Gaming Forum boards are (sadly) a relic of the old ways of internet communication, and it's not just this website- frankly it's amazing we still have a forum board.
It feels like we gave ourselves too many options to communicate on the internet, and now we can't just pick one and stick with it.
There is no way I would join the absolute hell that is social media.
Why the hell do people give sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc such a monopoly ?
If you want to do something commercial, sure I can see why Twitch etc have their appeal. But if all you want to do is communicate, forums are unbeatable.
Why the hell do people give sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc such a monopoly ?
Because people want to react immediately when they see a video or story, and those sites give them the means to do so. They don't want to have to remember what they saw or read for the 30 additional seconds it would take to switch over to their favorite forum site.
Most people absolutely do not care about having a conversation. They only want to get their ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction off their chest.
I actually don't think Massive or Massively 'matters', I can remember a few threads where players would tear into each other over which it was. Sure Wikipedia says Massively, I go with that, as they both mean " a lot of players" can we just move on.
Rather than explain why grammatically it matters why it has to be Massively instead of Massive, at issue is some gamers have argued that Massive Multiplayer is in reference to the size of the world and does not refer to the number of players.
Which is why precision in words and definitions often matter.
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
Why the hell do people give sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc such a monopoly ?
Because people want to react immediately when they see a video or story, and those sites give them the means to do so. They don't want to have to remember what they saw or read for the 30 additional seconds it would take to switch over to their favorite forum site.
Most people absolutely do not care about having a conversation. They only want to get their ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction off their chest.
Well that's sort of true on forums, yes?
How often do we see posters reacting simply from the thread title, often incorrectly without reading the actual post, God forbid there should be linked content.
Or my favorite, "I didn't bother to read any of the previous posters replies, but here is my 2¢."
Yeah, no, I skip right past any posts with that qualifier. If someone isn't actually part of the conversation, why would I care what their opinion is on the subject at hand.
(Well, unless of course I can see a way to report them).
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
I actually don't think Massive or Massively 'matters', I can remember a few threads where players would tear into each other over which it was. Sure Wikipedia says Massively, I go with that, as they both mean " a lot of players" can we just move on.
Rather than explain why grammatically it matters why it has to be Massively instead of Massive, at issue is some gamers have argued that Massive Multiplayer is in reference to the size of the world and does not refer to the number of players.
Which is why precision in words and definitions often matter.
Oh yes I had forgotten that one, the way I look at that is this: If you are going to have a lot of players in a game you need a big game world. One goes hand in hand with the other, yet we see MMOS thinking that even if they have lots of players they can put them in the same room (tiny MMO) and that's supposed to be alright.
It would seem odd to have 'massive' refer to number of players when 'multiplayer' seems to have that covered, unless 'massive' is describing 'multiplayer' so that 'multiplayer' doesn't just mean a dozen people.
My head hurts.
Maybe we should drop the MMORPG thing and just be more precise. I'd like to propose the following:
[4-digit]-[4-digit]-[2-digit]-[2-digit]-[2-digit]
Okay The first 4 digits are number of simultaneous players. The second 4 digits is the world size in km2. The first 2 digits is role-playing on a scale of 01 to 10. The second set of 2 digits is a scam rating. The last 2 digts is the MMORPG game rating.
So instead of being a MMORPG, a game like WoW would be:
4000-0200-02-00-9.0
The community has to ask itself: Are we going to take this seriously or just be a bunch of clowns?
I actually don't think Massive or Massively 'matters', I can remember a few threads where players would tear into each other over which it was. Sure Wikipedia says Massively, I go with that, as they both mean " a lot of players" can we just move on.
Rather than explain why grammatically it matters why it has to be Massively instead of Massive, at issue is some gamers have argued that Massive Multiplayer is in reference to the size of the world and does not refer to the number of players.
Which is why precision in words and definitions often matter.
Indeed!
A Massive Multiplayer Online Game would mean
It's a Massive Game
Its a Multiplayer Game
and its an Online Game
A Massively Multiplayer Online Game means
The multiplayer component of the game is Massive
Its a Multiplayer game
and its an Online game
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Why the hell do people give sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc such a monopoly ?
Because people want to react immediately when they see a video or story, and those sites give them the means to do so. They don't want to have to remember what they saw or read for the 30 additional seconds it would take to switch over to their favorite forum site.
Most people absolutely do not care about having a conversation. They only want to get their ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction off their chest.
Well that's sort of true on forums, yes?
How often do we see posters reacting simply from the thread title, often incorrectly without reading the actual post, God forbid there should be linked content.
Or my favorite, "I didn't bother to read any of the previous posters replies, but here is my 2¢."
Yeah, no, I skip right past any posts with that qualifier. If someone isn't actually part of the conversation, why would I care what their opinion is on the subject at hand.
(Well, unless of course I can see a way to report them).
I do that once in a while. Because at the time I didn't have time to read it all, but I didn't want to forget about a reply I wanted to make, not knowing if it had already been talked about. Sort of a "fair warning."
Side note: Now I know why you don't understand me.
its rare to have something interesting to talk about when it comes to mmorpg since most of the news are about crowdfunded mmorpg failing in development. There's a limit on how many times you can discuss what defines an mmorpg which is about as enjoyable as an acid bath for your eyes.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Why the hell do people give sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc such a monopoly ?
Because people want to react immediately when they see a video or story, and those sites give them the means to do so. They don't want to have to remember what they saw or read for the 30 additional seconds it would take to switch over to their favorite forum site.
Most people absolutely do not care about having a conversation. They only want to get their ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction off their chest.
Well that's sort of true on forums, yes?
How often do we see posters reacting simply from the thread title, often incorrectly without reading the actual post, God forbid there should be linked content.
Or my favorite, "I didn't bother to read any of the previous posters replies, but here is my 2¢."
Yeah, no, I skip right past any posts with that qualifier. If someone isn't actually part of the conversation, why would I care what their opinion is on the subject at hand.
(Well, unless of course I can see a way to report them).
I do that once in a while. Because at the time I didn't have time to read it all, but I didn't want to forget about a reply I wanted to make, not knowing if it had already been talked about. Sort of a "fair warning."
Side note: Now I know why you don't understand me.
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
Why the hell do people give sites like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc such a monopoly ?
Because people want to react immediately when they see a video or story, and those sites give them the means to do so. They don't want to have to remember what they saw or read for the 30 additional seconds it would take to switch over to their favorite forum site.
Most people absolutely do not care about having a conversation. They only want to get their ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction off their chest.
Well that's sort of true on forums, yes?
How often do we see posters reacting simply from the thread title, often incorrectly without reading the actual post, God forbid there should be linked content.
Or my favorite, "I didn't bother to read any of the previous posters replies, but here is my 2¢."
Yeah, no, I skip right past any posts with that qualifier. If someone isn't actually part of the conversation, why would I care what their opinion is on the subject at hand.
(Well, unless of course I can see a way to report them).
I do that once in a while. Because at the time I didn't have time to read it all, but I didn't want to forget about a reply I wanted to make, not knowing if it had already been talked about. Sort of a "fair warning."
Side note: Now I know why you don't understand me.
Reported.
Ban them. Ban them all. Let the moderators sort 'em out.
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Whilst I personally expect a massive game world as well as massive player counts, I've always been open to other possibilities, especially outside of RPGs.
I'm still waiting for a multiplayer FPS game like Battlefield, but with 1000v1000! I want to reach the sort of numbers where the chaos begins to feel more realistic. Like, I'd really like to play a D-Day landings map with 1000s of players participating.
Or go fantasy, and be able to do something like Helms Deep, but with 1000s of people as orcs and 1000s as rohirrim etc.
No idea if it'd be successful, or even fun, but I think it would be.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Words change as culture changes. We a bunch of old farts saying what the word massively means in the context of games and Palia has 25 people playing on a shard. Past 10 years of MMOs had no where close to the population we would have played in our hay day. How do we define it for the current generation of gamers? Another 20 years and the only buttons we will be pushing is to get the nice lady to bring us a cup of pudding. :'D
I actually don't think Massive or Massively 'matters', I can remember a few threads where players would tear into each other over which it was. Sure Wikipedia says Massively, I go with that, as they both mean " a lot of players" can we just move on.
I have been coming here multiple times daily for over 18 years that's crazy. I come here and definitely enjoy the lotro articles and a lot of the discussions like the current one about what is AOC? All the talk about PVP even if I have no interest in the game is really fun to read. I enjoy hearing about games I never played like lineage, wow or some of the older games those stories are some of the funnier ones.
I agree the current mmo situation has hurt the site some. One of the things that I think tremendously hurt the site and I have not enjoyed is the overzealous banhammer with no explanation. Some of the people who have been banned are certainly deserving it for some subjects and comments that can not be tolerated and I understand that. However, some of the permanent bans of posters have been too heavy handed we have suffered as a community from losing them. One example of a ban on a community member that I never understood and maybe I do not have all the facts and that is a given was Wizardry. He made some of the weirdest craziest sometimes non-subject related posts on this forum but was fun to read and laugh about his take and then the people who were commenting on his take were sometimes really fun. I think he got banned for making some stupid overly sexist comment that may have been offensive in a certain light. In some stupid thread that should've just been shutdown. Getting banned forever and not just a vacation even if it was a long one just because you want to be welcoming to everyone I think was overkill. In my opinion and I have shown this place a tremendous amount of loyalty for a long time I think the bans have hurt us more than any kind of good they were trying to accomplish. Wizardry may not be the best example but he is not the only one the list is huge. I think it would be great if we could go back and get some of the heavy handed decisions reversed or at least reconsidered. It is not my website, but I am a long time supporter and miss the community. I could be wrong about the reason he was banned above it is just an example of a point I am trying to make about people getting tossed out anyways not trying to offend just giving an opinion of a place I have enjoyed for most of my adult life maybe I'm too forgiving. Some of the suggestions that have been offered in this thread are great. The idea of featuring a game having a guild and a server are great. I think another cool thing would be a monthly feature about other columnist that used to work here like how are they doing? Where is their life at? Would they ever be interested in writing an article from time to time about how gaming has changed since they started or whatever? Things like that. I am not asking for some kind of weird facebook update status just honoring the history of the site. I think that could be really interesting for our old timers, newer people and just fun.
You could expand that and have a page that talks about the history of the site itself and things like that. Another series of articles idea could be featuring an MMORPG and its history and creators of old what are they up to? How are the games they created doing or what happened or is to those games? You could include things like baffling decisions they made or highlight some of the more and less well known failures and success with that game over time during the month or whatever time period you decided to feature the history of that game. I am a big knowing where you came from and I think the history of the evolution of this site and the games it covered and still covers could really be fun.
I have been coming here multiple times daily for over 18 years that's crazy. I come here and definitely enjoy the lotro articles and a lot of the discussions like the current one about what is AOC? All the talk about PVP even if I have no interest in the game is really fun to read. I enjoy hearing about games I never played like lineage, wow or some of the older games those stories are some of the funnier ones.
I agree the current mmo situation has hurt the site some. One of the things that I think tremendously hurt the site and I have not enjoyed is the overzealous banhammer with no explanation. Some of the people who have been banned are certainly deserving it for some subjects and comments that can not be tolerated and I understand that. However, some of the permanent bans of posters have been too heavy handed we have suffered as a community from losing them. One example of a ban on a community member that I never understood and maybe I do not have all the facts and that is a given was Wizardry. He made some of the weirdest craziest sometimes non-subject related posts on this forum but was fun to read and laugh about his take and then the people who were commenting on his take were sometimes really fun. I think he got banned for making some stupid overly sexist comment that may have been offensive in a certain light. In some stupid thread that should've just been shutdown. Getting banned forever and not just a vacation even if it was a long one just because you want to be welcoming to everyone I think was overkill. In my opinion and I have shown this place a tremendous amount of loyalty for a long time I think the bans have hurt us more than any kind of good they were trying to accomplish. Wizardry may not be the best example but he is not the only one the list is huge. I think it would be great if we could go back and get some of the heavy handed decisions reversed or at least reconsidered. It is not my website, but I am a long time supporter and miss the community. I could be wrong about the reason he was banned above it is just an example of a point I am trying to make about people getting tossed out anyways not trying to offend just giving an opinion of a place I have enjoyed for most of my adult life maybe I'm too forgiving. Some of the suggestions that have been offered in this thread are great. The idea of featuring a game having a guild and a server are great. I think another cool thing would be a monthly feature about other columnist that used to work here like how are they doing? Where is their life at? Would they ever be interested in writing an article from time to time about how gaming has changed since they started or whatever? Things like that. I am not asking for some kind of weird facebook update status just honoring the history of the site. I think that could be really interesting for our old timers, newer people and just fun.
You could expand that and have a page that talks about the history of the site itself and things like that. Another series of articles idea could be featuring an MMORPG and its history and creators of old what are they up to? How are the games they created doing or what happened or is to those games? You could include things like baffling decisions they made or highlight some of the more and less well known failures and success with that game over time during the month or whatever time period you decided to feature the history of that game. I am a big knowing where you came from and I think the history of the evolution of this site and the games it covered and still covers could really be fun.
Sorry for the long post.
I especially enjoy reading about the things that happened in yesteryear, in any MMORPG. Extra points if it's funny stuff.
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Whilst I personally expect a massive game world as well as massive player counts, I've always been open to other possibilities, especially outside of RPGs.
I'm still waiting for a multiplayer FPS game like Battlefield, but with 1000v1000! I want to reach the sort of numbers where the chaos begins to feel more realistic. Like, I'd really like to play a D-Day landings map with 1000s of players participating.
Or go fantasy, and be able to do something like Helms Deep, but with 1000s of people as orcs and 1000s as rohirrim etc.
No idea if it'd be successful, or even fun, but I think it would be.
Games like you mention (BF is my favorite all time shooter) need the map fitted to the play. Bigger is not necessarily better in such games, but obviously a 1k versus 1k map is going to have to be a lot bigger. PS2 does up to 2000 per map but typically had several hundred when I played. That game shows you can have a map which may seem larger than it needs to be, but with good transport players will get themselves to the action quickly enough.
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Whilst I personally expect a massive game world as well as massive player counts, I've always been open to other possibilities, especially outside of RPGs.
I'm still waiting for a multiplayer FPS game like Battlefield, but with 1000v1000! I want to reach the sort of numbers where the chaos begins to feel more realistic. Like, I'd really like to play a D-Day landings map with 1000s of players participating.
Or go fantasy, and be able to do something like Helms Deep, but with 1000s of people as orcs and 1000s as rohirrim etc.
No idea if it'd be successful, or even fun, but I think it would be.
I have always wanted to ride out across the bridge in a MMORPG recreation of the Battle for Helms Deep.
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
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Whilst I personally expect a massive game world as well as massive player counts, I've always been open to other possibilities, especially outside of RPGs.
I'm still waiting for a multiplayer FPS game like Battlefield, but with 1000v1000! I want to reach the sort of numbers where the chaos begins to feel more realistic. Like, I'd really like to play a D-Day landings map with 1000s of players participating.
Or go fantasy, and be able to do something like Helms Deep, but with 1000s of people as orcs and 1000s as rohirrim etc.
No idea if it'd be successful, or even fun, but I think it would be.
I have always wanted to ride out across the bridge in a MMORPG recreation of the Battle for Helms Deep.
You can do something like this in Lotro, maybe someone who has played more recently can remember. It was one of those play a character in the past quests.
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Whilst I personally expect a massive game world as well as massive player counts, I've always been open to other possibilities, especially outside of RPGs.
I'm still waiting for a multiplayer FPS game like Battlefield, but with 1000v1000! I want to reach the sort of numbers where the chaos begins to feel more realistic. Like, I'd really like to play a D-Day landings map with 1000s of players participating.
Or go fantasy, and be able to do something like Helms Deep, but with 1000s of people as orcs and 1000s as rohirrim etc.
No idea if it'd be successful, or even fun, but I think it would be.
I have always wanted to ride out across the bridge in a MMORPG recreation of the Battle for Helms Deep.
You can do something like this in Lotro, maybe someone who has played more recently can remember. It was one of those play a character in the past quests.
I believe it was the Gondor expansion that introduced "Epic Battles" where you could do this.
I had quit by that time so not played them personally, but they were advertised as a way to participate in the biggest set pieces from the books without needing all the players. Helms Deep, Siege of Gondar were the ones added.
They were basically just an extension of the skirmish system - scalable content for 1-12 players - but on larger battlefields with more background NPCs. They were supposed to replace raids, and Turbine stopped making new raids for a few years, but they didn't work well so traditional raids were brought back again.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Those extra couple of letters, "ly", change the meaning quite a bit. Which is precisely why the original genre inventors used "massively", because it was the scale of the multiplayer, not the scale of the game world, that set them apart.
Your semantics are dead on, but for me a massive game world was a given because we didn't have the tiny-MMOs that were to come back then. Can anyone remember when every new MMO in reviews was compared in size to usually WOW? It was Massively in world and players.
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Whilst I personally expect a massive game world as well as massive player counts, I've always been open to other possibilities, especially outside of RPGs.
I'm still waiting for a multiplayer FPS game like Battlefield, but with 1000v1000! I want to reach the sort of numbers where the chaos begins to feel more realistic. Like, I'd really like to play a D-Day landings map with 1000s of players participating.
Or go fantasy, and be able to do something like Helms Deep, but with 1000s of people as orcs and 1000s as rohirrim etc.
No idea if it'd be successful, or even fun, but I think it would be.
I have always wanted to ride out across the bridge in a MMORPG recreation of the Battle for Helms Deep.
You can do something like this in Lotro, maybe someone who has played more recently can remember. It was one of those play a character in the past quests.
I believe it was the Gondor expansion that introduced "Epic Battles" where you could do this.
I had quit by that time so not played them personally, but they were advertised as a way to participate in the biggest set pieces from the books without needing all the players. Helms Deep, Siege of Gondar were the ones added.
They were basically just an extension of the skirmish system - scalable content for 1-12 players - but on larger battlefields with more background NPCs. They were supposed to replace raids, and Turbine stopped making new raids for a few years, but they didn't work well so traditional raids were brought back again.
I think it was Helm's Deep, actually. The Battle at the Hornburg is the first Epic Batte I remember.
Comments
Which is why precision in words and definitions often matter.
"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
How often do we see posters reacting simply from the thread title, often incorrectly without reading the actual post, God forbid there should be linked content.
Or my favorite, "I didn't bother to read any of the previous posters replies, but here is my 2¢."
Yeah, no, I skip right past any posts with that qualifier. If someone isn't actually part of the conversation, why would I care what their opinion is on the subject at hand.
(Well, unless of course I can see a way to report them).
"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
My head hurts.
Maybe we should drop the MMORPG thing and just be more precise.
I'd like to propose the following:
[4-digit]-[4-digit]-[2-digit]-[2-digit]-[2-digit]
Okay
The first 4 digits are number of simultaneous players.
The second 4 digits is the world size in km2.
The first 2 digits is role-playing on a scale of 01 to 10.
The second set of 2 digits is a scam rating.
The last 2 digts is the MMORPG game rating.
So instead of being a MMORPG, a game like WoW would be:
4000-0200-02-00-9.0
The community has to ask itself: Are we going to take this seriously or just be a bunch of clowns?
So the actual wording has become more important as the years went on, back then there were no ifs or buts about what a MMORPG meant.
Because at the time I didn't have time to read it all, but I didn't want to forget about a reply I wanted to make, not knowing if it had already been talked about. Sort of a "fair warning."
Side note: Now I know why you don't understand me.
Once upon a time....
"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
Ban them all.
Let the moderators sort 'em out.
For sure!
I agree the current mmo situation has hurt the site some. One of the things that I think tremendously hurt the site and I have not enjoyed is the overzealous banhammer with no explanation.
Some of the people who have been banned are certainly deserving it for some subjects and comments that can not be tolerated and I understand that. However, some of the permanent bans of posters have been too heavy handed we have suffered as a community from losing them.
One example of a ban on a community member that I never understood and maybe I do not have all the facts and that is a given was Wizardry. He made some of the weirdest craziest sometimes non-subject related posts on this forum but was fun to read and laugh about his take and then the people who were commenting on his take were sometimes really fun.
I think he got banned for making some stupid overly sexist comment that may have been offensive in a certain light. In some stupid thread that should've just been shutdown. Getting banned forever and not just a vacation even if it was a long one just because you want to be welcoming to everyone I think was overkill.
In my opinion and I have shown this place a tremendous amount of loyalty for a long time I think the bans have hurt us more than any kind of good they were trying to accomplish. Wizardry may not be the best example but he is not the only one the list is huge. I think it would be great if we could go back and get some of the heavy handed decisions reversed or at least reconsidered.
It is not my website, but I am a long time supporter and miss the community. I could be wrong about the reason he was banned above it is just an example of a point I am trying to make about people getting tossed out anyways not trying to offend just giving an opinion of a place I have enjoyed for most of my adult life maybe I'm too forgiving.
Some of the suggestions that have been offered in this thread are great. The idea of featuring a game having a guild and a server are great. I think another cool thing would be a monthly feature about other columnist that used to work here like how are they doing? Where is their life at? Would they ever be interested in writing an article from time to time about how gaming has changed since they started or whatever? Things like that. I am not asking for some kind of weird facebook update status just honoring the history of the site. I think that could be really interesting for our old timers, newer people and just fun.
You could expand that and have a page that talks about the history of the site itself and things like that. Another series of articles idea could be featuring an MMORPG and its history and creators of old what are they up to? How are the games they created doing or what happened or is to those games? You could include things like baffling decisions they made or highlight some of the more and less well known failures and success with that game over time during the month or whatever time period you decided to feature the history of that game. I am a big knowing where you came from and I think the history of the evolution of this site and the games it covered and still covers could really be fun.
Sorry for the long post.
Once upon a time....
"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
I could also be gaslighting myself.