Dynasty Warrior and VINTICUS and Guikd Wars are MMO?
Did Dynasty Warrior become massive at some point? When I played it there were no shared worldspace -- heck there wasn't even multiplayer (splitscreen at most.)
Guild Wars is pretty damn close to a MMORPG, I'd say. For a long time, I insisted it was an MMORPG actually. But it's realistically in a grey area due to how fragmented the world spaces are and how little RPG there is (very little vertical progression.)
(Although oddly less fragmented world spaces than many MMORPGs. If I'm in a city in GW I can always join a friend. But if I'm in Org in WOW and my friend is in another realm (another instance, effectively), I'm prevented from joining them without a fee and a long wait. Only games like EVE (of which there are extremely few) have a truly singular shared world space, and we're certainly not going to pretend EVE is the only "one true MMORPG".)
No clue what Vindictus (Vinticus?) is.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I have no clue about those first two, but the vast majority of Guild Wars is not persistent. It is all instances. The only persistent part are the towns...and this is a minor part of the game. Calling GW an MMORPG would be like calling Diablo an MMORPG because it had a persistent lobby.
Actually yeah this is probably the main reason it's not considered a MMORPG.
Just like a game which is predominantly about FPS-aiming but has RPG elements is called a MMOFPS (Planetside), but a game which has strong RPG elements and happens to have FPS-aiming is called an RPG (Skyrim).
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Dynasty Warrior and VINTICUS and Guikd Wars are MMO?
All of those are close enough. So is DDO. Close enough that they don't need a genre of their own.
I can't comment on Dynasty Warriors because I have not played it, but Vindictus and Guild Wars ARE NOT MMORPGs. This is coming from someone who's bought every single expansion for GW and is currently playing Vindictus. The fact that they are both 100% instanced pretty much prevents them from fulfilling the 'massively' part of the MMORPG acronym. The towns where you can see more than 8 people are basically nothing more than glorified lobbies given a 3D space. There's a huge difference between the towns in WoW where they are seamnlessly integrated with the game world and the towns in GW/Vindictus where the only thing you can do is walk around.
They are at most MORPGS, although A-net decided to call GW a CORPG.
Dynasty Warrior and VINTICUS and Guikd Wars are MMO?
All of those are close enough. So is DDO. Close enough that they don't need a genre of their own.
I can't comment on Dynasty Warriors because I have not played it, but Vindictus and Guild Wars ARE NOT MMORPGs. This is coming from someone who's bought every single expansion for GW and is currently playing Vindictus. The fact that they are both 100% instanced pretty much prevents them from fulfilling the 'massively' part of the MMORPG acronym. The towns where you can see more than 8 people are basically nothing more than glorified lobbies given a 3D space. There's a huge difference between the towns in WoW where they are seamnlessly integrated with the game world and the towns in GW/Vindictus where the only thing you can do is walk around.
They are at most MORPGS, although A-net decided to call GW a CORPG.
Yeah Anet may call it a MMO, but other developers and producers do call these games MMO. How is Guild Wars not a MMO, but Dynasty Warrior Online is? Makes no sense. Its all marketing scams. This is why I have issues with this discussion, and make such a big deal out of which games are/aren't MMO, because these people are milking off people
Dynasty Warrior and VINTICUS and Guikd Wars are MMO?
All of those are close enough. So is DDO. Close enough that they don't need a genre of their own.
I can't comment on Dynasty Warriors because I have not played it, but Vindictus and Guild Wars ARE NOT MMORPGs. This is coming from someone who's bought every single expansion for GW and is currently playing Vindictus. The fact that they are both 100% instanced pretty much prevents them from fulfilling the 'massively' part of the MMORPG acronym. The towns where you can see more than 8 people are basically nothing more than glorified lobbies given a 3D space. There's a huge difference between the towns in WoW where they are seamnlessly integrated with the game world and the towns in GW/Vindictus where the only thing you can do is walk around.
They are at most MORPGS, although A-net decided to call GW a CORPG.
