Fortnite should be out in the first half of 2016, I'm in the closed alpha and its extremely polished, Devs have recently said its very close to beta, It's not an mmo or a moba, Its kind of a new genre I think, In the lobby there is a global chat. Ingame You and your party scavenge during the day and build up a base (building mechanics are the best I've seen, very fluid) then at night you defend your base against monsters, You can also build your own home base that you can upgrade over time and defend it every so often, its actually really fun. Keep an eye for it the devs (back by unreal) are putting a lot of AAA polish into it.
I'm also looking forward to Tree of Savior, Tried it in CB and really liked it. Albion Online, I'm not sure about that one, I bought the founders pack and i'm in the CB (rarely play it). The graphics are a bit crap (on par with runescape) and its very very grindy, its also very poorly optimized (fps issues on decent hardware), I like the idea behind it but the devs have mountains to climb for it to be in a good shape.
Crowfall 22.4%, Cyberpunk 2077 24.2%, Overwatch 55.5%. These games have strong teams behind them. They look on track for success. I have full confidence in these titles. Here's hoping they don't prove me wrong.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
@Wizardry said:
Wow i just realized Paragon is not on the list.It is a Moba although will play much better than a moba and of higher quality.
This one huge gaping hole proves this site does little on the gaming news front and spends too much time catering to sponsors.
If i actually enjoyed Moba's Paragon would easily hand down blow these other budgetware games out of the water,really sad this site doesn't even know of the game.
We know of the game, we've covered news of it since its first teaser and will have a listing soon. But given how long it takes Epic to do ANYTHING, we'll believe 2016 when we see it. Fortnite was due out originally last year and missed 2015 altogether. We're aware they hope to be in Early Access in Spring, with launch in Summer, but we're not counting on that holding fast.
We're close friends with a lot of the folks at Epic, both past and present, but they're like Blizzard - they release when they're ready and I doubt they'll force Paragon out unless they licensing of UE4 is going poorly and not earning them enough money.
If it DOES land in 2016, we'll gladly put it up for Best of polls next year. So in short, cool your freakin' jets.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
The division isn't an mmo. It's. 64 player game based on zones.
We don't need to get in this tired old argument again, but to us it's as much an MMO as Destiny, which we realize some people don't consider an MMO either. So if you don't think it should win, don't vote for it, but it's an MMO in our book even if it's a weird hybrid sort.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
I'm very much in favor of the magic that CDPR produces, i still can't get enough of Witchers 3's majesty and we haven't even seen how nuts Cyberpunk 2077 is going to be.
As for MMO's, i am definitely torn between Blade & Soul and Black Desert Online; -both are extremely strong titles, i loved the time i spent in BDO Alpha and it felt like i was playing Witcher 3 with a different coat of paint... it was just that type of landscape- but it's still unpolished.
Blade & Soul has the polish that BDO lacks right now, and has a lot to offer players up front to add to the sense of gaming experience and longevity, but it is an older title, so it doesn't have that wonderful mysterious aura hanging about that BDO definitely has because it's such a new title.
Fishing on Gilgamesh since 2013 Fishing on Bronzebeard since 2005 Fishing in RL since 1992 Born with a fishing rod in my hand in 1979
The division isn't an mmo. It's. 64 player game based on zones.
We don't need to get in this tired old argument again, but to us it's as much an MMO as Destiny, which we realize some people don't consider an MMO either. So if you don't think it should win, don't vote for it, but it's an MMO in our book even if it's a weird hybrid sort.
Neither qualify by this sites very rules of what constitutes a MMORPG which was changed/dropped not all that long ago.
Give us a None of the above or at least an Other selection. You didn't because it likely would have swept all three categories.
Look, if you are going to sell out, at least admit it, don't call it a "tired debate"
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Neither qualify by this sites very rules of what constitutes a MMORPG which was changed/dropped not all that long ago.
Give us a None of the above or at least an Other selection. You didn't because it likely would have swept all three categories.
Look, if you are going to sell out, at least admit it, don't call it a "tired debate"
Just because we can adapt to changing times doesn't mean we are selling out. Sorry to hear you're so shortsighted, Kyleran. I thought you understood, actually. And we never had hard rules about what constitutes an MMO. That would have been very foolish. It's an acronym for a very broad cross section of games.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
No Divinity: OS2? No WH40K Inquisitor: Martyr? No Grim Dawn? No Bard's Tale? No Goliath? The list of RPGs is sorely lacking.
As for MMOs, I only care about Eternal Crusade, and even then only because I'm a founder. And I don't give a rat's ass about MOBAs. I was kind of looking forward to Gigantic, but then they pulled that ridiculous 'Windows 10 only' bullshit and I lost all interest. Windows 7 works great for me. I have no reason to upgrade it, and I will not be forced into doing so by a bunch of chucklefucks who signed away their souls to M$ for a wad of cash, just to play their game. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
Neither qualify by this sites very rules of what constitutes a MMORPG which was changed/dropped not all that long ago.
