How many people needed to be considered an MMO?

mgilbrtsn

There will probably be a lot of quibbling about definitions. Most will know what I'm asking. For those who will respond with the 'about 6 billion play solitare, does that mean it's an MMO' type response.. head over to the SC threads and cause trouble.

Azaron_Nightblade

I take it you mean online at the same time on one server?

mgilbrtsn

DMKano said:

Most content is done with 1-20 players in vast majority of games. Yes some still have 40man content but it's rare.

So for all practical purposes as far as how many you interact on screen - lets say it's 50 (high end of the spectrum)

So this is how I see it:

As far as instances - phases, channels or any technology that "groups" players on the same slice of the virtual world -
 
20-50 players together in the same instance/phase/channel/zone is enough to be considered an MMO


As far as "total server population" - it depends, 
 
1. Traditional shard design (usually 5-20K accounts per shard) - about 1-5k concurrent (actively logged in)
2. Megaserver design - it's going to be in the 100s of thousands to million+ accounts and concurrency in tens to 100s of thousands per megaserver


Bottom line - this is just my 2c

There is no agreed upon min-max numbers 

Well reasoned.  Thx.

mgilbrtsn

Azaron_Nightblade said:

I take it you mean online at the same time on one server?

Yea, that was my thought, although I'm open for other ideas.

yaminsux

Over 9000.....

But seriously, for me at least 100 concurrent users in a play session. So, 15v15 deathmatches do not count as MMO, that is a lobby based MP (WoT, AW, CSGO, you get the idea).

acidblood

As many as are needed for the world to feel alive without you.

Zierski

Good question.  I've always felt MMORPG was thrown around to freely.  I selected Other.

Ultimately I think that the ability to support a large number of concurrent players in a seamless living changing world is what determines if it should be considered a MMO.
The actual number of people currently playing simply determines the rate of change which may or may not correlate to how much fun I am having.

My opinion: If the choices I make today change the world so that it influences you tomorrow, I think I would consider it an MMO.  Instancing, resets, choices without consequence are all aspects that make me question if it should be considered an MMO.

Disatisfied8

Here is a write-up answering this very question (or posing even more questions) in detail:

http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/is-mmo-why-mmo.287326/

Jakobmiller

it really depends on the game. I want a game that feels populated and where I don't run into same 5 people whenever I see someone.

Kyleran

65K of course. 

I chose 500 as it was MMORPG.com's original qualifier to get a game listed on this site.

I recall GW1was one of the first with fewer and there was great debate as even ANET didn't label it as a MMO.

Rather they coined the term CORPG and this site started down the slippery slope until now the definition of MMO here apparently is "Minimally" Multiplayer Online to draw the attention of the ignorant masses.

(Pretty sure these were the same folks who changed the meaning of "Christmas " to an end of the year shopping holiday called XMAS.) 

Steelhelm

I think 200 is already a massive number of players.
Something that I see crucial to an mmo is the interaction between those players though. Even if one of those players is soloing that activity should (always) somehow affect other players. And better yet if it's a deliberate mechanic.

SpottyGekko

How many players per instance ?
How many players per server ?

As far as game play goes, the "per instance" cap is a very important feature to me. Another important feature is how many players I can indirectly interact with (e.g. via the AH), so that references total server population as opposed to instance population (i.e. players that I can see).

Total server population can also affect things like GvG or RvR battles, or the way global events play out and similar things.

cameltosis

I voted 1000

By which I mean the game world needs to be able to support 1000+ concurrent players each and that, should I log in to my server, I should be able to find and speak to any one of those 1000+ players by travelling in game to their location. 


Mobas and games like WoT I would never class as MMOs because the number of concurrent players within the game world is tiny, not massive. WoT, according to their FAQ, only supports 30 players per match. Mobas are typically 6-10. Hardly massively. Games like Destiny, which also sometimes get called MMOs, have concurrent player caps in really low numbers (16 for destiny?). Again, not massive. 


I chose 1000, rather than 500 or 250, based on the average size on current MMORPGs. 1000 seems to be just enough to make the world feel alive: enough to see people running about in every zone, enough to populate the hubs and enough to have active pvp and dungeon grouping. If the game world was smaller, or the game more niche then 500 might be acceptable (for example, if all 500 could only pvp then it would still feel pretty massive) but less than 500 and you start hitting similar numbers as some online shooters which definitely aren't MMOs. 

jmcdermottuk

My standard answer is always 200+ and that's based on 20+ years of gameplay and looking back at what was always simply called multiplayer.

When I was playing TFC and CS competetively we had our own 32 seat server. At that time Battlefield hosted 64 seat servers. All of those games were called online multiplayer games. MMO's were things like UO or EQ or AC where you could have several hundred players in a zone. Planetside was set up for 300 players on a map. These were Massively Multiplayer, which makes sense when most multiplayer games allowed 32, so a jump to 300 was massive.

Despite a lot of current content being restricted to 20-40 payers, if a true MMO with an open world can support hundreds of players in a zone, then it's an MMO. If not it's multiplayer. Games like World of Tanks, which I play regularly can never be called an MMO. 15v15 is no more MMO than Counterstrike was 20 years ago.

