klash2def and TheScavenger are boring. They aren't bringing anything interesting to the table. Their opinions and imagined truths are stale...yet they still hide behind them.They are beginners when it comes to the art of annoyance...and that is disappointing to a degree.
Come on klash2def and TheScavenger, step up your game either in this thread or the other similar one. The lame insults...like.... talking to a wall? Calling people old?(I feel like you think that's an insult but it's like...impressive to live long enough to be considered old...) Saying they can't accept the future or change with the times? So......low tier. You both have got to do better, I won't accept this trash.
Actually, since this is klash2def's thread I mostly want klash2def to do better. TheScavenger is more like a follower/accomplice. klash2def.....do better! Show us you're not just a clown who the circus left behind! SHOW US THE TRUTH!
idk where that quote came from but I didnt say that. I personally said
people who resist change have a old way of thinking it has nothing to do
with age, its the way they think ,they think old. I've said this
several times.
Please read before trying to come for me okay thanks..
Edit: changed you to they before taken out of context to fit another narrative.
It should have been obvious that it was towards the other guy you were agreeing with.
And yes I do understand the use of you in a general context.
This is an MMO. Roughly 200 players all in the same non-instanced area fighting the same world boss.
ok decent amount of people but still even its 100 its not the 1000s of people claimed to be had. Im still waiting on the Massive part to happen. This is a good amount but if its 200 you guys are still instanced off from the other 800 something people playing with you or you are saying this shot could have been 1000 people? I doubt it. 100, 200 is decent but not massive.. not when there are supposedly MILLIONS playing the game. So again I ask where is the massive?
Massive is a old term used to help sell games at the start of the internet era. And it sucks that so many people wont let it go.. It shouldnt be this big of a deal for it to apply to new games..
"Beliefs don't change facts. Facts, if you're reasonable, should change your beliefs."
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
This is an MMO. Roughly 200 players all in the same non-instanced area fighting the same world boss.
ok decent amount of people but still even its 100 its not the 1000s of people claimed to be had. Im still waiting on the Massive part to happen. This is a good amount but if its 200 you guys are still instanced off from the other 800 something people playing with you or you are saying this shot could have been 1000 people? I doubt it. 100, 200 is decent but not massive.. not when there are supposedly MILLIONS playing the game. So again I ask where is the massive?
Massive is a old term used to help sell games at the start of the internet era. And it sucks that so many people wont let it go.. It shouldnt be this big of a deal for it to apply to new games..
yeah, back in like 1999 asheron's call could actually be considered massive it was bigger than any multiplayer game at that time. Today? Multiplayer games often match the amount of people that played at once in Asheron's Call. There are even Minecraft servers bigger or as big as many MMO servers.
So the word "massive" doesn't really have the same meaning or "feel" to it that it did a long time ago. many multiplayer games these days feel rather massive themselves.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
This is an MMO. Roughly 200 players all in the same non-instanced area fighting the same world boss.
ok decent amount of people but still even its 100 its not the 1000s of people claimed to be had. Im still waiting on the Massive part to happen. This is a good amount but if its 200 you guys are still instanced off from the other 800 something people playing with you or you are saying this shot could have been 1000 people? I doubt it. 100, 200 is decent but not massive.. not when there are supposedly MILLIONS playing the game. So again I ask where is the massive?
Massive is a old term used to help sell games at the start of the internet era. And it sucks that so many people wont let it go.. It shouldnt be this big of a deal for it to apply to new games..
It wasn't instanced, it was an open world boss. It could have been 1000 people but we happened to have roughly 200 people at the time.
Yes, because you haven't been taking a confrontational attitude with anyone who disagrees with you.
I literally laughed when I read you claim you haven't been acting all high and mighty. You've responded incredulously to anyone who disagrees with you.
Just so we're clear:
Incredulous - (adjective) unwilling or unable to believe something.
Just so you don't go off on some tangent about shit that isn't pertinent.
No the fuck I haven't you lying sack of shit. I have been having engaging debates and convos with everyone but you and one other person because you keep insulting me. You are so fragile that reading another persons opinion infuriates you to the point you have to throw insults to try to take away from my point, that's how I know I'm making sense. You just don't want to get it.
Again, its my opinion based on what I observe I don't care if you like it and damn sure dont care if you agree.. Im not going to lose any sleep, hell you can die tonight for all I care I wouldn't bat an eyelash my dude.
Edit: pardon my language. Teehee!
There it is, that anger that comes with ignorance called out.
I thrive off those anger vibes. Yum!
Trust me Im not angry but I have to check you because you are a weak little coward hiding behind a username. You insulted me until you got a reaction, you got your reaction now begone!
