I haven't played in many years, but doesn't Diablo3 (like 1 and 2 LOD) have like 16 or 32 player multiplay? How is that massive?
I don't care though really. Add it if you want to add it, I say. BUT....don't be surprised when you choose NOT to add other games that might be closer to MMOs and some people get all pissy about it.
Why not? It is newsworthy, its of great interest to many of the readers here, and if you dont like it you have the option to not read the articles.
Because it's simply not an MMO.
It would be like calling Modern Warfare 2 and RTS, or Starcraft 2 an FPS.
They may share some similar aspects, but they simply don't fall into the category. Forcing them into such a category devalues the entire meaning of said category.
Considering what other games are listed here, I think Diablo 3 should be listed too.
But I think that thinking too much about whether the game has common chat-hub (ala GW1) when categorizing it, you're going the wrong way. Chat-hubs are nice, but people don't play the game in chat-hub, chat-hubs just exist so that people could get their trading done, group up, and start the real gameplay of mass-murdering monsters.
Does the game offer persistent character advancement, or some other persistent element between gaming sessions? Does the game allow you to chat with all players playing the game while you play? Can you invite any of them to your group while you're slaying monsters, or do you need to return to chat hub to 'start a new game' to do that? Does the game allow trading between players and forming player guilds? Is all content only for soloers, or is there also content that is meant to be done in a group?
Originally posted by Ceridith Originally posted by lizardbones
Originally posted by Ceridith
Originally posted by lizardbones
Originally posted by Nibs
Originally posted by lizardbones Massive - pretty sure it will be Multiplayer - check Online - check RPG - check It should be added.
That 1st 'M' is for 'massively', not 'massive'. The 1st and 2nd 'M's should be taken taken together for 'Massively Multiplayer', meaning multiplayer on a massive scale, rather than only 32 people top a server. On those grounds, I don't think D3 should be included.
It will still fit "Massively Multiplayer" as in 3 Million people playing the game online.
As Nibs said, Massively Multiplayer refers to a 'massive' amount of players playing the game together in the same persistent world. Diablo 3 will limit players to playing together in small groups on instanced servers that are separate from one another, with no common gameplay area. If all it takes is a lot of people playing a game online, then Modern Warfare 2 is an MMO... and I sincerely hope you understand that MW2 should not be considered an MMO.
A game where every player enters the world one at a time would still be an MMORPG if there are a massive number of players. The world is persistent, but it doesn't have to be the same instance of the world. The definition is the players interacting with each other. There is an auction that is global to all players in a given region where the players interact with each other.
Call of Duty, World of Tanks, etc. all fit the definition. You can have your own personal interpretation, but D3 fits the definition. Farmville fits the definition as well.
** edit ** Farmville isn't referenced on these forums as a game people play, so it probably shouldn't have it's own section.
How is the game world in any way persistent in Diablo 3? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the game world will randomly generate each time you join a new instanced server, the same as it did in Diablo 2. So again I ask, how is that in any way a persistent world? And this still also doesn't even account for the fact that only small groups of players at a time will even be on an individual server that has it's own randomly generated instance of the 'world'... and when all the players leave the server, the instance goes poof and that 'world' is wiped out. Diablo 3 simply is not an MMO. It may have a few features that are similar to what MMOs have, but at the end of the day Diablo 3 is just not make use of persistent world mechanics. If Diablo 3 is to be considered an MMO, then dozens, of not hundreds, of additional games will also fall into the MMO category, at which point the term MMO will mean mean pretty much everything, and the term itself will lose any useful meaning.
The game world doesn't have to be persistent, just shared. In any event, the details will be randomly generated, but the world itself will be persistent. It won't be consistent, but it'll be persistent. Furthermore, every player playing will be able to interact with each other through the Auction House. Not even Eve has the potential to have an economy that big.
There will be a massive number of players, playing together online with as much role playing as any other game that fits your narrow definition of 'mmorpg'.
But that's all opinions, with no more or less weight than your post. Take it with a grain of salt. I'm certainly not taking the discussion seriously.
At this point, it would be inconsistent of MMORPG.com to not give Diablo 3 a section and post the game in the game list, given the other games they've created sections for. Whether your definition of MMORPG is clearly defined or fluid, Diablo 3 is 'close enough' to count.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It is not massive. All the gameplay is instanced worlds with small parties. How is that massive?
Massive does not refer to the number of players total that play a game. It refers to the number of players that can simultaneously interact within the same world.
If the MMORPG staff is even debating this, they should just change the website to be "MORPG.com" or even just "online gaming".
Come on, that a single players game with a shitty copy protection. If you add Diablo to the list, you should add Assassin creed 2 since you have to be online to play it on PC.