Yeah Anet may call it a MMO, but other developers and producers do call these games MMO. How is Guild Wars not a MMO, but Dynasty Warrior Online is? Makes no sense. Its all marketing scams. This is why I have issues with this discussion, and make such a big deal out of which games are/aren't MMO, because these people are milking off people
It's true. A-net proved with Guild Wars that instanced CORPGs can do fine without having a monthly fee. Hence why all the recent heavily instanced MORPGs released are going free2play, because people realized there's no point in paying a monthly fee for co-op rpgs.
A Real MMORPG should be Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. If it loses one part then it stops being an MMORPG.
WoW style Intanced Dungeons or instanced "BattleGrounds" contradicts the Massively Multiplayer part. If the game is infested with instances then it is not a Massively Multiplayer.
Auction Houses also hurt the Massively part; you will ask "why?" and I will answer you.... Auction House eliminated a big part of MMORPGs. It is when you communicate with other players to set a deal. Player-to-Player communication is a key in what a Massively Multiplayer is all about. Not only Combat should be Massive but the Player Interaction in Economics should be massive. If you get what you want communicating with a Program called the Auction House and you get the best prices of a specific piece of armor in a split of a second then why the heck do you want to interact with other players to look for a good deal? That auction house destroyed what was available in Massive games before.
Quest Driven Solo Content: Having 90% of the game Solo Friendly forces it to be a Single Player game and there's nothing Massive about a game you can solo all the way.
Dangerous World: Being in a dangerous world not only improve the massive part because you have to band together to survive (hence massive multiplayer) but it also improves the Role Playing part as well.
No Insta Traveling: Insta Traveling makes the worlds small. If a player can jump from part of the world to another far away part in a split of a second... the world is trivialized and is never a mssive world. Also, you lose the player-based traveling skill which were available on EverQuest... by making players, and only players, being able to boost your traveling you create a player-to-player interaction which, again, makes the game leans towards the Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing game because You're Interaction with players.
Immersion: Immersion improves on Role Playing and if you don't improve on immersion and just make a gamish-game then you lose the RP part.
These are just some of the points of what I believe makes an MMROPG an MMORPG. I don't consider a lot of MMORPGs MMORPGs... But I don't give a rats ass what you think. I know for sure I don't like these games and I stopped waiting for a decent one because I know the good old days are gone and are not coming back. Today is for today's kids just enjoy it because it's not going to last. But your MMORPGs now adays are a piece of shit.
Dynasty Warrior and VINTICUS and Guikd Wars are MMO?
All of those are close enough. So is DDO. Close enough that they don't need a genre of their own.
I can't comment on Dynasty Warriors because I have not played it, but Vindictus and Guild Wars ARE NOT MMORPGs. This is coming from someone who's bought every single expansion for GW and is currently playing Vindictus. The fact that they are both 100% instanced pretty much prevents them from fulfilling the 'massively' part of the MMORPG acronym. The towns where you can see more than 8 people are basically nothing more than glorified lobbies given a 3D space. There's a huge difference between the towns in WoW where they are seamnlessly integrated with the game world and the towns in GW/Vindictus where the only thing you can do is walk around.
They are at most MORPGS, although A-net decided to call GW a CORPG.
Yeah Anet may call it a MMO, but other developers and producers do call these games MMO. How is Guild Wars not a MMO, but Dynasty Warrior Online is? Makes no sense. Its all marketing scams. This is why I have issues with this discussion, and make such a big deal out of which games are/aren't MMO, because these people are milking off people
It really isn't that complicated...
If the significant majority of the world is persistent and shared between lots of people, then it is an MMO. If this game has RPG mechanics, then it is an MMORPG.
You can apply this litmus test to anything and it's easy to see what isn't and is an MMORPG.
Is the majority of Guild Wars persistent and shared? NO. It's not an MMORPG.
It really doesn't matter if some company "chooses" to call their game an MMORPG for marketing purposes. The definition that has pretty much been agreed upon since UO is that an MMORPG has to have a persistent shared world with lots of people.
After being through a few MMO releases over the past 5 years I've heard this phrase used many many times and its been cropping up again in the SW:TOR forum. But everyone that uses it has a different idea of what a real MMORPG is it can be a sandbox like UO or a heavily group grinding based game like Everquest or a hybrid of the two like Asherons Call or a three faction PvP game like DAOC or a quest heavy game like World Of Warcraft and Everquest 2 or inter-corporation polictics, exploration, galactic PVP game as in EVE. Now as I wasn't there at the creation of the graphical Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying game as I came in in 2007 I wonder was there an actual template that defines what a real MMORPG is or is this just a meaningless phrease used to denegrate modern "MMORPG's"?