No thanks, I don't take orders from you. I'll continue to post here so long as I have a reason to. Thanks for providing that!
Oh, btw... you're still wrong. Cheers, Bama is beating FSU!
I was just thinking about mmorpgs and possibilities. One of the things that makes an mmorpg a mmorpg is possibilities right? Like the possibility for there to be 100s to 1000+ in the same area?
klash2def it doesn't matter if you didn't say "old people don't like change" directly. That is what it comes off as.
No actually it matters if I didn't say that..its called twisting my words to build a different narrative. Thats the bullshit Im talking about...This type of paraphrasing happens often on this site. It needs to stop. My words exactly:
"People who resist change, have a old way of thinking"
This is true. I didn't make it up, its in society look at all the great innovations made none of them by people who held on to the past. Great innovations are made by people who think ahead. If this offends you Idk what to tell you, maybe you do think old who knows?
I didn't once call anybody old, I called somebody specific a lying sack of shit and a coward because they kept insulting me and twisting my words over and over after I told them to stop. But I never said anybody was old. The narrative that I think people who disagree with me are old is wrong and the only thing people have been saying to me in this thread. Its like you saw Destiny 2 is a mmo and didn't read anything else in the post.
Not one person Answered my OG question in the OP. Insane. That's how toxic this place has become. Its true.. look at the forums most of the site is people complaining about how mmos aren't good and the old days are better.
"Beliefs don't change facts. Facts, if you're reasonable, should change your beliefs."
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
All MMOs instance you off when you need to do group content. ALL.
WoW legion had that pre event.. it was instanced off into different groups. The one with the demon invasion. There wasnt 1000 people in the same instance. More like 40. All the games I mentioned do the same thing just at a smaller scale.
While Scorchien failed to clarify or explain his position at all, if he is saying the statement that all group content is done in instances then he would be correct. To name a few, there is plenty of group content in EVE that is not instanced. All the world content in ArcheAge. Wurm Rifts, etc.
The difference between a true MMO and fully instanced games is the Open World aspect. The fact that specific parts of the map can host hundreds or thousands of players simultaneously. This enables content not available in other games, which is what gives MMORPGs a meaningful distinction from other titles.
For instance, my favorite content is small group Open World PvP. Where you roam around the open world with a gang of buddies and fight other players and groups of players you encounter. Now small group PvP is obviously possible in a game like Destiny. But when the player cap is 20 that means a 10v10 requires the entire population of the shard you are in divide itself evenly in half and meet up to fight.
A random encounter of two small to moderate sized groups is simply not possible in that kind of environment. So when it comes down to it you can dress a pig in lipstick and call it Natalie Portman but the kind of "MMO" you are describing not only fails to qualify under the definition of MMO accepted by most players (Hence why you keep seeing people say it is not all across the internet apparently) but it fails to deliver to me the kind of content I play MMOs for.
Now About the open world part.. I hear where you are coming from, but I'm curious is there a difference between custom content (people making up things to do with friends) and Group Content (Raids, Dungeons, Quests) ?
the reason I ask is because if Destiny allows you to do group content the same way you described in the open world.. For instance you see a beacon that is relaying a random mission to take out a cabal camp.. everyone in that area can hear that same message and do that misson with you. Regardless of if they are in your fire team or not.. Thats 1 type of group content in destiny.
On WoW open world PVP only happens on PVP servers? I may be super off on that cause I haven't played since forever, but Unless you attack a city you cant just pvp unless you request a duel? Did that change?
If by custom content you mean things like Open World PvP where the primary drivers of the conflict are players, and group content you mean the primary thing is something put in the world by the developers then there is a mixture in many of the games I play.
For instance in ArcheAge a lot of the content starts when you run into a member of a rival guild and start a fight. You call in your backup, they call in their backup, then they call in their allied guilds and you call in your allied guilds and soon enough there is a massive battle raging entirely because of the actions of players. I assume that's kind of what you mean by custom content.
However there are also things like the Abyssal event. A massive PvE event with major rewards. This always ends up being a massive PvP naval battle but it's an event based off a pre-programmed series of events aimed to create such a thing.
So if the Destiny events you are talking about lead to hundreds of players all on the same battlefield interacting with each other like ArcheAge abyssal then that is clearly a massively multiplayer event. As far as I understand it they are all separated in to instances with a fairly small player cap though right? That's why I would contest it's MMO status.
I'm not sure how WoW works but for the record WoW is very bad at capitalizing on its MMO aspects. 99% of the content in WoW would work perfectly fine outside an MMO environment. It's games like EVE Online, Darkfall, and ArcheAge that just absolutely wouldn't work in any other format.
