I think it's all because of the emergance of F2P and online games wanting to cash in on that model. It's far easier to tempt people to play a game with a cash shop if you call your game an MMO, because we're already used to MMO's having cash shops.
Perfect example is WoT which calls itself the worlds first tank MMO, which it clearly isn't unless you want to redefine every FPS game that ever existed as well.
I think it was a very clever marketing strategy to justify the cash shops and people fell for it.
Because it's what keeps us PVP people out of your carebear MMO guild. If it weren't for MOBA, there'd be a lot more pressure on game devs to implement open world pvp, then you carebears would have a really bad day with surprise pvp encounters at every turn.
Essentially the first MOBA were literally scaled back RTS mods. I have been trying to figure out the connect to being a MMO. I guess it's just the demographics.
There is a distinct overlap in the markets, scale of the games, and the business models.
Also, most RTS are single player or very limited "versus" multiplayer, whereas MOBAs are traditionally designed for online, team-based, multiplayer gameplay.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Nothing wrong with lobbies, visual or otherwise. Who says MMO's can't have them?
Agreed. When it comes to endgame, WOW - the most popular example of "MMO" - is essentially a city-themed lobby where player group for their raids.
Then you haven't played WoW. If that was truly all that WoW was, then i seriously doubt it would have managed to sustain multiple millions of subscribers over the years, sure i have no doubt that some people just hang around the auction house between dungeons, but, like PVP'ers, they don't represent the whole of the playerbase. There is also the whole Raiding thing in WoW, raiders actually represent a minority of the playerbase too, something less than 10% apparently, one of the reasons why Blizzard introduced the LFR tool was because less than 3% of the players were participating in raiding. Most of the players aren't hanging around cities, they are out there playing the game, with legion now live no doubt that is even more so.
on some of these posts with people suggesting that 'people' seem to think anything that is multiplayer is MMO. it appears to me that those 'people' who think that are actually companies who suggest it first. I could be wrong there but the whole debate over what is or is not an MMO seems to have its source in a few companies 'suggesting' without actually saying it that their games MMOs (aka The Division).
I think people far to easily assume all ideas, thoughts and perspectives just grow naturally from 'people' that is not always the case
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I truly don't understand why it bothers people. When looking at games to play, I read and do a bit of research so that I know what I'm getting into. If I want a MOBA and see a game called an MMO but is a MOBA. I play it. I'm unconcerned about the terminology. There are a lot bigger things to worry about: gameplay, options, ui, graphics, bugs..... A term, meh.
I get it that it is a bit of an annoyance, but, such a minor one. We have a lot bigger fish to fry. mmmmm fish
Yeah but would it really fly in most other ways? If you bought a can of soda and it was water should you have to do research if it's water? The only reason it's not bigger issue is that it's games and nobody who matters cares. Not to mention that the MMO term has a short history and people just assume any online game is an MMO.
My definition of a MMO is online persistent world that is multiplayer. The number of players is debatable and why the acronym is bad in the first place. It was always about the world being their to log into that wasn't a session or match. It's why Planetside is a MMOFPS and Call of Duty is a FPS.
MMOs can have a visual lobby, but a lobby is not itself an MMO.
That argument is moot.
You say that yet many MMORPGs are little more than chatrooms with graphics. How ironic.
Would you agree that there is a bit of a difference between a lobby that is a world and one that is an actual chatroom, showing only text?
It depends on how they are used. MxM's lobby zone is a far more social environment than most MMO city hubs, but it's little more than a graphical lobby. Hubs in MMOs aren't much more than a chatroom with only text, as there isn't much in the 3D panel that is geared toward social interaction. In that regard, the social hub of APB: Reloaded (max 100 players to a PVP zone) is far more "MMO-ish" than most MMO hubs. There and Second Life are little more than lobbies and they're far more of an MMO than the elaborate 3D worlds of most EQ/WOW-style MMOs.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
MMOs can have a visual lobby, but a lobby is not itself an MMO.
That argument is moot.
You say that yet many MMORPGs are little more than chatrooms with graphics. How ironic.
Many MMORPGs "chatrooms" are worlds where characters can run around and do stuff in the game. If you are referring to titles that are more simply a virtual lobby that links into an instance then you are not talking about an MMO, but instead a CORPG like Guild Wars 1.
Instead of misusing the term "ironic", try and make a valid point.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Would you agree that there is a bit of a difference between a lobby that is a world and one that is an actual chatroom, showing only text?
Yes. The chatroom is more convenient, required less resources, and probably can fit more players, because you don't need 100 graphical toons to show up on screen all at once.
The world is a lot less massive, in terms of how many players can conveniently communicate, than a chatroom.
Would you agree that there is a bit of a difference between a lobby that is a world and one that is an actual chatroom, showing only text?
Yes. The chatroom is more convenient, required less resources, and probably can fit more players, because you don't need 100 graphical toons to show up on screen all at once.
The world is a lot less massive, in terms of how many players can conveniently communicate, than a chatroom.
Yeah because speaking in a chatroom to people with hundreds or thousands in it wouldn't be a cluster.
Would you agree that there is a bit of a difference between a lobby that is a world and one that is an actual chatroom, showing only text?
Yes. The chatroom is more convenient, required less resources, and probably can fit more players, because you don't need 100 graphical toons to show up on screen all at once.
The world is a lot less massive, in terms of how many players can conveniently communicate, than a chatroom.
Most chat servers are separate from game world servers and can process a very massive number of users at once just fine. That's why cross-zone and cross-server chat has become increasingly prevalent.
