Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The major reason MMOs like WoW and LOTRO (as two examples) don't work for an "MMO"RPG

1235

Comments

  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,503
    Tiller said:
    We can agree on what makes a game a "role playing game", we can agree what is defined as "online", what no one can seem to agree on is what is considered "Massively"

    10 players?

    100 players?

    1000 players?

    10,000+ players?

    ...and are the numbers overall on one server? across multiple servers? All in one area? or spread out through out the game? Honestly i think the phrase massively should just go away, there is no definition anyone can agree on.
    It would be nice to see a day the distinction is no longer needed at all.  A day when even FPSs like CoD employ something like a seamless match transition that works to help keep fights from becoming zerging nade fests but still allows the players to move about freely in an open, interactive world that sees them joining firefights organically.

    At that point, all multiplayer will have the potential to be "massive," and we won't even need an extra acronym or genre.
    I quite prefer lobby shooters. While I agree the technology you describe would be good, I believe there is always a place for a lobby while one waits for their next bout. That may just be me, but I tend to prefer a break now and then.
    MadFrenchie

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

    In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,059
    Rhoklaw said:
    Who would of thought that back in the late 90's and early 2000's that the creators of games like Ultima Online and EverQuest would create an acronym so confusing that even 20 years later, people still don't understand what they meant. 
    They gave gamers more credit for being intelligent than was deserved.

    They soon learned differently....
    AlBQuirky

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    Kyleran said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Who would of thought that back in the late 90's and early 2000's that the creators of games like Ultima Online and EverQuest would create an acronym so confusing that even 20 years later, people still don't understand what they meant. 
    They gave gamers more credit for being intelligent than was deserved.

    They soon learned differently....
    Ahh, so THATS why they stopped making good games too  B)

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    AlBQuirky
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,059
    edited August 2018
    lahnmir said:

    Kyleran said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Who would of thought that back in the late 90's and early 2000's that the creators of games like Ultima Online and EverQuest would create an acronym so confusing that even 20 years later, people still don't understand what they meant. 
    They gave gamers more credit for being intelligent than was deserved.

    They soon learned differently....
    Ahh, so THATS why they stopped making good games too  B)

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Well sure, gamers have proven they'll buy prit near anything, from tired retreads to overpriced garbage, (or even "ungames") why should devs bother trying very hard anymore?

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • herezahunherezahun Member CommonPosts: 2
    edited August 2018

    They gave gamers more credit for being intelligent than was deserved.


    Master Royale S1 S2 S3 Modded Server

    FHX Server Clash of Clans APK Download

  • SeelinnikoiSeelinnikoi Member RarePosts: 1,360
    Judging by its popularity, I think WoW gave the people what they wanted.
    It is funny you said that, because that might not be entirely true.

    I see this happening all the time, and I will explain.

    Imagine a business that offers a product (or game, or anything else really) that is plugging a hole in the market where there are not many options available quite as the product being offered...

    ... so people buy the product, use it, keep using it and perhaps keep buying that company products because it ties up with the main product.

    Now, the company will look at the figures and see that it is doing well, it is popular and the company then continues whatever it is doing, because their popularity remains high and sales of the product are doing well.

    This creates a circle that makes the company think they are doing a good job and have a good product, because it is popular and selling well... when in reality it is just because people have no other meaningful option, or an alternative that hits as many notes with them as that product in question.

    And I see this here ALL the time.

    An example this week was a restaurant that had a really bad service, the food was horrible and yet it was full to the brim... because it is the only restaurant in the village I went.
    So the owners think their popularity is because they are offering a good food/value, when in fact it is because you are sh!t out of luck to find anywhere to eat.

    This in turn makes them think what they are doing is right, making them not to strive for better and then you keep the same stagnant popular product because you cornered the market and there is no one else offering better, yet.

    That is WoW is popular, it is behind a huge company, with huge marketing, and their games are good and polished, but nowhere near what they COULD be.

    And I am sure many of us here could think of a million ways to make WoW better, and yet they dont think to implement those ideas. Why?