Despite a rather heated argument between Eldurian and I reference another topic a few weeks ago, I find that I agree with him again here.
Destiny events will never lead to such large amounts of players interacting because it doesn't support such interaction. This is what makes it a multiplayer game, and not an MMORPG.
Despite a rather heated argument between Eldurian and I reference another topic a few weeks ago, I find that I agree with him again here.
Destiny events will never lead to such large amounts of players interacting because it doesn't support such interaction. This is what makes it a multiplayer game, and not an MMORPG.
Then you agree, despite the devs of Star Citizen calling Star Citizen an MMO, that its not actually an MMO? Because in Star Citizen they instance each area to be a very small amount so you will never have large amounts of player interaction.
Does that mean the developers of Star Citizen are lying about their game being an MMO? That would be false advertising. Or in fact has the definition changed and what an MMO actually is?
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
MMO: Massivly Multiplayer Online, anything with more than I'd say 32 players on at once can be classified as a MMO as long as its not some stupid arena shooter garbage like unknown players battlegrounds (I still do not see what people see in that game, its more pointless than most games). I'd even not classify FF14 as a mmo either, as all its content for the most part is 4 or 8 person arena fights. Other than that you can pretty much solo to level cap. save for the odd forced 4 man dungeon.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
MMO: Massivly Multiplayer Online, anything with more than I'd say 32 players on at once can be classified as a MMO as long as its not some stupid arena shooter garbage like unknown players battlegrounds (I still do not see what people see in that game, its more pointless than most games). I'd even not classify FF14 as a mmo either, as all its content for the most part is 4 or 8 person arena fights. Other than that you can pretty much solo to level cap. save for the odd forced 4 man dungeon.
Yeah I agree. In this definition, is the TRUE oldschool definition of an MMO. Not instanced 6 player group focused MMOs or small team focused MMOs...that isn't massively multiplayer, that is co-op games.
If you want a real MMO, (some) true ones would be EVE Online, SWG and Ultima Online. The others are co-op focused MMOs.
So either the co-op focused MMOs are not actually MMOs or peoples definitions have changed from what an oldschool MMO is and they didn't realize it in this thread.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
Despite a rather heated argument between Eldurian and I reference another topic a few weeks ago, I find that I agree with him again here.
Destiny events will never lead to such large amounts of players interacting because it doesn't support such interaction. This is what makes it a multiplayer game, and not an MMORPG.
Then you agree, despite the devs of Star Citizen calling Star Citizen an MMO, that its not actually an MMO? Because in Star Citizen they instance each area to be a very small amount so you will never have large amounts of player interaction.
Does that mean the developers of Star Citizen are lying about their game being an MMO? That would be false advertising. Or in fact has the definition changed and what an MMO actually is?
From what I understand, 16 players per area is not the goal for Star Citizen.
As such, the best definition of an MMO is the recursive one: if liking game X is strongly correlated with liking other games that you'd previously have thought of as being an MMO, then game X is an MMO. Even if it's a single-player offline game.
I disagree. I fear there's enough correlation that all tabletop RPGs would be MMOs.
Do you think that MMO players would tend to be far more likely to enjoy tabletop RPGs than gamers who prefer any other genre of game? It's plausible that that could be the case, but it strikes me as unlikely.
And if it is the case, then how about making a massively multiplayer online tabletop RPG?
No. I think that a game can have multiple genres.
If you use additional requirement "more likely to enjoy X than gamers who prefer any other genre of game" then your definition would work. But it also means that a game can only have one genre.
wow .. this is still the most popular topic with the most posts (besides stickies).
We certainly do not need Jesus when there is enough fun in a single issue. In fact, there is not ONE, but TWO topics (granted, slightly different variations) on how one should define MMOs.
People are *so* passionate about how a three letter convenient label is defined and used. I am sure Jesus is pleased about humanity. Let's the game continue!
I don't get why people are confused by this. The definition is straight forward enough:
"A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is an online game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players, typically from hundreds to thousands, simultaneously in the same instance (or world)."
I don't get why people are confused by this. The definition is straight forward enough:
"A massively multiplayer online game (MMOG or MMO) is an online game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players, typically from hundreds to thousands, simultaneously in the same instance (or world)."
If it doesn't meet that criteria, it's not a MMO. There's nothing to debate here.
Party Pooper! He presented facts!
That description makes Minecraft a MMO. You can easily run a server that can support more then 100 players.
