But Here we go again. This whole thing on what gets to be called MMO
.....
For his generation Destiny is Everquest.
I love change.
Oh c'mon you love this topic and you know it. You would barely post anything if it weren't for this subject.
It gives you an opportunity to expand on your thesis that these everyday arguments are about liking/disliking change instead of what they really are: simply trying to change the meaning of a long established term for a type of game in decline to include a type of popular game that borrows a few things from MMOs.
Liking or disliking this type of game is irrelevant to how you label it... if you must label it. It's actually the totally unnecessary act of putting a label on it that limits it and detracts from the discussion about how good/bad the game is and self-derails discussions into trivial and pedantic off-topic horseshit when the author slaps it on the title like a putting a chip on his own shoulder and saying "come at me bro!"
I personally could give less of a shit about Destiny or FO76 being an MMO or a sandbox. I only care about how the game plays.
It's you and others who assign and defend these labels for games that could conceivably be shoehorned into fitting the labels, who think you're on the cutting edge of modern trends. And then you top it off by constantly saying that anyone who disagrees with your edgy labeling is just resisting change... you really got to get over yourselves.
"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
First sentence of the article is fake news: "Like Elder Scrolls Online, or perhaps Destiny 1 & 2, Fallout 76 limits the amount of players in an "instance" of the game world to 24".
In ESO a raid is limited to 24 players, but there are often numerous 24-player raids running per faction (so times that by 3) as well as many players who are not in a raid or in smaller groups and that is all on one massive map where every player can interact with each other in real time.
My experience in beta is completely opposite. If you havent played beta go watch the reviews on youtube. The PvE is down right boring and easy. No NPCs means you have zero impact on the story line. You go from point to point watching holotapes. Dated graphics, boring PvE, no impact on story. As for PvP... yawn. If players dont want to PvP you cannot do much. If someone wants to port away during PvP they can. If you die you can respawn close to where you died and attack your killer almost instantly since they become marked on your map no matter where they go. This is just a Fallout 4 skin on a bad PvP game.
Just wanted to correct something. They have said that the 400 pound limit on the stash is only for the BETA and will be significantly increased for launch.
Perhaps Bethesda are using beta to gauge the "minimum" inventory size.
Let's face it, monetizing inventory slots is a staple in most Cash Shops...
This game may or may not be the bee's knees, the cat jimmy jams and the dogs bollocks but what im worried about in a strange way is if this is an actual success there will not be a fallout 5, because why bother.
I personally don't want this version of fallout, not saying this experiment is wrong, and if its fun then YAY, but I want a proper Fallout 5 not this and if this becomes to successful then and understandably why bother.
Hope this makes sense, its kinda a conflicted stance as I want to try this but at the same time I want to hate it.
Haven't been any mmo for a long time, I have been excited about or where I didn't end up being disappointed.
I went into Fallout 76 prepared to run away screaming (based on reviews), even pre-ordering for just $5, so it would be easy to cut my loses.
Outcome: I have such a crazy hard time waiting for release, even cursing I have to work the next two beta times.
This game is going to be special to me, and I find it more mmORPG, than most if not all of the rest of the games out there
But Here we go again. This whole thing on what gets to be called MMO
.....
For his generation Destiny is Everquest.
I love change.
Oh c'mon you love this topic and you know it. You would barely post anything if it weren't for this subject.
It gives you an opportunity to expand on your thesis that these everyday arguments are about liking/disliking change instead of what they really are: simply trying to change the meaning of a long established term for a type of game in decline to include a type of popular game that borrows a few things from MMOs.
Liking or disliking this type of game is irrelevant to how you label it... if you must label it. It's actually the totally unnecessary act of putting a label on it that limits it and detracts from the discussion about how good/bad the game is and self-derails discussions into trivial and pedantic off-topic horseshit when the author slaps it on the title like a putting a chip on his own shoulder and saying "come at me bro!"
I personally could give less of a shit about Destiny or FO76 being an MMO or a sandbox. I only care about how the game plays.
It's you and others who assign and defend these labels for games that could conceivably be shoehorned into fitting the labels, who think you're on the cutting edge of modern trends. And then you top it off by constantly saying that anyone who disagrees with your edgy labeling is just resisting change... you really got to get over yourselves.
ah okay so calling these games something at all is "edgy" lol. "get over yourselves" how about tell that to the people who constantly tell people they simply can't label things. That's edgy to me. Trying to avoid labels. "I'm unique labels don't apply!" is the most edgy shit ever. You cant avoid labels in this life sorry to disappoint you. The reality is everything has a label. If one doesn't exist a new label will be made. its just human.