    Because they do not need to.
    [Deleted User]
    If you are a Star Wars fan, why not try the Star Wars The Old Republic?
    New players can get a welcome package and old/returning players can also get a welcome back package and 7 days free subscription time! Just click here to use my referral invitation
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
     i dunno man .. Looks like an MMO to me ...:)



    mmolouSteelhelm
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    edited August 2018
    ikcin said:
    Kyleran said:
    kitarad said:
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:
    They are designed with a solo only player in mind. You do quests, and (if you read the quest text, but it even happens when its voiced) its almost always about YOU and not the group or multiple people. On top of that, as an example of another problem, in WoW there are many cutscenes that don't even involve the player despite that your character is supposed to be there right in the same room or area (anduin entering lordaeron throneroom for example and the burning of the world tree).
    The narrative is designed with the player's character as the focus, but the game has plenty of group focus, which one can easily see if playing at or near the top levels where the majority of the population resides. Narrative focus doesn't define game focus, nor does it make a MMORPG a single player game.
    Sorry, but the existence of multiplayer parts does not make any game MMO. WoW is massive. WoW has multiplayer instances. But WoW is not massively multiplayer, so MMO. When the players do their singleplayer quest chains - this is not a multiplayer gameplay.
    And back to acting it is, how disappointing. As if you really believe the rubbish you write... The whole world disagrees with you, literally, go check every article about WoW and what genre it belongs to. Wouldn't it be fun if you would try to correct them all on their stance of what an MMORPG really is and you would then post the feedback you would get here? I for one am really curious as to how industry professionals would respond to your reasoning and accompanying results.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Industry professionals don't have time for this rubbish , even we don't have time for it. It is total rubbish but he goes on spouting it like it's the truth. Is it the disease of our times you think that you can go on saying something completely untrue enough times that you manage to convince yourself absolutely.
    Falls into the same logic category as people who try to argue subscription only games are "P2W" because.....they require you to pay a sub in order to play at all.

    Is OK, some folks truly believe the Earth is flat, even in this day and age, though I feel these contrarian attempts to redefine commonly accepted terms are the modern equivalent of George Orwell's "New Speak."
    This is kind of mean. Nobody here can prove WoW is massively multiplayer, because it is simply not.

    Also with the available technology in 80 or 90, MMO was one thing, now it should be another - bigger and better. Instead the massively multiplayer part is shrinking to instances like raid dungeons and PvP arenas. Still many people live in the bubble created by the advertisement and the marketing - and I do not mean you.
    Actually, it has been proven over and over again by the entire industry. Also, a definition doesn't change because you think it is time to do so. The only mean thing here is you trying to lure people into your false definition that has no connection to reality. You are the one not playing along, not the rest.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir 
    mmolou[Deleted User]cheyaneCazriel
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,198
    ikcin said:
    Kyleran said:
    kitarad said:
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:
    They are designed with a solo only player in mind. You do quests, and (if you read the quest text, but it even happens when its voiced) its almost always about YOU and not the group or multiple people. On top of that, as an example of another problem, in WoW there are many cutscenes that don't even involve the player despite that your character is supposed to be there right in the same room or area (anduin entering lordaeron throneroom for example and the burning of the world tree).
    The narrative is designed with the player's character as the focus, but the game has plenty of group focus, which one can easily see if playing at or near the top levels where the majority of the population resides. Narrative focus doesn't define game focus, nor does it make a MMORPG a single player game.
    Sorry, but the existence of multiplayer parts does not make any game MMO. WoW is massive. WoW has multiplayer instances. But WoW is not massively multiplayer, so MMO. When the players do their singleplayer quest chains - this is not a multiplayer gameplay.
    And back to acting it is, how disappointing. As if you really believe the rubbish you write... The whole world disagrees with you, literally, go check every article about WoW and what genre it belongs to. Wouldn't it be fun if you would try to correct them all on their stance of what an MMORPG really is and you would then post the feedback you would get here? I for one am really curious as to how industry professionals would respond to your reasoning and accompanying results.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Industry professionals don't have time for this rubbish , even we don't have time for it. It is total rubbish but he goes on spouting it like it's the truth. Is it the disease of our times you think that you can go on saying something completely untrue enough times that you manage to convince yourself absolutely.
    Falls into the same logic category as people who try to argue subscription only games are "P2W" because.....they require you to pay a sub in order to play at all.