The wiki entry in this case are also not really facts. No science was used, no leading experts were being asked, no statistics were used. The numbers are arbitrary and the comment about the instancing would make certain MMO's not a MMO. The only reason it has not been changed is because enough ppl agree with the statement because it is vague enough.
Imo the way Steam uses the tags makes more sense. Nowadays many survival games can be played in singleplayer, multiplayer (using client also as host) and on a dedicated server (seperate server files). When played on a dedicated server that is powerful enough it could be described as a MMO. So one game can be singleplayer, multiplayer and MMO. Some of those games let you change so much, it could almost be seen as create your own MMO.
Personally, if we want to debate whether or not Minecraft servers capable of hosting hundreds of players are MMOs I'm down for that. I can actually see some logic behind calling large Minecraft servers MMOs. It's an entirely reasonable debate to be had.
A lot of these other titles being thrown around by Nauri and a small handful of others are not reasonable to argue about. It's just a waste of time and in some cases probably just straight trolling.
We don't define video game genres by how popular they are.
So if only 5 people show up to a "proper" MMO, it is still a "massively multiplayer" game when all you get to interact with is 5?
hmm .. for a person who cares so much about logic, there is something missing here.
Yeah, I don't get that argument.
There is nothing massively multiplayer about an MMO that (and Istaria actually gets that low on off-times) only has 5-10 people playing. How is that massive? and how is that massively multiplayer? Often times those people won't say anything either, so its literally a singleplayer game at that point that happens to be able to hold more players but no one is playing it lol.
To me, I don't care if a server can hold 1 billion people, or 1000 people...if only 5-50 people are playing it, why does it matter if it can hold 1 billion people or even 1000 people if no one is playing it? That isn't massive, the only thing massive about that would be the server size lol.
Definitely not very logical
I agree with your first full paragraph.
Let me add the strong qualifier that game design matters. In the MMORPG I play, I have the capacity to shape the world to my (dis)advantage, organize with other players around common causes, build lasting social bonds, operate a virtual business, control territory, etc., to great effect. I can't do that in a shared world shooter or online CCG (such as Elder Scrolls Legends).
It's hard to believe this thread got 8 pages overnight, but part of it might be the ringing irony that sometimes genres other than MMORPGs make it feel "as if" you were playing in a much more populated space. This may even be true in terms of sheer simultaneous player numbers, but it's important to note that while other 'quasi-MMO' genres may bring one into memorable encounters with other players more quickly than MMORPGs, these encounters are usually fleeting. After I'm done with the match in ESL that player is lost in the mists, our former actions quickly assimilated into an entropic nothingness.
It's not just a facet of being 'one drop in the ocean', either. It's something fundamentally different about the way MMORPGs are designed. Ask anyone who plays Eve, a well populated MMORPG, whether or not their actions matter. I doubt you would get the same reaction from the also popular Elder Scrolls Legends crowd.
To MMORPGs that suffer from low population at given points in time, I can still feel the difference when I visit them. It puts the onus much more on the player to stick it out and build those lasting relationships in order to see what the game truly has to offer. Having seen the rewards firsthand though, it makes it much harder to settle for less.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
This is an MMO. Roughly 200 players all in the same non-instanced area fighting the same world boss.
So we're trotting out the measuring sticks, now?
Here's 30 pilots furballing in a physics-based twitch combat MMORPG:
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Comments
Come on klash2def and TheScavenger, step up your game either in this thread or the other similar one. The lame insults...like.... talking to a wall? Calling people old?(I feel like you think that's an insult but it's like...impressive to live long enough to be considered old...) Saying they can't accept the future or change with the times? So......low tier. You both have got to do better, I won't accept this trash.
Actually, since this is klash2def's thread I mostly want klash2def to do better. TheScavenger is more like a follower/accomplice. klash2def.....do better! Show us you're not just a clown who the circus left behind! SHOW US THE TRUTH!
It should have been obvious that it was towards the other guy you were agreeing with.
And yes I do understand the use of you in a general context.
Massive is a old term used to help sell games at the start of the internet era. And it sucks that so many people wont let it go.. It shouldnt be this big of a deal for it to apply to new games..
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
So the word "massive" doesn't really have the same meaning or "feel" to it that it did a long time ago. many multiplayer games these days feel rather massive themselves.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Oh, btw... you're still wrong. Cheers, Bama is beating FSU!
"People who resist change, have a old way of thinking"
This is true. I didn't make it up, its in society look at all the great innovations made none of them by people who held on to the past. Great innovations are made by people who think ahead. If this offends you Idk what to tell you, maybe you do think old who knows?
