Grand Theft Auto 5 is as much a MMO as Destiny is.
If you are going to use numbers from Destiny I'm going to use numbers from GTA 5.
The site here list's GTA Online as a MMOG.
It's almost like calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
Yes, but MMOFPS are doing really great so I don't think the topic is about them anyways. Personally am I not so sure either of those 2 games are massive enough to really be called MMOFPS, more MOFPS, but that could certainly be discussed, in the right thread for it.
I've never played Destiny. Is it a game where you play on a huge open world with hundreds of other players or one where you play through a bunch instances while experiencing features typically associated with MMOs (Loot drop etc.)?
If it has the huge open world that's indisputably an MMOFPS. If it's just an FPS with loot drop then I would actually dispute that. Planetside / Planetside 2 are what an MMOFPS looks like.
I've never played Destiny. Is it a game where you play on a huge open world with hundreds of other players or one where you play through a bunch instances while experiencing features typically associated with MMOs (Loot drop etc.)?
If it has the huge open world that's indisputably an MMOFPS. If it's just an FPS with loot drop then I would actually dispute that. Planetside / Planetside 2 are what an MMOFPS looks like.
Destiny has 3 person groups and 6 person raids you run instances with.
GTA V and Destiny are just multiplayer.
I was pointing out that if you include games that are not MMOs sure the numbers are great.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
I've never played Destiny. Is it a game where you play on a huge open world with hundreds of other players or one where you play through a bunch instances while experiencing features typically associated with MMOs (Loot drop etc.)?
If it has the huge open world that's indisputably an MMOFPS. If it's just an FPS with loot drop then I would actually dispute that. Planetside / Planetside 2 are what an MMOFPS looks like.
Destiny has 3 person groups and 6 person raids you run instances with.
GTA V and Destiny are just multiplayer.
I was pointing out that if you include games that are not MMOs sure the numbers are great.
Yeah that's not an MMO. Nothing massive about that. They can call it an MMO but it has equal grounds to call itself one as LoL and SMITE. Kind of like Age of Empires Online. It's Age of Empires with WoW graphics and grinding.
Yeah that's not an MMO. Nothing massive about that. They can call it an MMO but it has equal grounds to call itself one as LoL and SMITE. Kind of like Age of Empires Online. It's Age of Empires with WoW graphics and grinding.
lol .. you think most people care if MMOs are massive?
And yes, superdata call LoL and SMITE MMOs too. It is a convenient label for game companies, websites, and casual players. Nothing more, nothing less.
Labels are pretty much useless. People play the games they find fun and are not going to be too concerned about whether they are playing a massively online game or simply a multiplayer game. It's become a polemic exercise when the games go on to make money and use whatever labels suit sthem. The purist may grouch but unfortunately they do not represent the money or power to change anything.
Labels are pretty much useless. People play the games they find fun and are not going to be too concerned about whether they are playing a massively online game or simply a multiplayer game. It's become a polemic exercise when the games go on to make money and use whatever labels suit sthem. The purist may grouch but unfortunately they do not represent the money or power to change anything.
Depends what you, the consumer, uses labels for.
For me, being massively multiplayer is a key feature when making a purchasing decision about online games. If it is genuinely an MMO, then I am interested. If it's not an MMO, I'm not.
Luckily, the developers themselves (at least at the top end of the market) don't get it wrong, it tends to only be media sites that get it wrong. Occasionally though, I'll come across a game advertised as an MMO, then spend time investigating it only to discover it's not an MMO. It's a waste of my time which is frustrating and often results in me not talking favourably about that game with my friends.
Like you say though, people like me are few and far between and have no real power. The current market for small scale drop-in-drop-out online multiplayer seems to be larger (or at least is expanding) than the MMO market.
What continues to confuse me is why people get the terminology wrong. Is it that they don't understand what MMO means? Is it that they equate the typical features of an MMORPG with the term MMO, and thus if the feature set is similar to an MMORPG (levels, progression, dungeons, grouping, gear, classes etc) they feel comfortable using the term MMO? Is it an attempt to attract the traditional MMO crowd? Is it purely a media issue resulting from the dropping popularity of MMOs and the need to attract more visitors?