Personally I've had some great experiences in modern MMORPG's that I could not get in any other type of online game like the feeling I'm immersed in an online world with thousands of other players, (when I first played WoW I wanted to explore all the world do all the quests and play with as many people as I could, same with EQ2 and now SW:TOR), roleplaying with others has been a surprisingly enjoyable experience, crafting objects that are actually useful and needed by my guild or friends in game, going on adventures around the world with others and having to be organised in a team to survive what ever the world threw at us, being a successful trader within a real economy, having a home that I can hang my treasures and trophies the list goes on. So now I'm thinking I've never actually played a real MMORPG and I'm wondering what else is there other than going full simulation like Wurm Online.
We all seem to have different ideas of what makes an MMORPG and the "its not a real MMORPG" seems to come from disgrungled vets who have seen the genre evolve away from what they imagined it would be a decade or so ago, but that happens with entertainment and Art in general. Thomas Edison said about his new invention “I don’t want the phonograph sold for amusement purposes. It is not a toy. It is for business purposes only.” what would he think about the iPod and I feel that many of the users of this "its not a real MMORPG" phrase feel the same about there precious MMORPG games.
In SW:TOR I feel much more immersed in the world around me than I have with previous games, it has come alive with a myriad of different characters and places to meet and see that it makes me want to see and hear it all just like WoW and EQ2 and when I'm grouped it feels like I'm in an adventure film with all the dialogue choices and fast paced action. But it is to some a lobby based dungeon/quest/PvP grinder though I feel I'm playing a Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Game with all the different people to play with and against, places to see and things to do and with game dev's only having a certain amount of time, resources and funds I understand that no game is going to be all things to all men but why do players think that they should be? surely there is an MMORPG out there for you and if not patience is a virtue you know, there are plentry of other things to fill your time rather than bemoaning the demise of the genre.
When you quoted Thomas Edison you lost me, Thomas Edison was a hack, so anything he said is worthless, he gained fame off the work of others - people like Nicolas Tesla.
As for what a real MMORPG is? Well SWTOR is not one. That I can tell you.
Dont really care if Edison was a crack or not, but he was very influential in the latter part of the Industrial Revolution so he gets a pass in my book. Tesla on the other hand was an idiot savant and jis AC electical ideas were not only stupid but byond unsafe its the reason why his inventions never gained traction, not to mention he was an eccentric and considered a mad scientist. Theres a reason why people like him and Howard Huges never went mainstream.
With that being said SWTOR is an MMO regardless if you hate the game or not and its pretty obvious you hate the game so theres no reason to to undo what it obviously is.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
If you have any question about what mmorpg means, you might want to review the "Development of EQ".
The redefinition game is ultimately futile when dealing with a field as varied as this one.
WoW style Intanced Dungeons or instanced "BattleGrounds" contradicts the Massively Multiplayer part. If the game is infested with instances then it is not a Massively Multiplayer.
If you've ever found yourself seriously proposing that WoW is not an MMO, for example, you might need to just stop treating abstract concepts as concretes. You're splitting hairs and indulging your pedantry.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
When you quoted Thomas Edison you lost me, Thomas Edison was a hack, so anything he said is worthless, he gained fame off the work of others - people like Nicolas Tesla.
As for what a real MMORPG is? Well SWTOR is not one. That I can tell you.
~QFE
Examples of REAL MMOs previously done:
~DAOC
~EQ pre-Planes of Power
~SWG Pre-NGE, maybe even Pre-CU
~Shadowbane
~UO
Instances detracts from the "open world" of what an MMO is. ZERO instancing is EVER allowed!
Hand-Holding linear questing destroys immersion, and eventually turns into a grind of Exp per hour (EPH).
Uninteresting generic itemization destroys any sort of uniqueness to character customization.