This isn't about changing the meaning of a term. Its about expanding its meaning because of new information. That's what we do, we adapt and change when new information is presented. Its not edgy its common sense. Its amazing how common sense seems to be edgy to people now. You act as if somebody said MMO now means "Many Moon Oranges. That's changing the meaning of the term. Saying a game is MMO Lite is expanding the MMO term. So relax big dog, nobody is changing the meaning of the OG term.
This is funny to me though because you literally say "Liking or disliking this type of game" in your second paragraph. That implies that you know a label should exist.
Why not label? what's wrong with labels? What do you suggest then if not called something? They have to be called something, even if just "Game". So the problem isn't the labeling, you don't agree with the labeling. That's the problem.
Have you played any of these games? Are you denying the similarities to MMO or is it "I don't give a shit" now because you cant argue against it anymore? I personally never say it first... its always the response to people like yourself saying why it isn't or straight up calling people stupid for even making the suggestion. Nothing is edgy when its evident. I don't need to prove to anyone here that I'm on the cutting edge of tech, trust me.
I only bring it up in defense of the people being called stupid (myself incl) because whoever doesn't agree with them. I explain why we aren't wrong for saying MMO. Again who are you or anyone else to tell people they cant label things they feel need labeling? Especially since the article itself refers to F76 as MMO and the first thing people say is "its not a mmo" well who are you kind sir to tell people they cant call it that? People who think like me will say "Well actually it is kinda a MMO, here is why" then that turns into more people like yourself attacking that person because they used a label they don't like. Not that its wrong fundamentally but because they hate the label.
If people feel like these games should be called something, let them do it. Its not up to you and we aren't wrong for saying what we are experiencing. The reason you say " I don't give a shit" is because you feel it too, you just don't want to accept it because you are one of the people who have constantly argued against it.
Saying "get over yourselves" isn't going to win you any debate here. These MMO-Lite games have a thesis around it that is hard to argue against. Its not edgy to label things, its human. Humans label things so they can understand them. Its like you want to ignore the very obvious thing these games are doing in order to preserve your nostalgia.
As I said, the thing about change is that it must happen. You don't need to accept it, you don't need to agree, it is here. I didn't do it, nobody here did it, there is no ego with this, we are just pointing it out in the face of those who say its stupid or edgy to label things, simply because they aren't ready to agree on what to label it as. Don't confuse expanding on a term with changing the meaning of the term.
If those games give people a MMO experience they are not wrong for labeling it as one. These "Types" of games are here to stay a while. People are going to label them something, its human.
Personally I think its still early and that's what the Resistance to the label is about. In 2-3 years nobody will fight that "MMO-lites" are a thing. Its going to be normalized. More of these games are coming. The games as a service trend may continue in a big way behind these types of games.
Post edited by klash2def on
"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.
Ignoring the rest of what you posted, as it is irrelevant.
MMO is not much more than Massively, at all.
Massively Multiplayer Online.
Massively is the most important word out of the three, nothing in MMO means more than the first M.
Yes, just yes. I'm not going to ignore anything you posted I'm going to respond to it all.
Explain Massively. Don't give me the book definition, I know what it is, give me what it means in the online gaming space.
If you only had the Massively part is it still a MMO? How is it the most important then?
Okay according to you, lets take away the multiplayer and online part. Lets take away raids, dungeons, guilds, gear tiers, pvp, character progression, persistent world.. take away all that stuff and you have nothing. Those things I just listed are the Multiplayer and Online parts. The most important parts of the term. That's the gameplay and experience part. Massively means nothing in online gaming today. It was used as a buzzword in the early 2000s. The only reason its there today is simply because it stuck and people don't get rid of terms that stick. This isn't about changing the term, its about expanding it.
Massive is the least important part of the term. Funny that some vets put so much weight on it. The other things are the things that create the experience. Not Massive.
If you do those other things (Multiplayer Online) with 24 or 500 people you are having a "MMO" experience. MMO is a term that shouldn't be broken down the way you want to but if you do break it down..its hard to argue that massive means anything today especially over Multiplayer and Online.
If you take everything WoW is and take everything Destiny is, they are fundamentally the same game just with different amounts of people per shard. Destiny and games like it are new information, and the reason why MMO needs to be expanded beyond the 2003 understanding.
"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.
But Here we go again. This whole thing on what gets to be called MMO
.....
For his generation Destiny is Everquest.
I love change.
Oh c'mon you love this topic and you know it. You would barely post anything if it weren't for this subject.
It gives you an opportunity to expand on your thesis that these everyday arguments are about liking/disliking change instead of what they really are: simply trying to change the meaning of a long established term for a type of game in decline to include a type of popular game that borrows a few things from MMOs.
Liking or disliking this type of game is irrelevant to how you label it... if you must label it. It's actually the totally unnecessary act of putting a label on it that limits it and detracts from the discussion about how good/bad the game is and self-derails discussions into trivial and pedantic off-topic horseshit when the author slaps it on the title like a putting a chip on his own shoulder and saying "come at me bro!"
I personally could give less of a shit about Destiny or FO76 being an MMO or a sandbox. I only care about how the game plays.
It's you and others who assign and defend these labels for games that could conceivably be shoehorned into fitting the labels, who think you're on the cutting edge of modern trends. And then you top it off by constantly saying that anyone who disagrees with your edgy labeling is just resisting change... you really got to get over yourselves.
ah okay so calling these games something at all is "edgy" lol. "get over yourselves" how about tell that to the people who constantly tell people they simply can't label things. That's edgy to me. Trying to avoid labels. "I'm unique labels don't apply!" is the most edgy shit ever. You cant avoid labels in this life sorry to disappoint you. The reality is everything has a label. If one doesn't exist a new label will be made. its just human.
This isn't about changing the meaning of a term. Its about expanding its meaning because of new information. That's what we do, we adapt and change when new information is presented. Its not edgy its common sense. Its amazing how common sense seems to be edgy to people now. You act as if somebody said MMO now means "Many Moon Oranges. That's changing the meaning of the term. Saying a game is MMO Lite is expanding the MMO term. So relax big dog, nobody is changing the meaning of the OG term.
This is funny to me though because you literally say "Liking or disliking this type of game" in your second paragraph. That implies that you know a label should exist.
Why not label? what's wrong with labels? What do you suggest then if not called something? They have to be called something, even if just "Game". So the problem isn't the labeling, you don't agree with the labeling. That's the problem.
Have you played any of these games? Are you denying the similarities to MMO or is it "I don't give a shit" now because you cant argue against it anymore? I personally never say it first... its always the response to people like yourself saying why it isn't or straight up calling people stupid for even making the suggestion. Nothing is edgy when its evident. I don't need to prove to anyone here that I'm on the cutting edge of tech, trust me.
I only bring it up in defense of the people being called stupid (myself incl) because whoever doesn't agree with them. I explain why we aren't wrong for saying MMO. Again who are you or anyone else to tell people they cant label things they feel need labeling? Especially since the article itself refers to F76 as MMO and the first thing people say is "its not a mmo" well who are you kind sir to tell people they cant call it that? People who think like me will say "Well actually it is kinda a MMO, here is why" then that turns into more people like yourself attacking that person because they used a label they don't like. Not that its wrong fundamentally but because they hate the label.
If people feel like these games should be called something, let them do it. Its not up to you and we aren't wrong for saying what we are experiencing. The reason you say " I don't give a shit" is because you feel it too, you just don't want to accept it because you are one of the people who have constantly argued against it.
Saying "get over yourselves" isn't going to win you any debate here. These MMO-Lite games have a thesis around it that is hard to argue against. Its not edgy to label things, its human. Humans label things so they can understand them. Its like you want to ignore the very obvious thing these games are doing in order to preserve your nostalgia.
As I said, the thing about change is that it must happen. You don't need to accept it, you don't need to agree, it is here. I didn't do it, nobody here did it, there is no ego with this, we are just pointing it out in the face of those who say its stupid or edgy to label things, simply because they aren't ready to agree on what to label it as. Don't confuse expanding on a term with changing the meaning of the term.
If those games give people a MMO experience they are not wrong for labeling it as one. These "Types" of games are here to stay a while. People are going to label them something, its human.
Personally I think its still early and that's what the Resistance to the label is about. In 2-3 years nobody will fight that "MMO-lites" are a thing. Its going to be normalized. More of these games are coming. The games as a service trend may continue in a big way behind these types of games.
Pretty sure he was just pointing out how weird it was to be calling games mmos that are clearly not mmos.
Ignoring the rest of what you posted, as it is irrelevant.
MMO is not much more than Massively, at all.
Massively Multiplayer Online.
Massively is the most important word out of the three, nothing in MMO means more than the first M.
Yes, just yes. I'm not going to ignore anything you posted I'm going to respond to it all.
Explain Massively. Don't give me the book definition, I know what it is, give me what it means in the online gaming space.
If you only had the Massively part is it still a MMO? How is it the most important then?
Okay according to you, lets take away the multiplayer and online part. Lets take away raids, dungeons, guilds, gear tiers, pvp, character progression, persistent world.. take away all that stuff and you have nothing. Those things I just listed are the Multiplayer and Online parts. The most important parts of the term. That's the gameplay and experience part. Massively means nothing in online gaming today. It was used as a buzzword in the early 2000s. The only reason its there today is simply because it stuck and people don't get rid of terms that stick. This isn't about changing the term, its about expanding it.
Massive is the least important part of the term. Funny that some vets put so much weight on it. The other things are the things that create the experience. Not Massive.
If you do those other things (Multiplayer Online) with 24 or 500 people you are having a "MMO" experience. MMO is a term that shouldn't be broken down the way you want to but if you do break it down..its hard to argue that massive means anything today especially over Multiplayer and Online.
If you take everything WoW is and take everything Destiny is, they are fundamentally the same game just with different amounts of people per shard. Destiny and games like it are new information, and the reason why MMO needs to be expanded beyond the 2003 understanding.
CoD is Multiplayer Online
Battlefield, Overwatch, WarThunder, Eternal Crusade all MO.
Planetside2 is Massively Multiplayer.
Defiance, ESO, WoW, all MMO.
Do you see the theme? Do you see the difference in numbers of players possible in one world/instance/game space?
That first "M" makes ALL the difference. The difference between 5v5, 10v10, 32v32, and 100v100...500v500, 300v300v300.
Massively Multiplayer is very different to just Multiplayer. I fail to see how people don't see that. It seems self-evident to me. The only question, IMHO, remains "Where is the line between 'multiplayer' and 'massively multiplayer'. Personally, 32v32 is not a massive battle/encounter/gathering. Therefore, to me, a server with maximum population of 24 is not massively multiplayer. It is just multiplayer. Fallout 76 is, to me, an MORPG, not an MMORPG.
Your definition of "massive" is clearly different to mine, and his/hers/theirs, and the dictionary's:
Massive is the least important part of the term. Funny that some vets put so much weight on it. The other things are the things that create the experience. Not Massive.
If you do those other things (Multiplayer Online) with 24 or 500 people you are having a "MMO" experience. MMO is a term that shouldn't be broken down the way you want to but if you do break it down..its hard to argue that massive means anything today especially over Multiplayer and Online.
If you take everything WoW is and take everything Destiny is, they are fundamentally the same game just with different amounts of people per shard. Destiny and games like it are new information, and the reason why MMO needs to be expanded beyond the 2003 understanding.
I'm not going to get into a big discussion. I just want to let you know that the 'massively' bit was part of the experience. If you don't get that, then *shrug*.
I'll probably give this game a go. Had a lot of fun with the build mode in Fallout 4. Might wait a bit til after release though. Much prefer buying off Steam than downloading another stupid launcher... *cough* Blizzard *cough*
Back in the days, when mmorpgs first surfaced, players was not focused on being in a game surrounded by 100s of other players (which actually often spoil any kind of immersion), but a crpg where you meet and team up with random people, from a massive community. Fallout 76 is that. The community is (will be) massive. Its online and its an rpg. The feel is what I believe a lot of players are looking for, when coming to this site. Whatever you like it or not is one thing, but I sure find this game belong on this site
But Here we go again. This whole thing on what gets to be called MMO
.....
For his generation Destiny is Everquest.
I love change.
Oh c'mon you love this topic and you know it. You would barely post anything if it weren't for this subject.
It gives you an opportunity to expand on your thesis that these everyday arguments are about liking/disliking change instead of what they really are: simply trying to change the meaning of a long established term for a type of game in decline to include a type of popular game that borrows a few things from MMOs.
Liking or disliking this type of game is irrelevant to how you label it... if you must label it. It's actually the totally unnecessary act of putting a label on it that limits it and detracts from the discussion about how good/bad the game is and self-derails discussions into trivial and pedantic off-topic horseshit when the author slaps it on the title like a putting a chip on his own shoulder and saying "come at me bro!"
I personally could give less of a shit about Destiny or FO76 being an MMO or a sandbox. I only care about how the game plays.
It's you and others who assign and defend these labels for games that could conceivably be shoehorned into fitting the labels, who think you're on the cutting edge of modern trends. And then you top it off by constantly saying that anyone who disagrees with your edgy labeling is just resisting change... you really got to get over yourselves.
ah okay so calling these games something at all is "edgy" lol. "get over yourselves" how about tell that to the people who constantly tell people they simply can't label things. That's edgy to me. Trying to avoid labels. "I'm unique labels don't apply!" is the most edgy shit ever. You cant avoid labels in this life sorry to disappoint you. The reality is everything has a label. If one doesn't exist a new label will be made. its just human.
This isn't about changing the meaning of a term. Its about expanding its meaning because of new information. That's what we do, we adapt and change when new information is presented. Its not edgy its common sense. Its amazing how common sense seems to be edgy to people now. You act as if somebody said MMO now means "Many Moon Oranges. That's changing the meaning of the term. Saying a game is MMO Lite is expanding the MMO term. So relax big dog, nobody is changing the meaning of the OG term.
This is funny to me though because you literally say "Liking or disliking this type of game" in your second paragraph. That implies that you know a label should exist.
Why not label? what's wrong with labels? What do you suggest then if not called something? They have to be called something, even if just "Game". So the problem isn't the labeling, you don't agree with the labeling. That's the problem.
Have you played any of these games? Are you denying the similarities to MMO or is it "I don't give a shit" now because you cant argue against it anymore? I personally never say it first... its always the response to people like yourself saying why it isn't or straight up calling people stupid for even making the suggestion. Nothing is edgy when its evident. I don't need to prove to anyone here that I'm on the cutting edge of tech, trust me.
I only bring it up in defense of the people being called stupid (myself incl) because whoever doesn't agree with them. I explain why we aren't wrong for saying MMO. Again who are you or anyone else to tell people they cant label things they feel need labeling? Especially since the article itself refers to F76 as MMO and the first thing people say is "its not a mmo" well who are you kind sir to tell people they cant call it that? People who think like me will say "Well actually it is kinda a MMO, here is why" then that turns into more people like yourself attacking that person because they used a label they don't like. Not that its wrong fundamentally but because they hate the label.
If people feel like these games should be called something, let them do it. Its not up to you and we aren't wrong for saying what we are experiencing. The reason you say " I don't give a shit" is because you feel it too, you just don't want to accept it because you are one of the people who have constantly argued against it.
Saying "get over yourselves" isn't going to win you any debate here. These MMO-Lite games have a thesis around it that is hard to argue against. Its not edgy to label things, its human. Humans label things so they can understand them. Its like you want to ignore the very obvious thing these games are doing in order to preserve your nostalgia.
As I said, the thing about change is that it must happen. You don't need to accept it, you don't need to agree, it is here. I didn't do it, nobody here did it, there is no ego with this, we are just pointing it out in the face of those who say its stupid or edgy to label things, simply because they aren't ready to agree on what to label it as. Don't confuse expanding on a term with changing the meaning of the term.
If those games give people a MMO experience they are not wrong for labeling it as one. These "Types" of games are here to stay a while. People are going to label them something, its human.
Personally I think its still early and that's what the Resistance to the label is about. In 2-3 years nobody will fight that "MMO-lites" are a thing. Its going to be normalized. More of these games are coming. The games as a service trend may continue in a big way behind these types of games.
Pretty sure he was just pointing out how weird it was to be calling games mmos that are clearly not mmos.
Especially when it makes no difference other than perhaps some misguided sense that it's better to call them that for "reasons". Blizzard just did the exact same thing with Diablo Eternal.
FO76 is a multiplayer survival game. WTF is wrong with just calling it that? You can still cover it and sing its praises if that's what you want to do. All you accomplish by calling it an MMO is to confuse the issue and derail the discussion into the usual "it's an MMO", "No it's not" debate. Maybe that debate and its larger number of clicks is the "reason" this time.
As to why Bliz did it. I have no idea unless their market research tells them calling things MMOs is cool once again. It wasn't that long ago that developers were falling all over themselves trying to avoid the stigma and expectations those 3 letters generate.
"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
Ignoring the rest of what you posted, as it is irrelevant.
MMO is not much more than Massively, at all.
Massively Multiplayer Online.
Massively is the most important word out of the three, nothing in MMO means more than the first M.
Yes, just yes. I'm not going to ignore anything you posted I'm going to respond to it all.
Explain Massively. Don't give me the book definition, I know what it is, give me what it means in the online gaming space.
If you only had the Massively part is it still a MMO? How is it the most important then?
Okay according to you, lets take away the multiplayer and online part. Lets take away raids, dungeons, guilds, gear tiers, pvp, character progression, persistent world.. take away all that stuff and you have nothing. Those things I just listed are the Multiplayer and Online parts. The most important parts of the term. That's the gameplay and experience part. Massively means nothing in online gaming today. It was used as a buzzword in the early 2000s. The only reason its there today is simply because it stuck and people don't get rid of terms that stick. This isn't about changing the term, its about expanding it.
Massive is the least important part of the term. Funny that some vets put so much weight on it. The other things are the things that create the experience. Not Massive.
If you do those other things (Multiplayer Online) with 24 or 500 people you are having a "MMO" experience. MMO is a term that shouldn't be broken down the way you want to but if you do break it down..its hard to argue that massive means anything today especially over Multiplayer and Online.
If you take everything WoW is and take everything Destiny is, they are fundamentally the same game just with different amounts of people per shard. Destiny and games like it are new information, and the reason why MMO needs to be expanded beyond the 2003 understanding.
What is it about MMO you do not understand?
To be an MMO, a game needs to be massively multiplayer, and online.
To be massively multiplayer, the game needs to support (at least) hundreds of players at the same time, on the same server/shard. Online is online, does it really need to be explained?
It does not need to have raids, dungeons, guilds, or anything else you listed, it just needs to be massively multiplayer, and online.
What you are talking about is what type of MMO a game is, like MMORPG, or MMOFPS, for example.
But at the end of the day, if the game does not support (at least) hundreds of players at the same time on the same server/shard, the rest is irrelevant, it is not an MMO of any type.
It is a funny world we live in. We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
Especially when it makes no difference other than perhaps some misguided sense that it's better to call them that for "reasons". Blizzard just did the exact same thing with Diablo Eternal.
FO76 is a multiplayer survival game. WTF is wrong with just calling it that? You can still cover it and sing its praises if that's what you want to do. All you accomplish by calling it an MMO is to confuse the issue and derail the discussion into the usual "it's an MMO", "No it's not" debate. Maybe that debate and its larger number of clicks is the "reason" this time.
As to why Bliz did it. I have no idea unless their market research tells them calling things MMOs is cool once again. It wasn't that long ago that developers were falling all over themselves trying to avoid the stigma and expectations those 3 letters generate.
Developers are calling their games MMOs because , I think, they are realizing that people are wanting a real MMO. However the people bankrolling these games are to cheap to finance a real MMO and rather just pass off these cheap to make MMO-Light knockoffs as the real thing.
This game is fun! This is the first game in years that when I enter it, time flies while Im in the world. When Im out of the game, I want to be back in it, so when the server is down between tests, I am playing Fallout 4 lol. I would not call myself a fan of first person shooters, so its hard for me to believe that I am interested in any Fallout game, but the lore, and the music, the quasi 50s settings....I love it. Maybe because I grew up during the cold war and the threat of nuclear war was always there. For years, I truly believed this game was my destiny. Death or scrounging out a life in a nuclear winter. Im just glad I am doing it in a game and not real life.
Now there are some bugs still, and I am sure they are aware of them, but to me they aren't game breaking. If anything, they kind of fit in. Like I am experiencing a little bit too much rads or some sort of chem leak I drank. But to me game play is fun and immersive. And thats what a game is supposed to be eh?
I don't mind the number of players. Like Kano said, this looks like a multiplayer mod for FO4. Not enough game to justify $60. I wouldn't mind if the launch price was cut in half, or even $40. This will be a pick up on sale for me, if it's still alive in a couple of years.
... This is just a Fallout 4 skin on a bad PvP game.
That's just the point: Fallout 76 is NOT a "PVP game" !
It's a game with PVP.
Subtle but important difference...
But once again, why do so many companies feel they have to force PVP into the gameplay? If there is so much exploring to do, why ruin it with player killing?
Comments
Ignoring the rest of what you posted, as it is irrelevant.
MMO is not much more than Massively, at all.
Massively Multiplayer Online.
Massively is the most important word out of the three, nothing in MMO means more than the first M.
We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
It gives you an opportunity to expand on your thesis that these everyday arguments are about liking/disliking change instead of what they really are: simply trying to change the meaning of a long established term for a type of game in decline to include a type of popular game that borrows a few things from MMOs.
Liking or disliking this type of game is irrelevant to how you label it... if you must label it. It's actually the totally unnecessary act of putting a label on it that limits it and detracts from the discussion about how good/bad the game is and self-derails discussions into trivial and pedantic off-topic horseshit when the author slaps it on the title like a putting a chip on his own shoulder and saying "come at me bro!"
I personally could give less of a shit about Destiny or FO76 being an MMO or a sandbox. I only care about how the game plays.
It's you and others who assign and defend these labels for games that could conceivably be shoehorned into fitting the labels, who think you're on the cutting edge of modern trends. And then you top it off by constantly saying that anyone who disagrees with your edgy labeling is just resisting change... you really got to get over yourselves.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
In ESO a raid is limited to 24 players, but there are often numerous 24-player raids running per faction (so times that by 3) as well as many players who are not in a raid or in smaller groups and that is all on one massive map where every player can interact with each other in real time.
Keep it real please.
It's a game with PVP.
Subtle but important difference...
Let's face it, monetizing inventory slots is a staple in most Cash Shops...
I personally don't want this version of fallout, not saying this experiment is wrong, and if its fun then YAY, but I want a proper Fallout 5 not this and if this becomes to successful then and understandably why bother.
Hope this makes sense, its kinda a conflicted stance as I want to try this but at the same time I want to hate it.
I went into Fallout 76 prepared to run away screaming (based on reviews), even pre-ordering for just $5, so it would be easy to cut my loses.
Outcome: I have such a crazy hard time waiting for release, even cursing I have to work the next two beta times.
This game is going to be special to me, and I find it more mmORPG, than most if not all of the rest of the games out there
This isn't about changing the meaning of a term. Its about expanding its meaning because of new information. That's what we do, we adapt and change when new information is presented. Its not edgy its common sense. Its amazing how common sense seems to be edgy to people now. You act as if somebody said MMO now means "Many Moon Oranges. That's changing the meaning of the term. Saying a game is MMO Lite is expanding the MMO term. So relax big dog, nobody is changing the meaning of the OG term.
This is funny to me though because you literally say "Liking or disliking this type of game" in your second paragraph. That implies that you know a label should exist.
Why not label? what's wrong with labels? What do you suggest then if not called something? They have to be called something, even if just "Game". So the problem isn't the labeling, you don't agree with the labeling. That's the problem.
Have you played any of these games? Are you denying the similarities to MMO or is it "I don't give a shit" now because you cant argue against it anymore? I personally never say it first... its always the response to people like yourself saying why it isn't or straight up calling people stupid for even making the suggestion. Nothing is edgy when its evident. I don't need to prove to anyone here that I'm on the cutting edge of tech, trust me.
I only bring it up in defense of the people being called stupid (myself incl) because whoever doesn't agree with them. I explain why we aren't wrong for saying MMO. Again who are you or anyone else to tell people they cant label things they feel need labeling? Especially since the article itself refers to F76 as MMO and the first thing people say is "its not a mmo" well who are you kind sir to tell people they cant call it that? People who think like me will say "Well actually it is kinda a MMO, here is why" then that turns into more people like yourself attacking that person because they used a label they don't like. Not that its wrong fundamentally but because they hate the label.
If people feel like these games should be called something, let them do it. Its not up to you and we aren't wrong for saying what we are experiencing. The reason you say " I don't give a shit" is because you feel it too, you just don't want to accept it because you are one of the people who have constantly argued against it.
Saying "get over yourselves" isn't going to win you any debate here. These MMO-Lite games have a thesis around it that is hard to argue against. Its not edgy to label things, its human. Humans label things so they can understand them. Its like you want to ignore the very obvious thing these games are doing in order to preserve your nostalgia.
As I said, the thing about change is that it must happen. You don't need to accept it, you don't need to agree, it is here. I didn't do it, nobody here did it, there is no ego with this, we are just pointing it out in the face of those who say its stupid or edgy to label things, simply because they aren't ready to agree on what to label it as. Don't confuse expanding on a term with changing the meaning of the term.
If those games give people a MMO experience they are not wrong for labeling it as one. These "Types" of games are here to stay a while. People are going to label them something, its human.
Personally I think its still early and that's what the Resistance to the label is about. In 2-3 years nobody will fight that "MMO-lites" are a thing. Its going to be normalized. More of these games are coming. The games as a service trend may continue in a big way behind these types of 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.
Yes, just yes. I'm not going to ignore anything you posted I'm going to respond to it all.
Explain Massively. Don't give me the book definition, I know what it is, give me what it means in the online gaming space.
If you only had the Massively part is it still a MMO? How is it the most important then?
Okay according to you, lets take away the multiplayer and online part. Lets take away raids, dungeons, guilds, gear tiers, pvp, character progression, persistent world.. take away all that stuff and you have nothing. Those things I just listed are the Multiplayer and Online parts. The most important parts of the term. That's the gameplay and experience part. Massively means nothing in online gaming today. It was used as a buzzword in the early 2000s. The only reason its there today is simply because it stuck and people don't get rid of terms that stick. This isn't about changing the term, its about expanding it.
Massive is the least important part of the term. Funny that some vets put so much weight on it. The other things are the things that create the experience. Not Massive.
If you do those other things (Multiplayer Online) with 24 or 500 people you are having a "MMO" experience. MMO is a term that shouldn't be broken down the way you want to but if you do break it down..its hard to argue that massive means anything today especially over Multiplayer and Online.
If you take everything WoW is and take everything Destiny is, they are fundamentally the same game just with different amounts of people per shard. Destiny and games like it are new information, and the reason why MMO needs to be expanded beyond the 2003 understanding.
"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.
Pretty sure he was just pointing out how weird it was to be calling games mmos that are clearly not mmos.
I'm not going to get into a big discussion. I just want to let you know that the 'massively' bit was part of the experience. If you don't get that, then *shrug*.
LOLZ
Buy it, play it...then.
Seriously, why you call it mmo? Because you need to convince lil kids to buy this...thing?
Looking on other similar "games" im surprised why Bethesda decided to make it.
This looks like other "amazing" so called survival products.
P.S. Also accoring reddit some modder (teetharejustdone) claims that it EASY to cheat in F76.
P.S. 2 Cant wait Fallout/ElderScrolls BR!!! :P
Fallout 76 is that. The community is (will be) massive. Its online and its an rpg. The feel is what I believe a lot of players are looking for, when coming to this site.
Whatever you like it or not is one thing, but I sure find this game belong on this site
FO76 is a multiplayer survival game. WTF is wrong with just calling it that? You can still cover it and sing its praises if that's what you want to do. All you accomplish by calling it an MMO is to confuse the issue and derail the discussion into the usual "it's an MMO", "No it's not" debate. Maybe that debate and its larger number of clicks is the "reason" this time.
As to why Bliz did it. I have no idea unless their market research tells them calling things MMOs is cool once again. It wasn't that long ago that developers were falling all over themselves trying to avoid the stigma and expectations those 3 letters generate.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
To be an MMO, a game needs to be massively multiplayer, and online.
To be massively multiplayer, the game needs to support (at least) hundreds of players at the same time, on the same server/shard.
Online is online, does it really need to be explained?
It does not need to have raids, dungeons, guilds, or anything else you listed, it just needs to be massively multiplayer, and online.
What you are talking about is what type of MMO a game is, like MMORPG, or MMOFPS, for example.
But at the end of the day, if the game does not support (at least) hundreds of players at the same time on the same server/shard, the rest is irrelevant, it is not an MMO of any type.
We had Empires run by Emperors, we had Kingdoms run by Kings, now we have Countries...
Now there are some bugs still, and I am sure they are aware of them, but to me they aren't game breaking. If anything, they kind of fit in. Like I am experiencing a little bit too much rads or some sort of chem leak I drank.
Aloha Mr Hand !
Business sense.