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Let me think what titles made so much money, that are still profitable to run today and have a healthy playerbase:
WoW (the obvious one)
SW:TOR (gained some massive traction since F2P)
ESO (similar to SW:TOR)
Final Fantasy Online (big influx of players with latest expansion, rare subscription model too)
EVE online
BDO (probably the most successful of the Korean based mmorpgs atm)
GTA online
Destiny
Speaking of Destiny, it's funny how Bioware trashed the Mass Effect franchise to create a Destiny clone. It's as if they believe that the mmorpg space provides an opportunity for massive profits, even compared to a heavy weight IP, like the ME one.
The Mass Effect franchise would make a great setting for an MMORPG. For curiosities sake, it's too bad they didn't go with ME instead of Star Wars. I wonder what it would have turned out like.
Well they sort of did: they used the SW lore but the style and mechanics were very ME right down to cover mechanics and companions. I remember talking to friends when it first launched and we started playing it about how much it felt like ME.
"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
lol .. you think most people care if MMOs are massive?
And yes, superdata call LoL and SMITE MMOs too. It is a convenient label for game companies, websites, and casual players. Nothing more, nothing less.
Cares? It is not really about that but we need to distinct the different types of games or we could just skip all genres and just stick with games. When we are browsing steam or discuss a genre with friends it helps if they understand what we talk about. Same thing when we read an article about a game or discuss it at a forum.
Sure, you might consider any game with more then one player "massive" but it is not a convenient label, there is already a label for that and it is "multiplayer".
Well IMO Console days are over consoles need to die instead of consoles which come outdated faster than PC's all games should be on computers, because even a computer the size of a console can be built and play console games just fine.
There are certain games I would love to play for PS3, but im not buying a PS3 which will become outdated very fast if not already think they have a PS4 already just to play a single game they need to make for pc or release on steam (Without Denuvo.)
My friend is a doctor, he work a lot as you can imagine and have two children and a wife. He dosen't care about computers other than for watching movies and for work.
He dosen't have time, or care about, multiplayer games but rather appreciate a good narrative.
He absolutely love his PS to death and rarely play games on his laptop (even though he could - it is quite powerful).
Me, on the other hand, find console controls impossible and games outdated and single players games borring...
Guess my point is: both console and pc games have their different audience and reason for being
I swear I though you will say "My friend is a doctor. Please visit him" ))
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy? Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
Oh course who cares if we are talking about MMOs on MMORPG.com anymore...
and by MMORPG.com gamelist definition, Destiny is a MMOFPS. So there you are ...
Grand Theft Auto 5 is as much a MMO as Destiny is.
If you are going to use numbers from Destiny I'm going to use numbers from GTA 5.
The site here list's GTA Online as a MMOG.
It's almost like calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
One session in GTA online has a max of 32 players. The moment you start calling games like this "MMOs" is the moment you have just crossed over to the Twilight Zone.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game - nearly every word in has seen its definition evolve over the years. I see the genre as evolving and merging with other genres more than it is dying.
Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game - nearly every word in has seen its definition evolve over the years. I see the genre as evolving and merging with other genres more than it is dying.
I dunno, most of what the new games people start calling MMOs are evolution from other genres and just took the name.
MMOFPS games are clearly mainly influenced by regular FPS games. Mobas are a evolution of RTS games, not MMOs. Games like Diablo 3 comes from the first Diablo and the old arcade game "Gauntlet".
They often have taken in some ideas from MMOs like an auction house but the base of the games are from other genres.
The only sub genre I can think of that actually started from MMORPGs is CORPGs, instanced games like Guildwars and DDO that mainly uses MMO mechanics but only are massive in "towns" which basically is graphical hubs. That sub genre were popular in the mid to late 00s and mobas did take a bit of inspiration from them but took far more from the RTS game Warcraft 3.
So I don't agree, stealing a few ideas is not the same as merging. As for the genre evolving, it have changed for better and worse but there have been no huge leap for a long time.
I don't think we could say it is dying at the moment (you can seriously find threads on this forum from it's start saying the same thing) but we certainly are in a regression at the moment.
When we say Massively Multiplayer Online games are dying what we mean is Massively Multiplayer Online games are dying.
The reason I play MMOs is I enjoy the features that enjoy the MMO genres. I like massive communities, Open World PvP, games large enough for player factions with their own politics. Things that don't exist outside the true definition of an MMO.
Attempting to redefine it doesn't change that fact. If you enjoy playing games with hundreds or thousands of players in a persistent world, your genre is dying out. 6 man instances can never give us the content we desire. MOBAs mislabeled as MMOs don't give us the content we desire.