Give us a None of the above or at least an Other selection. You didn't because it likely would have swept all three categories.
Look, if you are going to sell out, at least admit it, don't call it a "tired debate"
Just because we can adapt to changing times doesn't mean we are selling out. Sorry to hear you're so shortsighted, Kyleran. I thought you understood, actually. And we never had hard rules about what constitutes an MMO. That would have been very foolish. It's an acronym for a very broad cross section of games.
I agree, MMO has been watered down to be an almost meaningless term, but I still feel games with 64 players on the field does not even begin to qualify.
But again as you said, not a thread for this discussion.
Just as MTV no longer is about Music Videos, it's clear MMORPG.com really isn't about it's namesake.
Oh, and yes, the site did have very specific rules about listing a title as an MMORPG (not MM0) with 500 concurrent players in a persistent world being at the forefront.
Finally, why not answer the real question, where is the None of the above button?
Are you concerned that if there is a clear landslide in that category advertisers might lose interest if no one reading this site gives a care about their upcoming product?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
@BillMurphy@Kyleran I'm with Bill's evolving policy in this one, but OTOH I still consider leaving CU out a mistake, and not a small one. We left potential winner out, and likely half of that list won't be out in 2016 as well (and I'm feeling generous today); I can point out 2-3 easy certain picks for 2017+ if need be.
Simply adding CU or going with "2016 and beyond" or...<insert random bad idea> would be better than this IMHO.
@BillMurphy@Kyleran I'm with Bill's evolving policy in this one, but OTOH I still consider leaving CU out a mistake, and not a small one. We left potential winner out, and likely half of that list won't be out in 2016 as well (and I'm feeling generous today); I can point out 2-3 easy certain picks for 2017+ if need be.
Simply adding CU or going with "2016 and beyond" or...<insert random bad idea> would be better than this IMHO.
I wouldn't have if MJ didn't ask me to.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
I've had my disagreements with Bill's views, but I agree that as games and the markets evolve, so does the way we view them. If what some people are proposing is that the site's name is changed to "MOG.com" (Multiplayer Online Game), that's fine, but I for one enjoy that I can come here to check for videos, news and coverage of games that while not strictly a MMORPG, could definitely be interesting.
That said, I see a lot of dismay in this thread, and honestly next year could be really great. Maybe not so much in the MMORPG department (though I do have good hopes put on Crowfall and Lineage Eternal), but RPG wise... Cyberpunk, Mass Effect, X-Com 2, Dark Souls 3, Torment and so many more... it'll be a busy and extremely fun year for a RPG player.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
Neither qualify by this sites very rules of what constitutes a MMORPG which was changed/dropped not all that long ago.
Give us a None of the above or at least an Other selection. You didn't because it likely would have swept all three categories.
Look, if you are going to sell out, at least admit it, don't call it a "tired debate"
Just because we can adapt to changing times doesn't mean we are selling out. Sorry to hear you're so shortsighted, Kyleran. I thought you understood, actually. And we never had hard rules about what constitutes an MMO. That would have been very foolish. It's an acronym for a very broad cross section of games.
I agree, MMO has been watered down to be an almost meaningless term, but I still feel games with 64 players on the field does not even begin to qualify.
But again as you said, not a thread for this discussion.
Just as MTV no longer is about Music Videos, it's clear MMORPG.com really isn't about it's namesake.
Oh, and yes, the site did have very specific rules about listing a title as an MMORPG (not MM0) with 500 concurrent players in a persistent world being at the forefront.
Finally, why not answer the real question, where is the None of the above button?
Are you concerned that if there is a clear landslide in that category advertisers might lose interest if no one reading this site gives a care about their upcoming product?
No. And next year, I'll consider adding it. Or at least a "show me the results" option.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
Neither qualify by this sites very rules of what constitutes a MMORPG which was changed/dropped not all that long ago.
Give us a None of the above or at least an Other selection. You didn't because it likely would have swept all three categories.
Look, if you are going to sell out, at least admit it, don't call it a "tired debate"
Just because we can adapt to changing times doesn't mean we are selling out. Sorry to hear you're so shortsighted, Kyleran. I thought you understood, actually. And we never had hard rules about what constitutes an MMO. That would have been very foolish. It's an acronym for a very broad cross section of games.
I agree, MMO has been watered down to be an almost meaningless term, but I still feel games with 64 players on the field does not even begin to qualify.
But again as you said, not a thread for this discussion.
Just as MTV no longer is about Music Videos, it's clear MMORPG.com really isn't about it's namesake.
Oh, and yes, the site did have very specific rules about listing a title as an MMORPG (not MM0) with 500 concurrent players in a persistent world being at the forefront.
Finally, why not answer the real question, where is the None of the above button?
Are you concerned that if there is a clear landslide in that category advertisers might lose interest if no one reading this site gives a care about their upcoming product?