Enjoy your hand-holding SWTOR, it won't last long. People don't want that old Wow-Clone model anymore.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
MMORPG for me, meaning my opinion, and it will be my criteria to decide if i will or will not play that game
1. open world acceccible by anyone, anytime, without instancing, without instant travel
reason: makes it more immersive to play when not only can you kill monsters, but you also have to deal with competition, its like a form of pvp without the bloodshed, well maybe a bit of blodshed... ok maybe alot...:), also, interacive environment, cuting down trees building cities, etc... is not necessary but a bonus.
A MMORPG is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game".
Thus it would have to be:
- Massively Multiplayer : Not just multiplayer, but massively multiplayer, i.e. there have to be at least hundreds, if not thousands of other players in the same world with you.
- Online : The game is played in the internet
- Role-Playing : The game is based on character properties and statistics, rather than on the reflexes etc of the gamer. Unlike a shooter, where the power of the game character depends mostly upon the amount of physical skills with the game controls the gamer possesses. Using a roleplaying rather than a shooter control allows for better tolerance in respect to ping.
- Game : There is no actual gain from the program; it is art and entertainment.
If you have any question about what mmorpg means, you might want to review the "Development of EQ".
The redefinition game is ultimately futile when dealing with a field as varied as this one.
WoW style Intanced Dungeons or instanced "BattleGrounds" contradicts the Massively Multiplayer part. If the game is infested with instances then it is not a Massively Multiplayer.
If you've ever found yourself seriously proposing that WoW is not an MMO, for example, you might need to just stop treating abstract concepts as concretes. You're splitting hairs and indulging your pedantry.
WoW is still an MMOrpg ,but almost everything Blizz did with this game since Vanilla - like prioritizing instance gameplay, making Arenas , making cross-server LFG tools with auto-teleportation, phasing , redesinging game so players spent 90% in instances ,etc - all of this imho is pushing WoW outside of MMOrpg sphere.
Don't get me wrong WoW is still mmorpg ,but imo barely.
That does NOT change the fact that this is kind of gameplay ALOT of people like and even prefer.
They just (propably cause many not even tried) not like original mmorpg concept.
10 or 20 years from now , there will be clear distinction between diffrent types of mmorpg's.
Same was with strategies and rts.
Firstly RTS games were just thrown into same genre as strategies, but after some years it evolved into whole diffrent genre.
Same will happen in mmorpg , genre is too big , playerbase and it's expectations vary too much , cause of WoW whole genre was in 'freezer' - it will start evolving faster and laungague and acronyms will come later
After all EvE Online and for example Vindictus are totally diffrent kind of games, almost nothing in common.
MMORPG - seamless ,persistant world, players are playing a chosen role in fictional "community" (actually it does not need to have levels and things like that to be RPG - common misconception , same game can have levels but not be rpg at all - see BF3 , CoD ,etc)
According to many people the only real mmorpg's are a hardcore group forcing games, the problem with those games is that'
after a short vile people have formed guilds that does not have any social action with other people other than puting up items on sale in the auctionhouse and raiding with their guildmates.
That is what many people find the only real mmorpg.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
An mmo to me is a game that has a great landmass and a majority of that landmass in the game is persistant IE non-instanced and on that great persistant landmass there should be able to be at least a thousand players logged in at the same time. This great landmass does not have to be seamless.
SWTOR fits so it's an mmo but still a crappy one for other reasons (altough a good bioware rpg game).
If you have any question about what mmorpg means, you might want to review the "Development of EQ".
The redefinition game is ultimately futile when dealing with a field as varied as this one.
WoW style Intanced Dungeons or instanced "BattleGrounds" contradicts the Massively Multiplayer part. If the game is infested with instances then it is not a Massively Multiplayer.
If you've ever found yourself seriously proposing that WoW is not an MMO, for example, you might need to just stop treating abstract concepts as concretes. You're splitting hairs and indulging your pedantry.
WoW is still an MMOrpg ,but almost everything Blizz did with this game since Vanilla - like prioritizing instance gameplay, making Arenas , making cross-server LFG tools with auto-teleportation, phasing , redesinging game so players spent 90% in instances ,etc - all of this imho is pushing WoW outside of MMOrpg sphere.
Don't get me wrong WoW is still mmorpg ,but imo barely.
....
Yes.
It's funny because the post-WoW themepark philosophy has basically been:
"Let's hide the fact that this is an MMORPG as much as possible!"