This is a dumb subject. Nobody who cares about MMO cares if the genres name carries on without the actual features of an MMO carry on. You really need to stop wasting our time by bringing this nonsense up in every possible topic.
MMOs aren't dying... it's just that they aren't the same as they used to be. Some people seem to think that if they could hop into the wayback machine they could rekindle the exact same feeling they once had. Reality is, that was different times and everyone changes. Sort of like rebuilding some old muscle car... not quite the same thing as owning one when they were a thing. It's trying to hold on to the past... that is all.
Ah the "rose coloured glasses excuse". Slapped over anything from the past by those ignorant of history a the concept of time. Enjoyment is real no matter the time is occurred but each new experience is unique. It has nothing to do with trying bring back anything. Wise people understand this and can play old games and look forward to similar yet new games so they can build new great memories. Why? Because they are not jaded and lack the empathy required to understand people's diversity of interests.
Apparently millions of players on old school emulators right this very moment don't actually still love the games they once played? You are detached from reality, blind to current trends of old school indie mmorpg development and deaf to those clearly stating their preference in gaming.
On top of all of this you clearly (along with the OP) don't even know the argument is. The actual argument is that "MMORPG's are dying". That is different than MMO. The very term MMO was not created by the players. It was termed by the industry itself in order to classify and construct models to capitalize off of a new, burgeoning game segment. MMORPG is a modified version of RPG where many players play at once. It wasn't a business model, but rather a variant of a genre that created it's own genre. MMO is an umbrella term and nothing more.
Therefore the MMORPG argument is something entirely different. It's about a niche genre that has nearly vanished due to RMT integration.
Stay on target people and stop saying stupid shit.
Not dying,already dead. Ever since Smedley started the cash shop going inside of Everquest,it went downhill and SOE eventually sold out.So now rather than sell their games based on merit,they try to sell their games with gimmicks...f2p...RAIDING...Early Access with loads of promises...Free items for buying Founders packs"is anything really free when your spending money?" and so on and son.
How often do we hear about some great game design,not often,it is usually just marketing,advertising and bait and lure tactics,free gift keys,free mount,for $500 founders a free house etc etc. Let's get back to selling finished COMPLETE games,it would eliminate 99% of the market and to that i say good riddance,let's get rid of all the lame gimmicks,i want quality games not your free items.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Oh course who cares if we are talking about MMOs on MMORPG.com anymore...
and by MMORPG.com gamelist definition, Destiny is a MMOFPS. So there you are ...
Grand Theft Auto 5 is as much a MMO as Destiny is.
If you are going to use numbers from Destiny I'm going to use numbers from GTA 5.
The site here list's GTA Online as a MMOG.
It's almost like calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
One session in GTA online has a max of 32 players. The moment you start calling games like this "MMOs" is the moment you have just crossed over to the Twilight Zone.
I'll clarify again then. GTA V and Destiny are just multiplayer.
This sites game list is pretty much twilight zone useless and lists Day Z as a MMORPG too.
Hence my last sentence in that post, calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
I'll clarify again then. GTA V and Destiny are just multiplayer.
This sites game list is pretty much twilight zone useless and lists Day Z as a MMORPG too.
Hence my last sentence in that post, calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
Survival games are actually more arguably MMOs then fully instanced games for small groups. Not saying they are, but you can actually debate it. Some survival games can host populations in the hundreds and those I think may actually be crossing the line into MMO territory.
Comments
If you are going to use numbers from Destiny I'm going to use numbers from GTA 5.
The site here list's GTA Online as a MMOG.
It's almost like calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/If it has the huge open world that's indisputably an MMOFPS. If it's just an FPS with loot drop then I would actually dispute that. Planetside / Planetside 2 are what an MMOFPS looks like.
GTA V and Destiny are just multiplayer.
I was pointing out that if you include games that are not MMOs sure the numbers are great.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Sure, use it. In fact, that makes my point, which is, there are MMOs doing well. So now we have TWO examples. Destiny *and* GTA5 .. THANK YOU!
And yes, by now, MMO is a pretty useless term ... to classify games .. but it is great for forum discussions!
And yes, superdata call LoL and SMITE MMOs too. It is a convenient label for game companies, websites, and casual players. Nothing more, nothing less.