    Is OK, some folks truly believe the Earth is flat, even in this day and age, though I feel these contrarian attempts to redefine commonly accepted terms are the modern equivalent of George Orwell's "New Speak."
    This is kind of mean. Nobody here can prove WoW is massively multiplayer, because it is simply not.

    Also with the available technology in 80 or 90, MMO was one thing, now it should be another - bigger and better. Instead the massively multiplayer part is shrinking to instances like raid dungeons and PvP arenas. Still many people live in the bubble created by the advertisement and the marketing - and I do not mean you.
    ikcin said:
    Kyleran said:
    kitarad said:
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:
    They are designed with a solo only player in mind. You do quests, and (if you read the quest text, but it even happens when its voiced) its almost always about YOU and not the group or multiple people. On top of that, as an example of another problem, in WoW there are many cutscenes that don't even involve the player despite that your character is supposed to be there right in the same room or area (anduin entering lordaeron throneroom for example and the burning of the world tree).
    The narrative is designed with the player's character as the focus, but the game has plenty of group focus, which one can easily see if playing at or near the top levels where the majority of the population resides. Narrative focus doesn't define game focus, nor does it make a MMORPG a single player game.
    Sorry, but the existence of multiplayer parts does not make any game MMO. WoW is massive. WoW has multiplayer instances. But WoW is not massively multiplayer, so MMO. When the players do their singleplayer quest chains - this is not a multiplayer gameplay.
    And back to acting it is, how disappointing. As if you really believe the rubbish you write... The whole world disagrees with you, literally, go check every article about WoW and what genre it belongs to. Wouldn't it be fun if you would try to correct them all on their stance of what an MMORPG really is and you would then post the feedback you would get here? I for one am really curious as to how industry professionals would respond to your reasoning and accompanying results.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Industry professionals don't have time for this rubbish , even we don't have time for it. It is total rubbish but he goes on spouting it like it's the truth. Is it the disease of our times you think that you can go on saying something completely untrue enough times that you manage to convince yourself absolutely.
    Falls into the same logic category as people who try to argue subscription only games are "P2W" because.....they require you to pay a sub in order to play at all.

    Is OK, some folks truly believe the Earth is flat, even in this day and age, though I feel these contrarian attempts to redefine commonly accepted terms are the modern equivalent of George Orwell's "New Speak."
    This is kind of mean. Nobody here can prove WoW is massively multiplayer, because it is simply not.

    Also with the available technology in 80 or 90, MMO was one thing, now it should be another - bigger and better. Instead the massively multiplayer part is shrinking to instances like raid dungeons and PvP arenas. Still many people live in the bubble created by the advertisement and the marketing - and I do not mean you.
    Just because you doesn't mean you should.  Have you some videos of random transit trains that are literally stuffing folks to the brim.  This could be possible anywhere but i think having a ride wear everyone can sit is a better consumer experience.  More players in one area does not make for a better experience.  You could make a huge game world to accommodate a large population and sure server tech. 

    What happens when there is too much lag? What about graphics being scaled down?  What happens if your population decreases or never comes and you've made game for 80k on a server?


  • Azaron_NightbladeAzaron_Nightblade Member EpicPosts: 4,829
    Eh, SWTOR tried the whole thing about involving the group. They did it very well too, with different characters taking turns... and it still bombed hard because they severely over-estimated how many players actually care about this.

    The average MMOer is a solo act most of the time. So devs cater to solo gameplay when it comes to story content, instead of wasting valuable resources that only a small minority is going to appreciate. Sorry, you'll just have to use your imagination when it comes to your party members.
    AlBQuirkyCazriel

    My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)

    https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/

  • GutlardGutlard Member RarePosts: 1,019
    No matter what, the older you get, the more you realize it's never as big as you thought it was...

    Gut Out!

    What, me worry?

  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    edited August 2018
    ikcin said:

    Just because you doesn't mean you should.  Have you some videos of random transit trains that are literally stuffing folks to the brim.  This could be possible anywhere but i think having a ride wear everyone can sit is a better consumer experience.  More players in one area does not make for a better experience.  You could make a huge game world to accommodate a large population and sure server tech. 

    What happens when there is too much lag? What about graphics being scaled down?  What happens if your population decreases or never comes and you've made game for 80k on a server?
    Seems you are missing the point. It is not related to the number of players in one area. When I'm talking about MMO, I always point open world. And open world means rules that make possible every action of every player to affect the other players. In such a game every player is like a thrown stone in the water. His waves make the game massively multiplayer. L2 and EVE are such games. WoW is not.
    But what you are talking about is not what the rest is talking about, not the game creators, not the journalists and not the forum goers. Its just you and your definition, supported by faulty logic, bias and false connections. "Your" genre doesn't exist, its most definitely not the MMORPG genre as been described and defined by Richard Garriott, and he is just a bit more of an authority then you are.

    Of course we could talk about what you want the genre to be, but that would mean you have to give up on beating up WoW and admitting that you might be wrong, so that discussion is never going to take place. Which is too bad, because redefining the definition of the genre because of technological advancement could be an interesting discussion.  

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    cheyanemmolouCazriel
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 9,404
    edited August 2018
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:

    Just because you doesn't mean you should.  Have you some videos of random transit trains that are literally stuffing folks to the brim.  This could be possible anywhere but i think having a ride wear everyone can sit is a better consumer experience.  More players in one area does not make for a better experience.  You could make a huge game world to accommodate a large population and sure server tech. 

    What happens when there is too much lag? What about graphics being scaled down?  What happens if your population decreases or never comes and you've made game for 80k on a server?
    Seems you are missing the point. It is not related to the number of players in one area. When I'm talking about MMO, I always point open world. And open world means rules that make possible every action of every player to affect the other players. In such a game every player is like a thrown stone in the water. His waves make the game massively multiplayer. L2 and EVE are such games. WoW is not.
    But what you are talking about is not what the rest is talking about, not the game creators, not the journalists and not the forum goers. Its just you and your definition, supported by faulty logic, bias and false connections. "Your" genre doesn't exist, its most definitely not the MMORPG genre as been described and defined by Richard Garriott, and he is just a bit more of an authority then you are.

    Of course we could talk about what you want the genre to be, but that would mean you have to give up on beating up WoW and admitting that you might be wrong, so that discussion is never going to take place. Which is too bad, because redefining the definition of the genre because of technological advancement could be an interesting discussion.  

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    I think that his argument can be something one can talk about in game design but unfortunately attempting to shoehorn his idea forcibly into this very well defined acronym is misguided and his stubborn insistence it is so does that discussion a disservice. It could have been a fruitful and good discussion but for this blind attempt to push a poorly thought out definition at others belligerently and often slyly that has alienated others into ignoring and dismissing him altogether.

    A pity really because with a little finesse one could have had an interesting discussion. Often a good debate is dependent on the participant's ability to advance a divergent view less forcefully and with less deceit but with good arguments that encourage thought instead of outright resistance. All he has managed is disdain and contempt .
    lahnmirMadFrenchieVermillion_RaventhalCazriel
    Garrus Signature
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    edited August 2018
    ikcin said:
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:

    Just because you doesn't mean you should.  Have you some videos of random transit trains that are literally stuffing folks to the brim.  This could be possible anywhere but i think having a ride wear everyone can sit is a better consumer experience.  More players in one area does not make for a better experience.  You could make a huge game world to accommodate a large population and sure server tech. 

    What happens when there is too much lag? What about graphics being scaled down?  What happens if your population decreases or never comes and you've made game for 80k on a server?
    Seems you are missing the point. It is not related to the number of players in one area. When I'm talking about MMO, I always point open world. And open world means rules that make possible every action of every player to affect the other players. In such a game every player is like a thrown stone in the water. His waves make the game massively multiplayer. L2 and EVE are such games. WoW is not.
    But what you are talking about is not what the rest is talking about, not the game creators, not the journalists and not the forum goers. Its just you and your definition, supported by faulty logic, bias and false connections. "Your" genre doesn't exist, its most definitely not the MMORPG genre as been described and defined by Richard Garriott, and he is just a bit more of an authority then you are.