I didn't once call anybody old, I called somebody specific a lying sack of shit and a coward because they kept insulting me and twisting my words over and over after I told them to stop. But I never said anybody was old. The narrative that I think people who disagree with me are old is wrong and the only thing people have been saying to me in this thread. Its like you saw Destiny 2 is a mmo and didn't read anything else in the post.
Not one person Answered my OG question in the OP. Insane. That's how toxic this place has become. Its true.. look at the forums most of the site is people complaining about how mmos aren't good and the old days are better.
"The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."
Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear.
For instance in ArcheAge a lot of the content starts when you run into a member of a rival guild and start a fight. You call in your backup, they call in their backup, then they call in their allied guilds and you call in your allied guilds and soon enough there is a massive battle raging entirely because of the actions of players. I assume that's kind of what you mean by custom content.
However there are also things like the Abyssal event. A massive PvE event with major rewards. This always ends up being a massive PvP naval battle but it's an event based off a pre-programmed series of events aimed to create such a thing.
So if the Destiny events you are talking about lead to hundreds of players all on the same battlefield interacting with each other like ArcheAge abyssal then that is clearly a massively multiplayer event. As far as I understand it they are all separated in to instances with a fairly small player cap though right? That's why I would contest it's MMO status.
I'm not sure how WoW works but for the record WoW is very bad at capitalizing on its MMO aspects. 99% of the content in WoW would work perfectly fine outside an MMO environment. It's games like EVE Online, Darkfall, and ArcheAge that just absolutely wouldn't work in any other format.
Destiny events will never lead to such large amounts of players interacting because it doesn't support such interaction. This is what makes it a multiplayer game, and not an MMORPG.
Does that mean the developers of Star Citizen are lying about their game being an MMO? That would be false advertising. Or in fact has the definition changed and what an MMO actually is?
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
If you want a real MMO, (some) true ones would be EVE Online, SWG and Ultima Online. The others are co-op focused MMOs.
So either the co-op focused MMOs are not actually MMOs or peoples definitions have changed from what an oldschool MMO is and they didn't realize it in this thread.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
If you use additional requirement "more likely to enjoy X than gamers who prefer any other genre of game" then your definition would work. But it also means that a game can only have one genre.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
We certainly do not need Jesus when there is enough fun in a single issue. In fact, there is not ONE, but TWO topics (granted, slightly different variations) on how one should define MMOs.
People are *so* passionate about how a three letter convenient label is defined and used. I am sure Jesus is pleased about humanity. Let's the game continue!
The wiki entry in this case are also not really facts. No science was used, no leading experts were being asked, no statistics were used. The numbers are arbitrary and the comment about the instancing would make certain MMO's not a MMO. The only reason it has not been changed is because enough ppl agree with the statement because it is vague enough.
Imo the way Steam uses the tags makes more sense. Nowadays many survival games can be played in singleplayer, multiplayer (using client also as host) and on a dedicated server (seperate server files). When played on a dedicated server that is powerful enough it could be described as a MMO. So one game can be singleplayer, multiplayer and MMO. Some of those games let you change so much, it could almost be seen as create your own MMO.
A lot of these other titles being thrown around by Nauri and a small handful of others are not reasonable to argue about. It's just a waste of time and in some cases probably just straight trolling.
Let me add the strong qualifier that game design matters. In the MMORPG I play, I have the capacity to shape the world to my (dis)advantage, organize with other players around common causes, build lasting social bonds, operate a virtual business, control territory, etc., to great effect. I can't do that in a shared world shooter or online CCG (such as Elder Scrolls Legends).
It's hard to believe this thread got 8 pages overnight, but part of it might be the ringing irony that sometimes genres other than MMORPGs make it feel "as if" you were playing in a much more populated space. This may even be true in terms of sheer simultaneous player numbers, but it's important to note that while other 'quasi-MMO' genres may bring one into memorable encounters with other players more quickly than MMORPGs, these encounters are usually fleeting. After I'm done with the match in ESL that player is lost in the mists, our former actions quickly assimilated into an entropic nothingness.
It's not just a facet of being 'one drop in the ocean', either. It's something fundamentally different about the way MMORPGs are designed. Ask anyone who plays Eve, a well populated MMORPG, whether or not their actions matter. I doubt you would get the same reaction from the also popular Elder Scrolls Legends crowd.
To MMORPGs that suffer from low population at given points in time, I can still feel the difference when I visit them. It puts the onus much more on the player to stick it out and build those lasting relationships in order to see what the game truly has to offer. Having seen the rewards firsthand though, it makes it much harder to settle for less.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
It is NOT an MMO.
Here's 30 pilots furballing in a physics-based twitch combat MMORPG:
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance