I find it ridiculous to talk about The Division in this setting, I'm half wondering if this is an invitation to talk about any, and all, multiplayer games on this forum.
That door opened quite some time ago, seems sports titles are the only taboo atm.
The damage has been already done and this ship is going down no matter what.
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
I find it ridiculous to talk about The Division in this setting, I'm half wondering if this is an invitation to talk about any, and all, multiplayer games on this forum.
That door opened quite some time ago, seems sports titles are the only taboo atm.
The damage has been already done and this ship is going down no matter what.
NBA2K series is more MMO than most MMO here. It's kind of pay to win though lol.
For example, I like MMORPGs. Currently, there aren't any MMORPGs out that I enjoy and there haven't been for nearly 4 years now. I miss playing MMORPGs and so I've been looking for a new one for a while now.
The game plays like Destiny and Vindictus. A persistent Lobby with instanced/group based world design.
It is more fun and the different features it has make it more appealing that those two games, but the core gameplay is the same. Walking through the same place over and over murdering the same respawning mobs. Thankfully, The Dark Zone will most likely make a huge difference and help break that poor destiny-like gameplay monotony.
It's a lobby Shoot and loot. Though I dunno if it has a lobby. I'll probably play it a bit though would have preferred to see Watchdogs 2. (Weirdly I rather enjoyed Watchdogs)
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
from the start to 0.58 secs is how you go from single player to Multi. Don't have to watch the rest, was just finding a vid to demonstrate how it's done
I find it ridiculous to talk about The Division in this setting, I'm half wondering if this is an invitation to talk about any, and all, multiplayer games on this forum.
That door opened quite some time ago, seems sports titles are the only taboo atm.
The damage has been already done and this ship is going down no matter what.
and I thought you are going to save the sinking ship by re-christening the first "M", minimally? :P
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
I find it ridiculous to talk about The Division in this setting, I'm half wondering if this is an invitation to talk about any, and all, multiplayer games on this forum.
That door opened quite some time ago, seems sports titles are the only taboo atm.
The damage has been already done and this ship is going down no matter what.
and I thought you are going to save the sinking ship by re-christening the first "M", minimally? :P
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
For example, I like MMORPGs. Currently, there aren't any MMORPGs out that I enjoy and there haven't been for nearly 4 years now. I miss playing MMORPGs and so I've been looking for a new one for a while now.
Based on this maybe you don't like mmorpgs....
No, they just haven't made any for years now outside of average theme parks.
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
I guess for my own personal tastes it comes down to the idea that as someone who played EQ from a beta stage on and DAOC , AC , etc ,that I always saw MMORPG as an abbreviation of Massively Multiplayer Role Playing Game , and that that's the way I preferred a game.
Be it early ones like that , or slightly later ones like Lineage 2 and City of Heroes.
If it isn't a virtual world with an ability to see hundreds of other players at the same time in the same area then it's not an mmorpg to me. Nor will I enjoy it.
One of the reasons I heavily (for me ) backed Camelot Unchained and am eagerly looking forward to it.
Devs and publishers have gotten lazier and gone backwards over the past several years by having less players together , not more.
They can define MMORPG however they want , and so can I.
My (and most other early players and devs ) defnition of mmorpg was before theirs.
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
it is still a lobby, people disappear out of thin air while going out of the persistent camp. Theres just no loading screen unless there is a door like in the Dark Zone which acts as a loading screen.
For example, I like MMORPGs. Currently, there aren't any MMORPGs out that I enjoy and there haven't been for nearly 4 years now. I miss playing MMORPGs and so I've been looking for a new one for a while now.
Based on this maybe you don't like mmorpgs....
No, they just haven't made any for years now outside of average theme parks.
So much potential wasted.
Oh so you are just one of those bitter old school vets who the genre passed by without even a blink...
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
it is still a lobby, people disappear out of thin air while going out of the persistent camp. Theres just no loading screen unless there is a door like in the Dark Zone which acts as a loading screen.
So by this definition every mmorpg out today is a lobby game....sorry no the Division is not a lobby game...
I think people are too caught up on erroneous labels.