    Of course we could talk about what you want the genre to be, but that would mean you have to give up on beating up WoW and admitting that you might be wrong, so that discussion is never going to take place. Which is too bad, because redefining the definition of the genre because of technological advancement could be an interesting discussion.  

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    ikcin said:
    Seems you are missing the point. It is not related to the number of players in one area. When I'm talking about MMO, I always point open world. And open world means rules that make possible every action of every player to affect the other players. In such a game every player is like a thrown stone in the water. His waves make the game massively multiplayer. L2 and EVE are such games. WoW is not. 
    But what you are talking about is not what the rest is talking about, not the game creators, not the journalists and not the forum goers. Its just you and your definition, supported by faulty logic, bias and false connections. "Your" genre doesn't exist, its most definitely not the MMORPG genre as been described and defined by Richard Garriott, and he is just a bit more of an authority then you are.

    Of course we could talk about what you want the genre to be, but that would mean you have to give up on beating up WoW and admitting that you might be wrong, so that discussion is never going to take place. Which is too bad, because redefining the definition of the genre because of technological advancement could be an interesting discussion.  

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Again that hilarious attempt to debate the person, instead the topic. Sorry, but in this debate you have one valid argument - people say so - and in general this is not a valid argument for any discussion.

    I do not beat WoW. I beat the mass behavior to change the objective facts. WoW is not a MMO game. That does not make it bad, unplayable, bugged, ugly, unfair and etc. Just it is not a MMO. And it is an excellent example how many people call MMORPG a game that is definitely not such.

    You could not prove that WoW is massively multiplayer. I bring to you many arguments that it is not such.

    And now, as you have not counterarguments, you attack me, my way to express opinion in general and etc. WoW is massive, it has multiplayer parts, but it is not massively multiplayer - very simple and very obvious, no matter what people say. And it is not only WoW - ESO, GW2, LOTRO, BDO and etc. are not MMOs. They are focused on the singleplayer written story line. And their multiplayer parts or events cannot make these games massively multiplayer.

    A game where every player can play solo without interaction and consequences for the other players cannot be a MMO.
    You are alone. Alone in your reasoning, alone in your conviction. Your words find no resonance because they exist in a vacuum. Every time you have to prove something you play the "but you make it personal" card. There is nothing to debate since you haven't proven anything, your "arguments" are absurd statements not related to the topic at all. You use sly and underhand tactics to manipulate those easily confused but when exposed you cry victim. Every argument presented to you you have ridiculed and dismissed. You have no reasons, no arguments, no logic, the whole world has proven you wrong yet you truck on. Good luck on your journey trying to prove WoW is not an MMORPG, you'll be travelling alone.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Post edited by lahnmir on
    cheyane[Deleted User]CazrielAlBQuirky
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • kosaboykosaboy Member UncommonPosts: 50
    All MMO means is not a single player game, yes you can play WoW all by yourself and not interact with anyone IF you choose but all those things can be done in a group.  The fact the quests refer to people in singular does not change that you can do those quests in groups. 
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,198
    ikcin said:
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:

    Just because you doesn't mean you should.  Have you some videos of random transit trains that are literally stuffing folks to the brim.  This could be possible anywhere but i think having a ride wear everyone can sit is a better consumer experience.  More players in one area does not make for a better experience.  You could make a huge game world to accommodate a large population and sure server tech. 

    What happens when there is too much lag? What about graphics being scaled down?  What happens if your population decreases or never comes and you've made game for 80k on a server?
    Seems you are missing the point. It is not related to the number of players in one area. When I'm talking about MMO, I always point open world. And open world means rules that make possible every action of every player to affect the other players. In such a game every player is like a thrown stone in the water. His waves make the game massively multiplayer. L2 and EVE are such games. WoW is not.
    But what you are talking about is not what the rest is talking about, not the game creators, not the journalists and not the forum goers. Its just you and your definition, supported by faulty logic, bias and false connections. "Your" genre doesn't exist, its most definitely not the MMORPG genre as been described and defined by Richard Garriott, and he is just a bit more of an authority then you are.

    Of course we could talk about what you want the genre to be, but that would mean you have to give up on beating up WoW and admitting that you might be wrong, so that discussion is never going to take place. Which is too bad, because redefining the definition of the genre because of technological advancement could be an interesting discussion.  

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Again that hilarious attempt to debate the person, instead the topic. Sorry, but in this debate you have one valid argument - people say so - and in general this is not a valid argument for any discussion.

    I do not beat WoW. I beat the mass behavior to change the objective facts. WoW is not a MMO game. That does not make it bad, unplayable, bugged, ugly, unfair and etc. Just it is not a MMO. And it is an excellent example how many people call MMORPG a game that is definitely not such.

    You could not prove that WoW is massively multiplayer. I bring to you many arguments that it is not such.

    And now, as you have not counterarguments, you attack me, my way to express opinion in general and etc. WoW is massive, it has multiplayer parts, but it is not massively multiplayer - very simple and very obvious, no matter what people say. And it is not only WoW - ESO, GW2, LOTRO, BDO and etc. are not MMOs. They are focused on the singleplayer written story line. And their multiplayer parts or events cannot make these games massively multiplayer.

    A game where every player can play solo without interaction and consequences for the other players cannot be a MMO.
    Player behavior does not decide what is an MMO.  You could literally be in a group your whole level experience. 
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    edited August 2018
    ikcin said:
    lahnmir said:

    You are alone. Alone in your reasoning, alone in your conviction. Your words find no resonance because they exist in a vacuum. Every time you have to prove something you play the "but you make it personal" card. There is nothing to debate since you haven't proven anything, your "arguments" are absurd statements not related to the topic at all. You use sly and underhand tactics to manipulate those easily confused but when exposed you cry victim. Every argument presented to you you have ridiculed and dismissed. You have no reasons, no arguments, no logic, the whole world has proven you wrong yet you truck on. Good luck on your journey trying to prove WoW is not an MMORPG, you'll be travelling alone.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    An excellent example for denial and ignorance I think. As you cannot debate the things I write or the topic here, you attack everything else.

    How WoW is massively multiplayer, I asked multiple times - you cannot answer. How a game without open world could be a MMO - you cannot answer.

    My logic is very simple - to have a multiplayer game you must play in competition and cooperation with other players. That is why chess, football and etc. are multiplayer, but solitaire is not. 

    I already proved WoW is not MMO. But you cannot prove the opposite as your only argument is - people say so, which is not a true argument.




    But I already did. You wanted an example of one players action affecting the whole gaming world because that was one of your arguments against WoW. So I told you that if one player buys a rare mount from an Auction House that makes it impossible for everybody else to buy it. Or when killing a rare world boss nobody else can do it until it respawns. Your response was something along the lines of "hur hur mount is no MMORPG hur hur." In WoW raids you play in cooperation, in WoW BGs you play in competition, both are multiplayer. You go "hur hur, but every action from a player must have an effect on everybody hur hur" which totally isn't true in the games you mention as counter evidence. You talk about persistence being crucial and that nothing lasts in WoW etc. Yet in L2 when you kill someone in PVP he respawns and it all continues, by your logic he or she should stay dead.

    But enough of these childish game and time to turn the tables around. Time for you to prove something. Tell me how WoW isn't an MMORPG, and please give me the definition of what an MMORPG is so you can clearly show how WoW differs from that. I would like a source with your definition too because else it is just "because I say so." Come on, time to man up and show some proper sources mate, WoW doesn't abide to some MMORPG rules, tell me which ones that are and who decided that those were deciding factors.

    As a sidenote, the only one attacking everything and everyone is you. You go through several stages during a debate, lets list them just for fun:

    1. you start a false arguments presenting fake connections. You do so quite arrogant and dismissive of other people
    2. When people counter your "facts" you ridicule them and act like a clown, discrediting the poster trying to make his counterarguments look invalid.
    3. When people don't fall for this trick you act the victim. 'Ohh, its personal, you are out to get me because you have no arguments." This to hide the fact to you yourself have presented nothing.
    4. When people see through this behavior you get frustrated and angry and your true colors start to show.