And as you say, this even applies to WoW itself. In exception for things like public quests, rifts, and invasions, almost all new features added to modern themepark MMORPGs are just standard multiplayer things, i.e. instanced dungeons, PvP, and soon scenarios. Or even crazier, things that deliberately undermine the persistent world.
It's like developers see the persistent world as a "problem" that they have to overcome somehow. For example...
Hmmm...players are complaining that the world never changes when they do their quests. I know! Let's make it so players at different stages of quests just get shunted off to different instances of the world which reflect their current quest state.
Yeah, you succeed in making the players feel like they are changing the world, but you do so at the cost of isolating them from other players...making the world less shared which is a key aspect of an MMORPG. This also goes along with...
Hmmm...players are complaining that there aren't enough mobs for them, they say that other players keep taking them. I know! Let's make a ton of separate shared instances for each zone so that there are only so many players in one instance at a time.
Yeah, you make sure that players always have enough mobs, but you do so at the cost of making the world feel much more empty and less shared.
A MMORPG is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game".
Thus it would have to be:
- Massively Multiplayer : Not just multiplayer, but massively multiplayer, i.e. there have to be at least hundreds, if not thousands of other players in the same world with you.
- Online : The game is played in the internet
- Role-Playing : The game is based on character properties and statistics, rather than on the reflexes etc of the gamer. Unlike a shooter, where the power of the game character depends mostly upon the amount of physical skills with the game controls the gamer possesses. Using a roleplaying rather than a shooter control allows for better tolerance in respect to ping.
- Game : There is no actual gain from the program; it is art and entertainment.
A MMORPG is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game". Thus it would have to be: - Massively Multiplayer : Not just multiplayer, but massively multiplayer, i.e. there have to be at least hundreds, if not thousands of other players in the same world with you. - Online : The game is played in the internet - Role-Playing : The game is based on character properties and statistics, rather than on the reflexes etc of the gamer. Unlike a shooter, where the power of the game character depends mostly upon the amount of physical skills with the game controls the gamer possesses. Using a roleplaying rather than a shooter control allows for better tolerance in respect to ping. - Game : There is no actual gain from the program; it is art and entertainment.
All of this, especially the highlighted.
That red part is not true at all. Because that would mean that Skyrim isn't a rpg
WoW is still an MMOrpg ,but almost everything Blizz did with this game since Vanilla - like prioritizing instance gameplay, making Arenas , making cross-server LFG tools with auto-teleportation, phasing , redesinging game so players spent 90% in instances ,etc - all of this imho is pushing WoW outside of MMOrpg sphere.
It is more like WOW is redefining what MMORPG means. Put it this way, do you really think at some point, if WOW goes down this road further (and it is, they just put in LFR, and they will have instance group quest called scenarios in the next expansion), the industry, and the market will refer to it as something else?
All this discussion is just moot. No one is going to change language use just because of some discussions on forums.
When you quoted Thomas Edison you lost me, Thomas Edison was a hack, so anything he said is worthless, he gained fame off the work of others - people like Nicolas Tesla.
As for what a real MMORPG is? Well SWTOR is not one. That I can tell you.
~QFE
Examples of REAL MMOs previously done:
~DAOC
~EQ pre-Planes of Power
~SWG Pre-NGE, maybe even Pre-CU
~Shadowbane
~UO
Instances detracts from the "open world" of what an MMO is. ZERO instancing is EVER allowed!
Hand-Holding linear questing destroys immersion, and eventually turns into a grind of Exp per hour (EPH).
Uninteresting generic itemization destroys any sort of uniqueness to character customization.
Enjoy your hand-holding SWTOR, it won't last long. People don't want that old Wow-Clone model anymore.
Hmmm, based on pre-order numbers alone, as well as the number of servers that are high-pop, I'd say you are wrong and people want TOR-style gameplay way more than the other games you mentioned. Hell, 2 of the games you listed are shut down, are they not?
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
A MMORPG is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game".
Thus it would have to be:
- Massively Multiplayer : Not just multiplayer, but massively multiplayer, i.e. there have to be at least hundreds, if not thousands of other players in the same world with you.