I played a fair amount and the most players I saw in a single area was between 15 - 20, max. This was all basically not far from korea town where a group of gold bounties ran into a group of crazy NPCs and I'm pretty sure the majority of those in the DZ were after them. Thats probably more players than I've seen even in traditional MMO's apart from say, GW2's Boss Events in a long time.
I mean, it was pretty ridiculous with that many people in such a tight space shooting everything, and so many people ended up going rogue because of cross fire or misidentification. Having more than 20 players in a single space... for a game like this? I think it would be way too much.
Just so everyone is aware, for the Beta's the MAX they allowed in a DZ at a single time was 24. Is that MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER? Well, yes and no.
Lets pretend all 6.4 million testers were on a single platform. Lets say all of them were in the DZ. I certainly wouldn't want to see too many more players in that small area of NYC. It would have been a blood bath. No way would I want even 50.
Extrapolate that though. The DZ as we played it now, only let in about 24 players for what, a 10 block radius? Maybe more? Maybe less? It will be nearly 4 - 5 times that size on launch, so obviously the DZ cap will be increased throughout the seamless DZ transitions.
So lets say we decided that it was a cap of 24, and for the sake of conversation we multiply it by 4 times that size -- lets round up to 100 and say.. 100 people in the DZ at a single time.
When was the last time you saw 100 people in a single area in an MMO where you thought... "This is how MMOs were meant to be played" MAYBE a WvW scenario? I guarantee you wouldn't be saying the same thing with 100 DZ agents in the same area.
I think they made an educated decision. For a game like this, it should totally be considered an MMO.
How about set silly labels aside and just enjoy the game?
Because it is being advertised as something it is not? For the sake of argument I agree with you, but don't sell me an orange and tell me it's an apple.
How is UbiSoft advertising this as an MMORPG?
This article was by some guy on some website, not UbiSoft.
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
it is still a lobby, people disappear out of thin air while going out of the persistent camp. Theres just no loading screen unless there is a door like in the Dark Zone which acts as a loading screen.
So by this definition every mmorpg out today is a lobby game....sorry no the Division is not a lobby game...
The division is not a lobby game.
A Lobby game is the system there is in place in COD or in CS:go. You can't play without having to deal with this kind of system even to play as a single player a map you need to use the Lobby system.
You don't see this in The Division, it is not the same crappy system that cod or cs got.
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
it is still a lobby, people disappear out of thin air while going out of the persistent camp. Theres just no loading screen unless there is a door like in the Dark Zone which acts as a loading screen.
So by this definition every mmorpg out today is a lobby game....sorry no the Division is not a lobby game...
no, every mmo is not. The Division you have a town (and a pvp area) that are persistent with all players. The rest of the game is instanced to you and your party. A game can be full of loading screens between maps, and if every map is persistent then its not lobby based. Division is lobby based, just like Destiny, just like Vindictus, just like Rusty Hearts, etc. Ubi just made a very smooth transition between the lobby and the outside world.
Except the first "M" is for "Massively", not just "Massive".
Massively Multiplayer meaning massive amounts of people online sharing the same space.
Massive Multiplayer meaning multiplayer in a massive space?
See the difference?
I understand why you would define it as only that but the Industry defines it as many different forms as long as the server/world is shared by thousands of players and that is the "core" of the game.
Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) games are titles with a shared
persistent or instance-based world where players can interact in real
time. However, as the space has developed, MMOs have adopted a series of
common characteristics, like virtual currency markets and character
customization, which are now staples of the category. Naturally, not
every MMO will have every one of these features. Instead, we label a
game an MMO depending on how many of these markers it has and how
central they are to the game’s experience.
Hearthstone and League of Legends are MMOs.
Yes, we know neither allows you to join a ten-person raiding party,
but let us explain. Trading Card Games (TCGs) or Collective Card Games
(CCGs) are their own unique genre, which is we often analyze them
individually. However, we also sometimes group them with MMOs. That is
because in many ways, TCGs are precursors to MMOs, with a similar player
base and many common themes. For example, players in TCGs often
represent a character (Planeswalker, Pokemon Trainer,
etc.). This means customizing a card deck is really customizing your
character. Moreover, as TCGs transition into the digital space, many
have adopted the trappings of free-to-play MMOs.