Conversing with one another is not an actual problem nor valid excuse in the least.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
on some of these posts with people suggesting that 'people' seem to think anything that is multiplayer is MMO. it appears to me that those 'people' who think that are actually companies who suggest it first. I could be wrong there but the whole debate over what is or is not an MMO seems to have its source in a few companies 'suggesting' without actually saying it that their games MMOs (aka The Division).
I think people far to easily assume all ideas, thoughts and perspectives just grow naturally from 'people' that is not always the case
Well the use of mmo is overloaded. So people should stop using it unless they mean the broad thing where many types of games are included. If you mean MOBA, say MOBA. If you mean mmoRPG, say mmoRPG. If you mean RTS, say RTS.
If you people actually want to it be confusing them keep using mmo. Just don't bitch about it when someone uses in a way you don't like.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
The question is what number of players does a game need to support to be classified as a Massively Multiplayer Online game? 100? 1,000? 10,000? Playing Air Warrior, Gemstone and NWN (AOL) didn't feel very 'massive' yet are considered, by many, to be some of the first graphical MMOs
That kind of question is subject to the capability and limitations of the time in which it's asked.
Hence why early titles with the MMO moniker are smaller scale, because relative to other titles of their time they were massive. Whereas now that relative ratio has gone up quite a lot.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
The question is what number of players does a game need to support to be classified as a Massively Multiplayer Online game? 100? 1,000? 10,000? Playing Air Warrior, Gemstone and NWN (AOL) didn't feel very 'massive' yet are considered, by many, to be some of the first graphical MMOs
The term MMO was applied to them retroactively since it wasn't a term until Garriot started using it to describe UO.
So the real answer would be "whatever number UO supported." Anything less than that is at best MMO-like
"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
on some of these posts with people suggesting that 'people' seem to think anything that is multiplayer is MMO. it appears to me that those 'people' who think that are actually companies who suggest it first. I could be wrong there but the whole debate over what is or is not an MMO seems to have its source in a few companies 'suggesting' without actually saying it that their games MMOs (aka The Division).
I think people far to easily assume all ideas, thoughts and perspectives just grow naturally from 'people' that is not always the case
Well the use of mmo is overloaded. So people should stop using it unless they mean the broad thing where many types of games are included. If you mean MOBA, say MOBA. If you mean mmoRPG, say mmoRPG. If you mean RTS, say RTS.
If you people actually want to it be confusing them keep using mmo. Just don't bitch about it when someone uses in a way you don't like.
The problem is that there is a legitimate use of MMO that describes MMORPGs + MMOFPS + MMORTS, etc. - just not all the other non-MMO online multiplayer games that get lumped into the term. Not to mention that when spoken aloud everyone would rather use a 3 syllable word instead of 6 syllables
"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
on some of these posts with people suggesting that 'people' seem to think anything that is multiplayer is MMO. it appears to me that those 'people' who think that are actually companies who suggest it first. I could be wrong there but the whole debate over what is or is not an MMO seems to have its source in a few companies 'suggesting' without actually saying it that their games MMOs (aka The Division).
I think people far to easily assume all ideas, thoughts and perspectives just grow naturally from 'people' that is not always the case
Well the use of mmo is overloaded. So people should stop using it unless they mean the broad thing where many types of games are included. If you mean MOBA, say MOBA. If you mean mmoRPG, say mmoRPG. If you mean RTS, say RTS.
If you people actually want to it be confusing them keep using mmo. Just don't bitch about it when someone uses in a way you don't like.
The problem is that there is a legitimate use of MMO that describes MMORPGs + MMOFPS + MMORTS, etc. - just not all the other non-MMO online multiplayer games that get lumped into the term. Not to mention that when spoken aloud everyone would rather use a 3 syllable word instead of 6 syllables
Then use can use the correct term. Are you so lazy that you need to type mmo when you mean mmoRPG?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Comments
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Perfect example is WoT which calls itself the worlds first tank MMO, which it clearly isn't unless you want to redefine every FPS game that ever existed as well.
I think it was a very clever marketing strategy to justify the cash shops and people fell for it.
Also, most RTS are single player or very limited "versus" multiplayer, whereas MOBAs are traditionally designed for online, team-based, multiplayer gameplay.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Most of the players aren't hanging around cities, they are out there playing the game, with legion now live no doubt that is even more so.
I think people far to easily assume all ideas, thoughts and perspectives just grow naturally from 'people' that is not always the case
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
My definition of a MMO is online persistent world that is multiplayer. The number of players is debatable and why the acronym is bad in the first place. It was always about the world being their to log into that wasn't a session or match. It's why Planetside is a MMOFPS and Call of Duty is a FPS.
VG
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Instead of misusing the term "ironic", try and make a valid point.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
The world is a lot less massive, in terms of how many players can conveniently communicate, than a chatroom.
Conversing with one another is not an actual problem nor valid excuse in the least.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Well the use of mmo is overloaded. So people should stop using it unless they mean the broad thing where many types of games are included. If you mean MOBA, say MOBA. If you mean mmoRPG, say mmoRPG. If you mean RTS, say RTS.
If you people actually want to it be confusing them keep using mmo. Just don't bitch about it when someone uses in a way you don't like.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Hence why early titles with the MMO moniker are smaller scale, because relative to other titles of their time they were massive. Whereas now that relative ratio has gone up quite a lot.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
So the real answer would be "whatever number UO supported." Anything less than that is at best MMO-like
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Then use can use the correct term. Are you so lazy that you need to type mmo when you mean mmoRPG?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"