The idea that 20-50 players can qualify as an MMO is, for me personally, rediculous. Those are standard multiplayer numbers and have been going back 20 years. For any game to be Massively Multiplayer then it needs to host massively multiplayer numbers and 50 is just too low when BF 1942 was doing that in 2002.

Another worthless opinion thrown into the mix.

Distopia

tree fitty

Erillion

Preferably 50 around me in high fidelity, that i can directly interact with (SWG cantina style).

Preferably  100 around me at degraded fidelity (LOTRO style), that i can directly interact with.

Preferably  1000 around me with time dilation like in EVE Online (does not work for avatars, only for "simpler" objects like ships)

Unlimited on the server in total   (Megaserver style or like EVE Online)


Have fun

Rattenmann

Unsure to be honest.
Depends on the size of the world. Enough to make it feel like a "massive" number.

By current gen MMOs standard area and world size id say,...250-500 ish.
By the size of old school MMOs it would be 1000-5000 ish.

Definitly REACHABLE players, like others mentioned. Not Diablo 3 like where the max you can see is 3 others, but 100.000s play on the same server at once. Pretty sick of people calling DOTA or Diablo style games a MMO actually. Both have TINY worlds and VERY limited players. 

Slapshot1188

This site always used to define an MMORPG as one that had 500+ concurrent players.

Wizardry

It is not about how many people login,it is abut interaction.If a player is just soloing,there is no need for servers at all.

IF you are interacting with a large portion of the player base then it still becomes a debate.The reason i say this is because i have played UT99 for around 15-17 years and i am sure i have interacted with more players than most do in mmo's and i have paid NOTHING extra,no sub fees no cash shops.

How many people do we really interact with at one time "usually" 5 others if a 6 man group "few games have grouping".Raiding maybe 24 total so 23 others?

However i point back to UT99,we could have 48 man servers if we wanted or even more if the server could handle it.Nobody has ever called UT99 a mmo,so i guess i answered it.
The way we are judging the term MMO is really ONLY based on how many people login at once,not actual interaction,so MASSIVE becomes objective.I would accept anywhere around 5k players at one time to be a massive login.I am using my experience with FFXI as a base,at 5k i remember the server feeling "massive" players everywhere,over crowding.

However we could have as many as 1 million all login on the same hour,same day in UT99 and we might interact with say 6-12 other people,easily as many as these mmo's and we still don't call it a MMO.All those other people on the same login screen don't mean squat if you are not interacting with them,they might as well be off on some private server for all that matters.

Slapshot1188

Here are the MMORPG.COM rules:

Does it meet our requirements?

1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot of them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
3. The game must include some form of common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction. Exceptions are made where logical (such as sports MMOs) that still fit within the spirit of what an MMO is.
4. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
5. The game must contain some form of advancement.

Vermillion_Raventhal

To me if it has a persistent online world and supports multiplayer it's a MMORPG.  Massively is a bad and vaguely term.  

Dullahan

DMKano said:

Most content is done with 1-20 players in vast majority of games. Yes some still have 40man content but it's rare.

So for all practical purposes as far as how many you interact on screen - lets say it's 50 (high end of the spectrum)

So this is how I see it:

As far as instances - phases, channels or any technology that "groups" players on the same slice of the virtual world -
 
20-50 players together in the same instance/phase/channel/zone is enough to be considered an MMO


As far as "total server population" - it depends, 
 
1. Traditional shard design (usually 5-20K accounts per shard) - about 1-5k concurrent (actively logged in)
2. Megaserver design - it's going to be in the 100s of thousands to million+ accounts and concurrency in tens to 100s of thousands per megaserver


Bottom line - this is just my 2c

There is no agreed upon min-max numbers 

Its more than that though. You have to consider the impact that many players interacting indirectly, in trading and the marketplace and other random encounters. Its the people necessary to create the illusion of world filled and effected by the players on a large scale, not just who you interact with personally on a day by day basis.

A clan of 20 people playing Battlefield does not make it an MMO.

Pepeq

The same number of people needed to qualify to drive in the HoV lanes:

2 people or 1 person with a pay as you go pass.

iixviiiix

If i recalled right , the first MMORPG allow 10.000 players to play in one persistent world . So they need at lest 10.000+ player one one persistent world to be called MMO (RPG) .

Avanah

"Other"

The answer is 2 or more.

MMO = Massively Multiplayer Online

Massively:  Large Scale Game.
Multiplayer: 2+ Players are multiple players.
Online: Self explanatory. 

As long as you can have more than one player in a Massive world, It's an MMO.

Dullahan

Avanah said:

"Other"

The answer is 2 or more.

MMO = Massively Multiplayer Online

Massively:  Large Scale Game.
Multiplayer: 2+ Players are multiple players.
Online: Self explanatory. 

As long as you can have more than one player in a Massive world, It's an MMO.

Its Massively MULTIPLAYER, not Massive Scale Game Multiplayer Online RPG.

Two people is multiplayer, but its not massively multiplayer.