I think you should add it because it is a game that willl be massive and it has online mutiplayer and it is a rpg
so you might as well
Playing: Single player games |
Awaiting: Wild Star |Blade & Soul | The Repopulation | The Elder Scrolls online | ArcheAge | Firefall | Survarium | Bless | Black Desert |
Played: Guild Wars | Diablo 3 |The War Z | Runescape |World of Warcraft |Combat Arms |Perfect World | Rift | Fiesta | DC universe online | Aion | Age of Conan |Allods | Vindictus | The Secret World | Forge | Battle of the Immortals | Global Agenda| Cabal Online | Tera |
It is not massive. All the gameplay is instanced worlds with small parties. How is that massive?
Exactly. It's a co-op game really, not massive.
How many people could I potentially group with in D3? More than 4? If so it's already a bigger group experience than TOR is offering, massive or not really doesn"t matter IMO. It's relevancy to the player-base that's most important. If it's relevant and would generate discussion (which it's already shown to in multiple forum sections) it's fair game IMO.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
It is not massive. All the gameplay is instanced worlds with small parties. How is that massive?
Exactly. It's a co-op game really, not massive.
How many people could I potentially group with in D3? More than 4? If so it's already a bigger group experience than TOR is offering, massive or not really doesn"t matter IMO. It's relevancy to the player-base that's most important. If it's relevant and would generate discussion (which it's already shown to in multiple forum sections) it's fair game IMO.
TOR will have worlds with huge populations. I think you are severely missing the point.
Its not an MMORPG, as long as people understand that, there is nothing wrong with adding it.
Maybe you could make an extra cattegory for Non massive online RPG's like the orriginal Guildwars and Vindictus.
I agree with this. Maybe there could be a category for the non-MMO games. I think the community here plays more than just MMOs, so categories would be.....I don't know.....nice.
It is not massive. All the gameplay is instanced worlds with small parties. How is that massive?
Exactly. It's a co-op game really, not massive.
How many people could I potentially group with in D3? More than 4? If so it's already a bigger group experience than TOR is offering, massive or not really doesn"t matter IMO. It's relevancy to the player-base that's most important. If it's relevant and would generate discussion (which it's already shown to in multiple forum sections) it's fair game IMO.
TOR will have worlds with huge populations. I think you are severely missing the point.
No I don't think I missed that point, as if you read my post I said massive ( huge populations) isn't as important as relevancy to those who play MMO's.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
Comments
I haven't played in many years, but doesn't Diablo3 (like 1 and 2 LOD) have like 16 or 32 player multiplay? How is that massive?
I don't care though really. Add it if you want to add it, I say. BUT....don't be surprised when you choose NOT to add other games that might be closer to MMOs and some people get all pissy about it.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
ALL of that ^^^^^.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Because it's simply not an MMO.
It would be like calling Modern Warfare 2 and RTS, or Starcraft 2 an FPS.
They may share some similar aspects, but they simply don't fall into the category. Forcing them into such a category devalues the entire meaning of said category.
Considering what other games are listed here, I think Diablo 3 should be listed too.
But I think that thinking too much about whether the game has common chat-hub (ala GW1) when categorizing it, you're going the wrong way. Chat-hubs are nice, but people don't play the game in chat-hub, chat-hubs just exist so that people could get their trading done, group up, and start the real gameplay of mass-murdering monsters.
Does the game offer persistent character advancement, or some other persistent element between gaming sessions? Does the game allow you to chat with all players playing the game while you play? Can you invite any of them to your group while you're slaying monsters, or do you need to return to chat hub to 'start a new game' to do that? Does the game allow trading between players and forming player guilds? Is all content only for soloers, or is there also content that is meant to be done in a group?
That 1st 'M' is for 'massively', not 'massive'.
The 1st and 2nd 'M's should be taken taken together for 'Massively Multiplayer', meaning multiplayer on a massive scale, rather than only 32 people top a server.
On those grounds, I don't think D3 should be included.
It will still fit "Massively Multiplayer" as in 3 Million people playing the game online.
As Nibs said, Massively Multiplayer refers to a 'massive' amount of players playing the game together in the same persistent world. Diablo 3 will limit players to playing together in small groups on instanced servers that are separate from one another, with no common gameplay area.
If all it takes is a lot of people playing a game online, then Modern Warfare 2 is an MMO... and I sincerely hope you understand that MW2 should not be considered an MMO.
A game where every player enters the world one at a time would still be an MMORPG if there are a massive number of players. The world is persistent, but it doesn't have to be the same instance of the world. The definition is the players interacting with each other. There is an auction that is global to all players in a given region where the players interact with each other.
Call of Duty, World of Tanks, etc. all fit the definition. You can have your own personal interpretation, but D3 fits the definition. Farmville fits the definition as well.
** edit **
Farmville isn't referenced on these forums as a game people play, so it probably shouldn't have it's own section.
How is the game world in any way persistent in Diablo 3?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the game world will randomly generate each time you join a new instanced server, the same as it did in Diablo 2. So again I ask, how is that in any way a persistent world? And this still also doesn't even account for the fact that only small groups of players at a time will even be on an individual server that has it's own randomly generated instance of the 'world'... and when all the players leave the server, the instance goes poof and that 'world' is wiped out.
Diablo 3 simply is not an MMO. It may have a few features that are similar to what MMOs have, but at the end of the day Diablo 3 is just not make use of persistent world mechanics. If Diablo 3 is to be considered an MMO, then dozens, of not hundreds, of additional games will also fall into the MMO category, at which point the term MMO will mean mean pretty much everything, and the term itself will lose any useful meaning.
The game world doesn't have to be persistent, just shared. In any event, the details will be randomly generated, but the world itself will be persistent. It won't be consistent, but it'll be persistent. Furthermore, every player playing will be able to interact with each other through the Auction House. Not even Eve has the potential to have an economy that big.
There will be a massive number of players, playing together online with as much role playing as any other game that fits your narrow definition of 'mmorpg'.
But that's all opinions, with no more or less weight than your post. Take it with a grain of salt. I'm certainly not taking the discussion seriously.
At this point, it would be inconsistent of MMORPG.com to not give Diablo 3 a section and post the game in the game list, given the other games they've created sections for. Whether your definition of MMORPG is clearly defined or fluid, Diablo 3 is 'close enough' to count.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
No. Don't want it.
It should be added, because actually MMO stands for LOTS OF PEOPLE ONLINE IN ONE SERVER.
There will be with Diablo 3...
enough said..
NO
D3 does not pass the MM test (and I'd be very carefull with the RPG part as well).
Yes. Diablo 3 is going to be ruined by RMT like any recent MMORPG so, yes, a lot in common.
Why not? we have hellgate london on list don't we?
It is not massive. All the gameplay is instanced worlds with small parties. How is that massive?
Massive does not refer to the number of players total that play a game. It refers to the number of players that can simultaneously interact within the same world.
If the MMORPG staff is even debating this, they should just change the website to be "MORPG.com" or even just "online gaming".
Come on, that a single players game with a shitty copy protection. If you add Diablo to the list, you should add Assassin creed 2 since you have to be online to play it on PC.
I think you should add it because it is a game that willl be massive and it has online mutiplayer and it is a rpg
so you might as well
Playing: Single player games |
Awaiting: Wild Star |Blade & Soul | The Repopulation | The Elder Scrolls online | ArcheAge | Firefall | Survarium | Bless | Black Desert |
Played: Guild Wars | Diablo 3 |The War Z | Runescape |World of Warcraft |Combat Arms |Perfect World | Rift | Fiesta | DC universe online | Aion | Age of Conan |Allods | Vindictus | The Secret World | Forge | Battle of the Immortals | Global Agenda| Cabal Online | Tera |
Exactly. It's a co-op game really, not massive.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Short answer: No.
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
This is probably the most honest answer given for not having D3 in the game list.
Well played, sir!
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
What he said
FYI the poll doesn't show the results to us mere users *dons tinfoil hat*
Its not an MMORPG, as long as people understand that, there is nothing wrong with adding it.
Maybe you could make an extra cattegory for Non massive online RPG's like the orriginal Guildwars and Vindictus.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
How many people could I potentially group with in D3? More than 4? If so it's already a bigger group experience than TOR is offering, massive or not really doesn"t matter IMO. It's relevancy to the player-base that's most important. If it's relevant and would generate discussion (which it's already shown to in multiple forum sections) it's fair game IMO.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
Guild Wars 1 is still listed on this site though.
Outside of a town-hub, the majority of the game is built for 4 people, with a handful of 8-12 player PvE missions and some 8-player PvP stuff.
Hell, probably the most quoted line from their wiki...
"Guild Wars is a CORPG, or Competitive/Cooperative Online Role Playing Game developed for Windows by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft."
Lets Push Things Forward
I knew I would live to design games at age 7, issue 5 of Nintendo Power.
Support games with subs when you believe in their potential, even in spite of their flaws.
Hellgate london, vindictus, GW.. D3 i don't see the difference. Hell we even have Habbo hotel on list which is nothing but a chat room with item shop.
TOR will have worlds with huge populations. I think you are severely missing the point.
I agree with this. Maybe there could be a category for the non-MMO games. I think the community here plays more than just MMOs, so categories would be.....I don't know.....nice.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
No I don't think I missed that point, as if you read my post I said massive ( huge populations) isn't as important as relevancy to those who play MMO's.
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...