechwarrior about as much as I role-play a Spartan in Halo. Perhaps less.
You mean it's not finished yet?
This is breaking news. We better alert the media to this discovery.
OP:
It is am mmo. There are going to be consequences to the state of the political climate to the universe if you lose that 1 fight or 1 planet.
It is just not implemented yet because it is still in early BETA
You do know it is still in early BETA rite?
Well you do realize Wow is probably the lowest tech PC big name title in this genre?You can enjoy MANY things in WOW but TECh is NOT one of them.
I have seen mech warrior and to be honest ,it is far from a high tech state of the art game either.
However i really cannot get into commenting on how misleading dveloipers have become to sell their games.It is no wonder so many gamers come away unhappy and complaining about games,it is becuase many try to lie or mislead them.
Myself personally,i enjoy 1 on 1 the best for the msot skillfull type competition,The bigger the less interested i am.
Example i was around when FPS and Esports started back in the days of Quake and unreal.The MOST i would ever play was 4 players,anymore i found the game play less skillfull with more backstabbing or players getting clean up duty on the battle leftovers.I love the battle of wits between two players ,trying to outwit each otehr.
So imo i would have no problem at all with their setup.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Zerg vs Tatical, which do you prefer? As for me, i prefer the tatical aspect of smaller battles.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Really don't like the direction of mmo's are going then. I mean you sit at a launcher, you can not communicate with any players you need to use forums or third party voip. even then how do you make friends in game? so you sit at a launcher totally discconnected from all other players and then launch into an 8v8 battle that lasts 6-10 minutes then you are kicked back to the launcher. yup feels like an mmo to me.
Edit: what's wrong with just calling a game a multiplayer game or an online game that has feature x. Like creating a story form the won or lost battles. I mean I feel the gaming industry just wants to slap the term MMo on any game just so they can charge monthly fees or sell stuff for real money in game if it's "ftp".
Maybe wiki should rediffine MMO to mean any game that takes real money from the player throughout it's lifecycle.