- Online : The game is played in the internet
- Role-Playing : The game is based on character properties and statistics, rather than on the reflexes etc of the gamer. Unlike a shooter, where the power of the game character depends mostly upon the amount of physical skills with the game controls the gamer possesses. Using a roleplaying rather than a shooter control allows for better tolerance in respect to ping.
- Game : There is no actual gain from the program; it is art and entertainment.
All of this, especially the highlighted.
That red part is not true at all. Because that would mean that Skyrim isn't a rpg
Skyrim has and relies heavily statistics.. try and fight a mob on hardest difficulty at level 50 with a weapon you have not leveled and perked up in.
The trend is moving from Massive to "Moderately Populated Channels", Multiplayer to "Small Group/Solo Instances", Online to "Undergoing Unscheduled Maintenance", and then dropping the "RPG" part altogether.
I'm not the biggest fan of this trend.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Comments
Did Dynasty Warrior become massive at some point? When I played it there were no shared worldspace -- heck there wasn't even multiplayer (splitscreen at most.)
Guild Wars is pretty damn close to a MMORPG, I'd say. For a long time, I insisted it was an MMORPG actually. But it's realistically in a grey area due to how fragmented the world spaces are and how little RPG there is (very little vertical progression.)
(Although oddly less fragmented world spaces than many MMORPGs. If I'm in a city in GW I can always join a friend. But if I'm in Org in WOW and my friend is in another realm (another instance, effectively), I'm prevented from joining them without a fee and a long wait. Only games like EVE (of which there are extremely few) have a truly singular shared world space, and we're certainly not going to pretend EVE is the only "one true MMORPG".)
No clue what Vindictus (Vinticus?) is.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Actually yeah this is probably the main reason it's not considered a MMORPG.
Just like a game which is predominantly about FPS-aiming but has RPG elements is called a MMOFPS (Planetside), but a game which has strong RPG elements and happens to have FPS-aiming is called an RPG (Skyrim).
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
All of those are close enough. So is DDO. Close enough that they don't need a genre of their own.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I can't comment on Dynasty Warriors because I have not played it, but Vindictus and Guild Wars ARE NOT MMORPGs. This is coming from someone who's bought every single expansion for GW and is currently playing Vindictus. The fact that they are both 100% instanced pretty much prevents them from fulfilling the 'massively' part of the MMORPG acronym. The towns where you can see more than 8 people are basically nothing more than glorified lobbies given a 3D space. There's a huge difference between the towns in WoW where they are seamnlessly integrated with the game world and the towns in GW/Vindictus where the only thing you can do is walk around.
They are at most MORPGS, although A-net decided to call GW a CORPG.
Dynasty Warrior and VINTICUS and Guikd Wars are MMO?All of those are close enough. So is DDO. Close enough that they don't need a genre of their own.
I can't comment on Dynasty Warriors because I have not played it, but Vindictus and Guild Wars ARE NOT MMORPGs. This is coming from someone who's bought every single expansion for GW and is currently playing Vindictus. The fact that they are both 100% instanced pretty much prevents them from fulfilling the 'massively' part of the MMORPG acronym. The towns where you can see more than 8 people are basically nothing more than glorified lobbies given a 3D space. There's a huge difference between the towns in WoW where they are seamnlessly integrated with the game world and the towns in GW/Vindictus where the only thing you can do is walk around.
They are at most MORPGS, although A-net decided to call GW a CORPG.
Yeah Anet may call it a MMO, but other developers and producers do call these games MMO. How is Guild Wars not a MMO, but Dynasty Warrior Online is? Makes no sense. Its all marketing scams. This is why I have issues with this discussion, and make such a big deal out of which games are/aren't MMO, because these people are milking off peoplePhilosophy of MMO Game Design
It's true. A-net proved with Guild Wars that instanced CORPGs can do fine without having a monthly fee. Hence why all the recent heavily instanced MORPGs released are going free2play, because people realized there's no point in paying a monthly fee for co-op rpgs.
A Real MMORPG should be Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. If it loses one part then it stops being an MMORPG.
WoW style Intanced Dungeons or instanced "BattleGrounds" contradicts the Massively Multiplayer part. If the game is infested with instances then it is not a Massively Multiplayer.