    We are at stage 3 now, last time we made it to stage 4, lets see where we end up this time. For now though, time for you to get to work, i am anxiously waiting for your definition of an MMORPG and the source it came from. From thereon out you can show me how WoW strays from this.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir

     
    CazrielcheyaneAlBQuirky
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    ikcin said:
    lahnmir said:
    ikcin said:
    lahnmir said:

    You are alone. Alone in your reasoning, alone in your conviction. Your words find no resonance because they exist in a vacuum. Every time you have to prove something you play the "but you make it personal" card. There is nothing to debate since you haven't proven anything, your "arguments" are absurd statements not related to the topic at all. You use sly and underhand tactics to manipulate those easily confused but when exposed you cry victim. Every argument presented to you you have ridiculed and dismissed. You have no reasons, no arguments, no logic, the whole world has proven you wrong yet you truck on. Good luck on your journey trying to prove WoW is not an MMORPG, you'll be travelling alone.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    An excellent example for denial and ignorance I think. As you cannot debate the things I write or the topic here, you attack everything else.

    How WoW is massively multiplayer, I asked multiple times - you cannot answer. How a game without open world could be a MMO - you cannot answer.

    My logic is very simple - to have a multiplayer game you must play in competition and cooperation with other players. That is why chess, football and etc. are multiplayer, but solitaire is not. 

    I already proved WoW is not MMO. But you cannot prove the opposite as your only argument is - people say so, which is not a true argument.




    But I already did. You wanted an example of one players action affecting the whole gaming world because that was one of your arguments against WoW. So I told you that if one player buys a rare mount from an Auction House that makes it impossible for everybody else to buy it. Or when killing a rare world boss nobody else can do it until it respawns. Your response was something along the lines of "hur hur mount is no MMORPG hur hur." In WoW raids you play in cooperation, in WoW BGs you play in competition, both are multiplayer.
    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir

     
    I do not say WoW is not multiplayer, but it is instanced and not massively multiplayer. The only argument here against that is the rare items/mounts one - but that are the rewards, not the gameplay.

    How people compete and cooperate massively to win these rewards? I think they cannot. So WoW is not a MMO.

    I will simply ignore the personal flame, as it is completely off the topic.

    When you PvP to beat a boss, that does not exist simultaneously for the other players - this is a MMO. Or if every player can do something in the game to win the mount on competitive basis - this is MMO. If the boss is open world, and really needs cooperative gameplay - for example GW2 OW bosses do not need such - this is a MMO. To take an unique item is not massively multiplayer gameplay. It is important how you get it - in competition and cooperation, or by luck - BDO - again not a MMO.
    Nice try, avoiding my request for proof though. Show me the definition of MMORPG that says all these rules are needed and not just your opinion. You talk about facts, I would like a source please. Thanks in advance.

    And ignoring personal flaming is rich from someone belitteling others with his snarky comments, how hypocrite.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    AlBQuirky
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • kosaboykosaboy Member UncommonPosts: 50
    WoW has non instanced play where you can compete or work together....resource nodes, open world pvp, open world named mobs that drop loot.....
    lahnmircheyaneAlBQuirky
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member LegendaryPosts: 5,054
    kosaboy said:
    WoW has non instanced play where you can compete or work together....resource nodes, open world pvp, open world named mobs that drop loot.....
    He knows, he really does. He is just clowning around but dislikes it when others do the same to him.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir 
    AlBQuirky
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...



    'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless. 

    It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.

    It is just huge resource waste....'

    Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer

  • kosaboykosaboy Member UncommonPosts: 50
    lahnmir said:
    kosaboy said:
    WoW has non instanced play where you can compete or work together....resource nodes, open world pvp, open world named mobs that drop loot.....
    He knows, he really does. He is just clowning around but dislikes it when others do the same to him.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir 
    oh hahaa ok :)
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 9,404
    None of the rules he insists appear in any definition. He made them up. 

    Where does it say interaction has to be competitive or cooperative. Interaction does not mean that. Trade is interaction. Prove it is not and you won't be able to. Talking is interaction ..Barren's chat is interaction.
    Garrus Signature
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914


  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914


Sign In or Register to comment.