Likewise, MOBAs share a similar audience and feel, complete with
customizable characters and microtransactions. A common critique is that
the 4v4 style of play in League of Legends is not exactly
“massive. ” However, the term refers to the number of players in one
server or in a shared environment, not the individual lobby.
Why is Grand Theft Auto: Online not an MMO?
Action-adventure games like GTA: Online and Assassin’s Creed
have begun to incorporate MMO-like features, including online gameplay
and microtransactions. These changes could arguably place them in the
MMO category, but there are a couple of differences. First, the online
mode is an addition to an existing game, often separate from the main
story. Second, although online play allows you to interact with others,
it is not essential to the core experience. By contrast, MMOs are
primarily online and how players interact is at the heart of the game.
Wikipedia also has similar definitions
The gaming and simulations programming course at Devry University also teach the same thing from teachers who are industry vets (I took a class once there)
It's a lobby based game that has removed sitting in a lobby waiting for a group. APB Reloaded allows you to run around in a city while waiting for a group instead of sitting in a lobby waiting, but that doesn't make it an MMO.
there's no lobby at all, it has a seemless transition from single player to multiplayer. You could call the checkpoints kind of a lobby when thinking on it, but not a traditional lobby.
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
it is still a lobby, people disappear out of thin air while going out of the persistent camp. Theres just no loading screen unless there is a door like in the Dark Zone which acts as a loading screen.
So by this definition every mmorpg out today is a lobby game....sorry no the Division is not a lobby game...
no, every mmo is not. The Division you have a town (and a pvp area) that are persistent with all players. The rest of the game is instanced to you and your party. A game can be full of loading screens between maps, and if every map is persistent then its not lobby based. Division is lobby based, just like Destiny, just like Vindictus, just like Rusty Hearts, etc. Ubi just made a very smooth transition between the lobby and the outside world.
Thats an awkward way to look at it. Because a lot of MMOs have instanced areas as well, just for you and your party, home instances, etc. Even certain maps, just for you and your team. Some are PvP maps, some are PvE maps, it doesn't make it a lobby based game.
You could travel through the dark zone, through different areas and stages of it, without the door, where its completely persistent. Yet, it doesn't count as being persistent?
What about SWTOR? Many of the portions you'd walk into or the conversations you had from the open world were completely instanced.... instancing does not equal lobby based. Hubs don't equal lobby based either.
The DZ is an open world that spans a huge amount of the map. Plus we don't know if there will ever be PvE areas that have other players in them, we've only seen up to level 8 content.
no, every mmo is not. The Division you have a town (and a pvp area) that are persistent with all players. The rest of the game is instanced to you and your party. A game can be full of loading screens between maps, and if every map is persistent then its not lobby based. Division is lobby based, just like Destiny, just like Vindictus, just like Rusty Hearts, etc. Ubi just made a very smooth transition between the lobby and the outside world.
Thats an awkward way to look at it. Because a lot of MMOs have instanced areas as well, just for you and your party, home instances, etc. Even certain maps, just for you and your team. Some are PvP maps, some are PvE maps, it doesn't make it a lobby based game.
You could travel through the dark zone, through different areas and stages of it, without the door, where its completely persistent. Yet, it doesn't count as being persistent?
What about SWTOR? Many of the portions you'd walk into or the conversations you had from the open world were completely instanced.... instancing does not equal lobby based. Hubs don't equal lobby based either.
The DZ is an open world that spans a huge amount of the map. Plus we don't know if there will ever be PvE areas that have other players in them, we've only seen up to level 8 content.
Yes but those instanced areas you are talking about from other mmos are not the core of the game.Those are just additional group based content. If you grab ESO and add PvP inside a public dungeon, it turns into the Dark Zone. If you take the darkzone and the instances away from TD you dont have a game anymore. If you take pvp and dungeons away from an mmo, you still have a game. Like i said before, Ubi just made a very smooth transition between the lobby(town/camp hudson), the pvp dark zone , and the solo/group instance which is the rest of the game.
Yes but those instanced areas you are talking about from other mmos are not the core of the game.Those are just additional group based content. If you grab ESO and add PvP inside a public dungeon, it turns into the Dark Zone. If you take the darkzone and the instances away from TD you dont have a game anymore. If you take pvp and dungeons away from an mmo, you still have a game. Like i said before, Ubi just made a very smooth transition between the lobby(town/camp hudson), the pvp dark zone , and the solo/group instance which is the rest of the game.
Thats not true either though. The PVP is in an open world, for example, take the mists of GW2 as an example.
The mists aren't the core game, but they aren't.. not the core game either. People just play GW2 for WvW.. nothing else.
You can do similar with the division if you wanted to. You can spend your entire time in the dark zone.. you still get XP, and money and gear.... its not a separate part of the game it is THE GAME. All inclusive, in its own right.
And again we have only seen up to level 8 of the world.. for all we know, some areas may have enemies that are also open, or they could always add on to what is there. If not, that would also be okay, I mean the DZ is an open world. There is a lot we still don't know about the division.
I understand the genre changes and definitions , for marketing reasons sometimes, change.
I do not consider Division a traditional MMORPG. But I'll still play it. Well,...I am looking forward to OverWatch more.
But I think may it is time to simply come up with a New name/acronym whatever for what the 'old' EQ style of MMORPG is, instead of trying to keep the current one from applying to newer games since it is so liquid as more and more cross-genre bleeds develop.
Maybe use 'traditional' MMO when referring to EQ style. Only.
so Division can call itself an MMORPG,..just not a "Traditional MMORPG". I think that's fair.
There will be a grey area of course. For me,..anything pre-Lobby, is definitely 'traditional'.
Comments
The damage has been already done and this ship is going down no matter what.
"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
It is more fun and the different features it has make it more appealing that those two games, but the core gameplay is the same. Walking through the same place over and over murdering the same respawning mobs. Thankfully, The Dark Zone will most likely make a huge difference and help break that poor destiny-like gameplay monotony.
from the start to 0.58 secs is how you go from single player to Multi. Don't have to watch the rest, was just finding a vid to demonstrate how it's done
Good .. and who says there is no innovation in the genre?
"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
No, they just haven't made any for years now outside of average theme parks.
So much potential wasted.
"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
Be it early ones like that , or slightly later ones like Lineage 2 and City of Heroes.
If it isn't a virtual world with an ability to see hundreds of other players at the same time in the same area then it's not an mmorpg to me. Nor will I enjoy it.
One of the reasons I heavily (for me ) backed Camelot Unchained and am eagerly looking forward to it.
Devs and publishers have gotten lazier and gone backwards over the past several years by having less players together , not more.
They can define MMORPG however they want , and so can I.
My (and most other early players and devs ) defnition of mmorpg was before theirs.
I played a fair amount and the most players I saw in a single area was between 15 - 20, max. This was all basically not far from korea town where a group of gold bounties ran into a group of crazy NPCs and I'm pretty sure the majority of those in the DZ were after them. Thats probably more players than I've seen even in traditional MMO's apart from say, GW2's Boss Events in a long time.
I mean, it was pretty ridiculous with that many people in such a tight space shooting everything, and so many people ended up going rogue because of cross fire or misidentification. Having more than 20 players in a single space... for a game like this? I think it would be way too much.
Just so everyone is aware, for the Beta's the MAX they allowed in a DZ at a single time was 24. Is that MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER? Well, yes and no.
Lets pretend all 6.4 million testers were on a single platform. Lets say all of them were in the DZ. I certainly wouldn't want to see too many more players in that small area of NYC. It would have been a blood bath. No way would I want even 50.
Extrapolate that though. The DZ as we played it now, only let in about 24 players for what, a 10 block radius? Maybe more? Maybe less? It will be nearly 4 - 5 times that size on launch, so obviously the DZ cap will be increased throughout the seamless DZ transitions.
So lets say we decided that it was a cap of 24, and for the sake of conversation we multiply it by 4 times that size -- lets round up to 100 and say.. 100 people in the DZ at a single time.
When was the last time you saw 100 people in a single area in an MMO where you thought... "This is how MMOs were meant to be played" MAYBE a WvW scenario? I guarantee you wouldn't be saying the same thing with 100 DZ agents in the same area.
I think they made an educated decision. For a game like this, it should totally be considered an MMO.
This article was by some guy on some website, not UbiSoft.
A Lobby game is the system there is in place in COD or in CS:go. You can't play without having to deal with this kind of system even to play as a single player a map you need to use the Lobby system.
You don't see this in The Division, it is not the same crappy system that cod or cs got.
https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/whats-an-mmo/
What makes a game an MMO?
Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) games are titles with a shared persistent or instance-based world where players can interact in real time. However, as the space has developed, MMOs have adopted a series of common characteristics, like virtual currency markets and character customization, which are now staples of the category. Naturally, not every MMO will have every one of these features. Instead, we label a game an MMO depending on how many of these markers it has and how central they are to the game’s experience.
Hearthstone and League of Legends are MMOs.
Yes, we know neither allows you to join a ten-person raiding party, but let us explain. Trading Card Games (TCGs) or Collective Card Games (CCGs) are their own unique genre, which is we often analyze them individually. However, we also sometimes group them with MMOs. That is because in many ways, TCGs are precursors to MMOs, with a similar player base and many common themes. For example, players in TCGs often represent a character (Planeswalker, Pokemon Trainer, etc.). This means customizing a card deck is really customizing your character. Moreover, as TCGs transition into the digital space, many have adopted the trappings of free-to-play MMOs.
Likewise, MOBAs share a similar audience and feel, complete with customizable characters and microtransactions. A common critique is that the 4v4 style of play in League of Legends is not exactly “massive. ” However, the term refers to the number of players in one server or in a shared environment, not the individual lobby.
Why is Grand Theft Auto: Online not an MMO?
Action-adventure games like GTA: Online and Assassin’s Creed have begun to incorporate MMO-like features, including online gameplay and microtransactions. These changes could arguably place them in the MMO category, but there are a couple of differences. First, the online mode is an addition to an existing game, often separate from the main story. Second, although online play allows you to interact with others, it is not essential to the core experience. By contrast, MMOs are primarily online and how players interact is at the heart of the game.
Wikipedia also has similar definitions
The gaming and simulations programming course at Devry University also teach the same thing from teachers who are industry vets (I took a class once there)
You could travel through the dark zone, through different areas and stages of it, without the door, where its completely persistent. Yet, it doesn't count as being persistent?
What about SWTOR? Many of the portions you'd walk into or the conversations you had from the open world were completely instanced.... instancing does not equal lobby based. Hubs don't equal lobby based either.
The DZ is an open world that spans a huge amount of the map. Plus we don't know if there will ever be PvE areas that have other players in them, we've only seen up to level 8 content.
Just co-op lobby is hidden
If this game is called MMORPG , than Dark Souls is also mmo ... etc
The mists aren't the core game, but they aren't.. not the core game either. People just play GW2 for WvW.. nothing else.
You can do similar with the division if you wanted to. You can spend your entire time in the dark zone.. you still get XP, and money and gear.... its not a separate part of the game it is THE GAME. All inclusive, in its own right.
And again we have only seen up to level 8 of the world.. for all we know, some areas may have enemies that are also open, or they could always add on to what is there. If not, that would also be okay, I mean the DZ is an open world. There is a lot we still don't know about the division.
I understand the genre changes and definitions , for marketing reasons sometimes, change.
I do not consider Division a traditional MMORPG. But I'll still play it. Well,...I am looking forward to OverWatch more.
But I think may it is time to simply come up with a New name/acronym whatever for what the 'old' EQ style of MMORPG is, instead of trying to keep the current one from applying to newer games since it is so liquid as more and more cross-genre bleeds develop.
Maybe use 'traditional' MMO when referring to EQ style. Only.
so Division can call itself an MMORPG,..just not a "Traditional MMORPG". I think that's fair.
There will be a grey area of course. For me,..anything pre-Lobby, is definitely 'traditional'.