For me, being massively multiplayer is a key feature when making a purchasing decision about online games. If it is genuinely an MMO, then I am interested. If it's not an MMO, I'm not.
Luckily, the developers themselves (at least at the top end of the market) don't get it wrong, it tends to only be media sites that get it wrong. Occasionally though, I'll come across a game advertised as an MMO, then spend time investigating it only to discover it's not an MMO. It's a waste of my time which is frustrating and often results in me not talking favourably about that game with my friends.
Like you say though, people like me are few and far between and have no real power. The current market for small scale drop-in-drop-out online multiplayer seems to be larger (or at least is expanding) than the MMO market.
What continues to confuse me is why people get the terminology wrong. Is it that they don't understand what MMO means? Is it that they equate the typical features of an MMORPG with the term MMO, and thus if the feature set is similar to an MMORPG (levels, progression, dungeons, grouping, gear, classes etc) they feel comfortable using the term MMO? Is it an attempt to attract the traditional MMO crowd? Is it purely a media issue resulting from the dropping popularity of MMOs and the need to attract more visitors?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Sure, you might consider any game with more then one player "massive" but it is not a convenient label, there is already a label for that and it is "multiplayer".
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
MMOFPS games are clearly mainly influenced by regular FPS games. Mobas are a evolution of RTS games, not MMOs. Games like Diablo 3 comes from the first Diablo and the old arcade game "Gauntlet".
They often have taken in some ideas from MMOs like an auction house but the base of the games are from other genres.
The only sub genre I can think of that actually started from MMORPGs is CORPGs, instanced games like Guildwars and DDO that mainly uses MMO mechanics but only are massive in "towns" which basically is graphical hubs. That sub genre were popular in the mid to late 00s and mobas did take a bit of inspiration from them but took far more from the RTS game Warcraft 3.
So I don't agree, stealing a few ideas is not the same as merging. As for the genre evolving, it have changed for better and worse but there have been no huge leap for a long time.
I don't think we could say it is dying at the moment (you can seriously find threads on this forum from it's start saying the same thing) but we certainly are in a regression at the moment.
The reason I play MMOs is I enjoy the features that enjoy the MMO genres. I like massive communities, Open World PvP, games large enough for player factions with their own politics. Things that don't exist outside the true definition of an MMO.
Attempting to redefine it doesn't change that fact. If you enjoy playing games with hundreds or thousands of players in a persistent world, your genre is dying out. 6 man instances can never give us the content we desire. MOBAs mislabeled as MMOs don't give us the content we desire.
This is a dumb subject. Nobody who cares about MMO cares if the genres name carries on without the actual features of an MMO carry on. You really need to stop wasting our time by bringing this nonsense up in every possible topic.
Apparently millions of players on old school emulators right this very moment don't actually still love the games they once played? You are detached from reality, blind to current trends of old school indie mmorpg development and deaf to those clearly stating their preference in gaming.
On top of all of this you clearly (along with the OP) don't even know the argument is. The actual argument is that "MMORPG's are dying". That is different than MMO. The very term MMO was not created by the players. It was termed by the industry itself in order to classify and construct models to capitalize off of a new, burgeoning game segment. MMORPG is a modified version of RPG where many players play at once. It wasn't a business model, but rather a variant of a genre that created it's own genre. MMO is an umbrella term and nothing more.
Therefore the MMORPG argument is something entirely different. It's about a niche genre that has nearly vanished due to RMT integration.
Stay on target people and stop saying stupid shit.
You stay sassy!
Ever since Smedley started the cash shop going inside of Everquest,it went downhill and SOE eventually sold out.So now rather than sell their games based on merit,they try to sell their games with gimmicks...f2p...RAIDING...Early Access with loads of promises...Free items for buying Founders packs"is anything really free when your spending money?" and so on and son.
How often do we hear about some great game design,not often,it is usually just marketing,advertising and bait and lure tactics,free gift keys,free mount,for $500 founders a free house etc etc.
Let's get back to selling finished COMPLETE games,it would eliminate 99% of the market and to that i say good riddance,let's get rid of all the lame gimmicks,i want quality games not your free items.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
This sites game list is pretty much twilight zone useless and lists Day Z as a MMORPG too.
Hence my last sentence in that post, calling everything a MMO makes the term useless.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/And I am glad you think i have any impact on the internet by just flogging a dead horse. I wouldn't be so bold.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/