Auction Houses also hurt the Massively part; you will ask "why?" and I will answer you.... Auction House eliminated a big part of MMORPGs. It is when you communicate with other players to set a deal. Player-to-Player communication is a key in what a Massively Multiplayer is all about. Not only Combat should be Massive but the Player Interaction in Economics should be massive. If you get what you want communicating with a Program called the Auction House and you get the best prices of a specific piece of armor in a split of a second then why the heck do you want to interact with other players to look for a good deal? That auction house destroyed what was available in Massive games before.
Quest Driven Solo Content: Having 90% of the game Solo Friendly forces it to be a Single Player game and there's nothing Massive about a game you can solo all the way.
Dangerous World: Being in a dangerous world not only improve the massive part because you have to band together to survive (hence massive multiplayer) but it also improves the Role Playing part as well.
No Insta Traveling: Insta Traveling makes the worlds small. If a player can jump from part of the world to another far away part in a split of a second... the world is trivialized and is never a mssive world. Also, you lose the player-based traveling skill which were available on EverQuest... by making players, and only players, being able to boost your traveling you create a player-to-player interaction which, again, makes the game leans towards the Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing game because You're Interaction with players.
Immersion: Immersion improves on Role Playing and if you don't improve on immersion and just make a gamish-game then you lose the RP part.
These are just some of the points of what I believe makes an MMROPG an MMORPG. I don't consider a lot of MMORPGs MMORPGs... But I don't give a rats ass what you think. I know for sure I don't like these games and I stopped waiting for a decent one because I know the good old days are gone and are not coming back. Today is for today's kids just enjoy it because it's not going to last. But your MMORPGs now adays are a piece of shit.
It really isn't that complicated...
If the significant majority of the world is persistent and shared between lots of people, then it is an MMO. If this game has RPG mechanics, then it is an MMORPG.
You can apply this litmus test to anything and it's easy to see what isn't and is an MMORPG.
Is the majority of Guild Wars persistent and shared? NO. It's not an MMORPG.
It really doesn't matter if some company "chooses" to call their game an MMORPG for marketing purposes. The definition that has pretty much been agreed upon since UO is that an MMORPG has to have a persistent shared world with lots of people.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Dont really care if Edison was a crack or not, but he was very influential in the latter part of the Industrial Revolution so he gets a pass in my book. Tesla on the other hand was an idiot savant and jis AC electical ideas were not only stupid but byond unsafe its the reason why his inventions never gained traction, not to mention he was an eccentric and considered a mad scientist. Theres a reason why people like him and Howard Huges never went mainstream.
With that being said SWTOR is an MMO regardless if you hate the game or not and its pretty obvious you hate the game so theres no reason to to undo what it obviously is.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
If you have any question about what mmorpg means, you might want to review the "Development of EQ".
The redefinition game is ultimately futile when dealing with a field as varied as this one.
WoW style Intanced Dungeons or instanced "BattleGrounds" contradicts the Massively Multiplayer part. If the game is infested with instances then it is not a Massively Multiplayer.
If you've ever found yourself seriously proposing that WoW is not an MMO, for example, you might need to just stop treating abstract concepts as concretes. You're splitting hairs and indulging your pedantry.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
~QFE
Examples of REAL MMOs previously done:
~DAOC
~EQ pre-Planes of Power
~SWG Pre-NGE, maybe even Pre-CU
~Shadowbane
~UO
Instances detracts from the "open world" of what an MMO is. ZERO instancing is EVER allowed!
Hand-Holding linear questing destroys immersion, and eventually turns into a grind of Exp per hour (EPH).
Uninteresting generic itemization destroys any sort of uniqueness to character customization.
Enjoy your hand-holding SWTOR, it won't last long. People don't want that old Wow-Clone model anymore.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Great. You can pretty much quit the genre now.
A MMORPG is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game".
Thus it would have to be:
- Massively Multiplayer : Not just multiplayer, but massively multiplayer, i.e. there have to be at least hundreds, if not thousands of other players in the same world with you.
- Online : The game is played in the internet
- Role-Playing : The game is based on character properties and statistics, rather than on the reflexes etc of the gamer. Unlike a shooter, where the power of the game character depends mostly upon the amount of physical skills with the game controls the gamer possesses. Using a roleplaying rather than a shooter control allows for better tolerance in respect to ping.
- Game : There is no actual gain from the program; it is art and entertainment.
WoW is still an MMOrpg ,but almost everything Blizz did with this game since Vanilla - like prioritizing instance gameplay, making Arenas , making cross-server LFG tools with auto-teleportation, phasing , redesinging game so players spent 90% in instances ,etc - all of this imho is pushing WoW outside of MMOrpg sphere.
Don't get me wrong WoW is still mmorpg ,but imo barely.
That does NOT change the fact that this is kind of gameplay ALOT of people like and even prefer.
They just (propably cause many not even tried) not like original mmorpg concept.
10 or 20 years from now , there will be clear distinction between diffrent types of mmorpg's.
Same was with strategies and rts.
Firstly RTS games were just thrown into same genre as strategies, but after some years it evolved into whole diffrent genre.
Same will happen in mmorpg , genre is too big , playerbase and it's expectations vary too much , cause of WoW whole genre was in 'freezer' - it will start evolving faster and laungague and acronyms will come later
After all EvE Online and for example Vindictus are totally diffrent kind of games, almost nothing in common.
MMORPG - seamless ,persistant world, players are playing a chosen role in fictional "community" (actually it does not need to have levels and things like that to be RPG - common misconception , same game can have levels but not be rpg at all - see BF3 , CoD ,etc)
I think it is a very legit mmo.
According to many people the only real mmorpg's are a hardcore group forcing games, the problem with those games is that'
after a short vile people have formed guilds that does not have any social action with other people other than puting up items on sale in the auctionhouse and raiding with their guildmates.
That is what many people find the only real mmorpg.
Let's ask Garriot?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
An mmo to me is a game that has a great landmass and a majority of that landmass in the game is persistant IE non-instanced and on that great persistant landmass there should be able to be at least a thousand players logged in at the same time. This great landmass does not have to be seamless.
SWTOR fits so it's an mmo but still a crappy one for other reasons (altough a good bioware rpg game).
Yes.
It's funny because the post-WoW themepark philosophy has basically been:
"Let's hide the fact that this is an MMORPG as much as possible!"
And as you say, this even applies to WoW itself. In exception for things like public quests, rifts, and invasions, almost all new features added to modern themepark MMORPGs are just standard multiplayer things, i.e. instanced dungeons, PvP, and soon scenarios. Or even crazier, things that deliberately undermine the persistent world.
It's like developers see the persistent world as a "problem" that they have to overcome somehow. For example...
Hmmm...players are complaining that the world never changes when they do their quests. I know! Let's make it so players at different stages of quests just get shunted off to different instances of the world which reflect their current quest state.
Yeah, you succeed in making the players feel like they are changing the world, but you do so at the cost of isolating them from other players...making the world less shared which is a key aspect of an MMORPG. This also goes along with...
Hmmm...players are complaining that there aren't enough mobs for them, they say that other players keep taking them. I know! Let's make a ton of separate shared instances for each zone so that there are only so many players in one instance at a time.
Yeah, you make sure that players always have enough mobs, but you do so at the cost of making the world feel much more empty and less shared.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
All of this, especially the highlighted.
All of this, especially the highlighted.
That red part is not true at all. Because that would mean that Skyrim isn't a rpgPhilosophy of MMO Game Design
It is more like WOW is redefining what MMORPG means. Put it this way, do you really think at some point, if WOW goes down this road further (and it is, they just put in LFR, and they will have instance group quest called scenarios in the next expansion), the industry, and the market will refer to it as something else?
All this discussion is just moot. No one is going to change language use just because of some discussions on forums.
Hmmm, based on pre-order numbers alone, as well as the number of servers that are high-pop, I'd say you are wrong and people want TOR-style gameplay way more than the other games you mentioned. Hell, 2 of the games you listed are shut down, are they not?
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
Skyrim has and relies heavily statistics.. try and fight a mob on hardest difficulty at level 50 with a weapon you have not leveled and perked up in.
The trend is moving from Massive to "Moderately Populated Channels", Multiplayer to "Small Group/Solo Instances", Online to "Undergoing Unscheduled Maintenance", and then dropping the "RPG" part altogether.
I'm not the biggest fan of this trend.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.