What I see as the fundamental problem with this classification issue (which is usually started by member N) is a reluctance to just call them multiplayer games. Instead there is this weird holding on to an acronym that made sense once upon a time when "multiplayer" was not common and hot-seat or local network multiplayer were a thing. The acronym served only one purpose: to differentiate MMOs from the other multiplayer online category that was common back then, FPS.
Even the "O", the "online" part of the acronym, is redundant now and there is all this massaging of the first M trying to fit ever smaller, FPS-like player numbers into "massively."
Why this site, which has already, for quite a while, been covering single player RPGs insists in trying to shoehorn multiplayer games into the MMO acronym, I have no idea. Most of us don't care what the game is categorized as - we just want to know and talk about them and are happy that Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are also covered here along with EVE, ESO, SWTOR and also Destiny and The Division.
There is no need to justify coverage of anything they want to cover - site's name be damned.
What I and you and others find irritating is trying to lump every M game into the MMO acronym - there is no need to do that.
As to The Division itself... it got my vote despite being wrongly lumped into MMO (IMO of course.) It is after all much more MMOish (even though it would have fallen neatly into the FPS category 20 years ago) than Path of Exile, a game which I like a lot but had no place in the list of best MMOs of all time a while back.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Comments
It takes one to know one.
I'm also looking forward to Tree of Savior, Tried it in CB and really liked it. Albion Online, I'm not sure about that one, I bought the founders pack and i'm in the CB (rarely play it). The graphics are a bit crap (on par with runescape) and its very very grindy, its also very poorly optimized (fps issues on decent hardware), I like the idea behind it but the devs have mountains to climb for it to be in a good shape.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
For those who STILL want to hang me up, please read Mark's posts. Honestly, we DO think these things through sometimes.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
We're close friends with a lot of the folks at Epic, both past and present, but they're like Blizzard - they release when they're ready and I doubt they'll force Paragon out unless they licensing of UE4 is going poorly and not earning them enough money.
If it DOES land in 2016, we'll gladly put it up for Best of polls next year. So in short, cool your freakin' jets.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
I don't! But @SBFord can!
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Blade & Soul has the polish that BDO lacks right now, and has a lot to offer players up front to add to the sense of gaming experience and longevity, but it is an older title, so it doesn't have that wonderful mysterious aura hanging about that BDO definitely has because it's such a new title.
Fishing on Gilgamesh since 2013
Fishing on Bronzebeard since 2005
Fishing in RL since 1992
Born with a fishing rod in my hand in 1979
Give us a None of the above or at least an Other selection. You didn't because it likely would have swept all three categories.
Look, if you are going to sell out, at least admit it, don't call it a "tired debate"
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
I hope one or the other comes out, but I wouldn't hold your breath.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
As for MMOs, I only care about Eternal Crusade, and even then only because I'm a founder. And I don't give a rat's ass about MOBAs. I was kind of looking forward to Gigantic, but then they pulled that ridiculous 'Windows 10 only' bullshit and I lost all interest. Windows 7 works great for me. I have no reason to upgrade it, and I will not be forced into doing so by a bunch of chucklefucks who signed away their souls to M$ for a wad of cash, just to play their game. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
But again as you said, not a thread for this discussion.
Just as MTV no longer is about Music Videos, it's clear MMORPG.com really isn't about it's namesake.
Oh, and yes, the site did have very specific rules about listing a title as an MMORPG (not MM0) with 500 concurrent players in a persistent world being at the forefront.
Finally, why not answer the real question, where is the None of the above button?
Are you concerned that if there is a clear landslide in that category advertisers might lose interest if no one reading this site gives a care about their upcoming product?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Simply adding CU or going with "2016 and beyond" or...<insert random bad idea> would be better than this IMHO.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
That said, I see a lot of dismay in this thread, and honestly next year could be really great. Maybe not so much in the MMORPG department (though I do have good hopes put on Crowfall and Lineage Eternal), but RPG wise... Cyberpunk, Mass Effect, X-Com 2, Dark Souls 3, Torment and so many more... it'll be a busy and extremely fun year for a RPG player.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
No. And next year, I'll consider adding it. Or at least a "show me the results" option.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Even the "O", the "online" part of the acronym, is redundant now and there is all this massaging of the first M trying to fit ever smaller, FPS-like player numbers into "massively."
Why this site, which has already, for quite a while, been covering single player RPGs insists in trying to shoehorn multiplayer games into the MMO acronym, I have no idea. Most of us don't care what the game is categorized as - we just want to know and talk about them and are happy that Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are also covered here along with EVE, ESO, SWTOR and also Destiny and The Division.
There is no need to justify coverage of anything they want to cover - site's name be damned.
What I and you and others find irritating is trying to lump every M game into the MMO acronym - there is no need to do that.
As to The Division itself... it got my vote despite being wrongly lumped into MMO (IMO of course.) It is after all much more MMOish (even though it would have fallen neatly into the FPS category 20 years ago) than Path of Exile, a game which I like a lot but had no place in the list of best MMOs of all time a while back.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile