MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER online rpg. That means hundreds or thousands of people in a PERSISTANT world. .. WTF is happening to this site? It's all about the CHA CHING! now.
nethervoid - Est. '97 [UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|AQW|DN|SWTOR|Dofus|SotA|BDO|AO|NW|LA] - Currently Playing EQ1 20k+ subs YouTube Gaming channel
The title pretty much says it all and MMORPG.com Managing Editor Bill Murphy really wants your input.
Yes. Not only becuase their is a clear delineation between game-type, game-play, mechanics, but also off-line vs on-line, lobby team-based vs persistent world massively-multiplayer.
So, be specific about it under an "Action RPG Section" or modifier or something that clearly identifies it as an Action RPG as opposed to a mmorpg, for such games like:
Please include other game, because it's just not about D3, and may Action RPG enthusiasts that visit this site shouldn't think that Diablo 3 is their only option.
I love any RPG, MMO or not (eventhough this game has different games instead of 1 world, it is gonna be most massive of all time and you get involved in PvP arena combat as well).
An unqualified and hearty YES from me. Please cover D3 and Neverwinter, too, imo.
Seriously, WoW, Rift, LotRO, STO, CoX, etc., play for all intents and purposes like CORPGs for 95% of their respective contents, since you spend the VAST majority of your time questing either alone or in small player groups in -- eegad! -- instances.
Look at how much Diablo 3 has been debated on these forums already over various topics. Pop it in its own 'not strictly an mmo' section by all means, but not having a section for it would seem just dumb when so many will be playing it and wanting info.
This isn't about whether D3 is an MMORPG or not, it isn't and the article says so. It's about whether or not to add it on this site. Assuming that what was said in the article was true (concerning the new planned game categories ie. mmorpg, mmofps etc), then yes, it should be included in this site and categorized correctly.
On futher thought, is this the MMORPG.com NFE? Like is this just a topic to gauge reaction and tomorrow when I log in all my progress will be gone, and the site will be completely different?
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
Whether or not hubs are "in-game" or just a glorified chat room, I would say its still very much a MMORPG. Remember, MMOs first came to be as MUDs where were in essense, glorified chat rooms. The primary difference between GW1 and D2 were the in-game hubs. You were still adventuring in instanced areas.
Also, even if the only difference between D2 and D3s online model is the AH, the AH sounds like it will provide a variety of metagame experiences that are MMOish. I think this is key. It will have the economy of a MMO (and D2 did to some degree). I have always felt we will never see a "Diablo Online" as Diablo's online model has evolved with each game... I imagine by the time we see D4, it will be more MMORPG than MRPG.
With MMOs having more and more influence in other genres, the definition of a MMO should be expected to change and evolve.
Add it. It isn't a true MMORPG (as much as I love the Diablo series), but is close enough and doesn't fall into any other categories that mmorpg.com's sister sites cover.
As a reminder, we at MMORPG.com are working actively to ensure that a wide variety of games that have ties to traditional MMORPGs are covered here on the site if nowhere else than our Games List. Our scope is widening to cover MOBAs, MMORTS, MMOFPS, traditional RPGs, action-RPGs and more that have even what some would call 'cursory' connections to MMORPGs. Our plan is to make the Games List "sortable" by genre similar to those listed above.
As Boltonsquad stated:
Of course it should be added, maybe it's not an MMO as such but its an RPG and many player will be investing in it and it would be nice to have a discussion on it here.
Then why are you guys even running the poll? What your suggesting should be done, but like others we honestly don't care about all the F2P junk released, but unfortunately I see a large amount of advertisement revenue coming from them.
I think sorting them will help out, and I'd sort them in the games list and everywhere so people can compare apples to apples not to oranges.
It has no offline play option, it is fully online, so it meets the standard of any listed mmorpg, and it will be bigger then any listed free to play game.
Well it looks like by an entire lack of logic and reason this game is still going to be listed on this site, desptie what anyone says for or agaisnt it. I have a feeling that the decision to add this game was made long before this 'question' article was even posed, and this is just a token excuse to say "well we asked and there was enough positive response to warrent adding it".
While there are other games listed on this site that technically aren't MMOs, I don't think that's a good reason to further muddy the term or the site. If anything, it's reason to get rid of the games that don't correctly fit into the MMORPG umbrella, and to put them in their own categorization, if not their own separate site.
With nonsensical administration like this, along with the trend of ridiculously one sided, overly opinionated, or downright void of factual substance 'featured articles' on this site, particular for several non-MMORPG games, I see less and less reason to stick around on this site. Honestly, I get far more reliable and relevent news from massively, and they're competent enough to know where to draw the line of what should and should not be discussed under their sub-site.
That's not to say that Diablo 3 shouldn't be discussed at all, but if it is it should be to the limit of the impact it might have on actual MMOs. Diablo 3 itself however, simply is not an MMO. Considering that this site is MMORPG.com... I think they really need to think long and hard about how they're running things, and fix the scope of this site to focus back on MMORPGs. If they really want to host discussion of games that aren't quite MMOs, then that should either fall into a sub-section that's segregated from the main site, or do so on an entirely separate sister site.
I (personally) disagree with the assessment that D3 is not an MMORPG. It's like Sandbox or Themepark...it's a range. D3 is close enough. It's the in game Auction House that does it. All the players have a persistent connection to each other through the auction house.
Yes, it's only a lobby type thing, but that lobby is massively multiplayer. I'll agree with anyone who says that's a thin link into the MMORPG pool, but again, it's close enough.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
its not a MMORPG and therefore shouldn't have a place on this site (same goes with DDO, GW 1...). We are already plagued with all the WoW, ToR fanboys no need to give the Diablo 3 fanboys another home (they have battlenet..).
Is it massive? No
is it an RPG? No
Its a single player game with a forced online requirement and coop modus. I think you guys, girls should stick more strictly to the MMORPG formula instead of adding non MMORPGs.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
It may be a massive multiplayer online rpg but it's not a massively multiplayer online rpg.
There are already a plethora of non-MMORPG's on this site anyway so there isn't any reason not to add Diablo 3 too.
That's a terrible reason to add it. Just because there's games that aren't quite MMOs listed as games on this site, isn't a reason to add more, that just bogs the site down with even more irrelevant and out of place information.
The non-MMO games should be removed from the site, or in the least not labled the same as actual MMORPGs and moved into a 'quasi'-MMO subsection of the site.
Comments
This definition is wrong.
MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER online rpg. That means hundreds or thousands of people in a PERSISTANT world. .. WTF is happening to this site? It's all about the CHA CHING! now.
nethervoid - Est. '97
[UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|AQW|DN|SWTOR|Dofus|SotA|BDO|AO|NW|LA] - Currently Playing EQ1
20k+ subs YouTube Gaming channel
Yes. Not only becuase their is a clear delineation between game-type, game-play, mechanics, but also off-line vs on-line, lobby team-based vs persistent world massively-multiplayer.
So, be specific about it under an "Action RPG Section" or modifier or something that clearly identifies it as an Action RPG as opposed to a mmorpg, for such games like:
Diablo3
Torchlight2
Grim Dawn http://www.grimdawn.com/index.php
Path of Exile http://www.pathofexile.com/about/
Please include other game, because it's just not about D3, and may Action RPG enthusiasts that visit this site shouldn't think that Diablo 3 is their only option.
It will be added to MMORPG.COM anyway. People are interested in it, so you will add it. What I want is irrelevant.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Is it just me or we cannot see the results of the poll? would have been nice to see it.
Please add D3!
I love any RPG, MMO or not (eventhough this game has different games instead of 1 world, it is gonna be most massive of all time and you get involved in PvP arena combat as well).
And the diablo series are simply the best.
An unqualified and hearty YES from me. Please cover D3 and Neverwinter, too, imo.
Seriously, WoW, Rift, LotRO, STO, CoX, etc., play for all intents and purposes like CORPGs for 95% of their respective contents, since you spend the VAST majority of your time questing either alone or in small player groups in -- eegad! -- instances.
Look at how much Diablo 3 has been debated on these forums already over various topics. Pop it in its own 'not strictly an mmo' section by all means, but not having a section for it would seem just dumb when so many will be playing it and wanting info.
This isn't about whether D3 is an MMORPG or not, it isn't and the article says so. It's about whether or not to add it on this site. Assuming that what was said in the article was true (concerning the new planned game categories ie. mmorpg, mmofps etc), then yes, it should be included in this site and categorized correctly.
If the mmorpg.com guys want to add more game types to the website more power to them.
But just keep in mind if you add Diablo 3 you will have to add in every damn co-op rpg with a online option.
Seems like too much work to me.
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
On futher thought, is this the MMORPG.com NFE? Like is this just a topic to gauge reaction and tomorrow when I log in all my progress will be gone, and the site will be completely different?
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...
Diablo3 is as much an MMo as quite a few games on the game list. I am honestly surprised it hasn't been added yet.
I voted yes.
Whether or not hubs are "in-game" or just a glorified chat room, I would say its still very much a MMORPG. Remember, MMOs first came to be as MUDs where were in essense, glorified chat rooms. The primary difference between GW1 and D2 were the in-game hubs. You were still adventuring in instanced areas.
Also, even if the only difference between D2 and D3s online model is the AH, the AH sounds like it will provide a variety of metagame experiences that are MMOish. I think this is key. It will have the economy of a MMO (and D2 did to some degree). I have always felt we will never see a "Diablo Online" as Diablo's online model has evolved with each game... I imagine by the time we see D4, it will be more MMORPG than MRPG.
With MMOs having more and more influence in other genres, the definition of a MMO should be expected to change and evolve.
I think Lostkost said it best.
When "mmo" was coined the there were only a few games around that could wear that moniker.
The field of games has widened.
As long as there is some persistence such as what Guild Wars has then I don't see any reason not to include it.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Yes.
Gw was mmorpg so why not diablo 3
@Sovrath Persistence is a characteristic in all RPGs, yet not all are MMOs.
Add it. It isn't a true MMORPG (as much as I love the Diablo series), but is close enough and doesn't fall into any other categories that mmorpg.com's sister sites cover.
Yes, it should be added.
Then why are you guys even running the poll? What your suggesting should be done, but like others we honestly don't care about all the F2P junk released, but unfortunately I see a large amount of advertisement revenue coming from them.
I think sorting them will help out, and I'd sort them in the games list and everywhere so people can compare apples to apples not to oranges.
It has no offline play option, it is fully online, so it meets the standard of any listed mmorpg, and it will be bigger then any listed free to play game.
Well it looks like by an entire lack of logic and reason this game is still going to be listed on this site, desptie what anyone says for or agaisnt it. I have a feeling that the decision to add this game was made long before this 'question' article was even posed, and this is just a token excuse to say "well we asked and there was enough positive response to warrent adding it".
While there are other games listed on this site that technically aren't MMOs, I don't think that's a good reason to further muddy the term or the site. If anything, it's reason to get rid of the games that don't correctly fit into the MMORPG umbrella, and to put them in their own categorization, if not their own separate site.
With nonsensical administration like this, along with the trend of ridiculously one sided, overly opinionated, or downright void of factual substance 'featured articles' on this site, particular for several non-MMORPG games, I see less and less reason to stick around on this site. Honestly, I get far more reliable and relevent news from massively, and they're competent enough to know where to draw the line of what should and should not be discussed under their sub-site.
That's not to say that Diablo 3 shouldn't be discussed at all, but if it is it should be to the limit of the impact it might have on actual MMOs. Diablo 3 itself however, simply is not an MMO. Considering that this site is MMORPG.com... I think they really need to think long and hard about how they're running things, and fix the scope of this site to focus back on MMORPGs. If they really want to host discussion of games that aren't quite MMOs, then that should either fall into a sub-section that's segregated from the main site, or do so on an entirely separate sister site.
I (personally) disagree with the assessment that D3 is not an MMORPG. It's like Sandbox or Themepark...it's a range. D3 is close enough. It's the in game Auction House that does it. All the players have a persistent connection to each other through the auction house.
Yes, it's only a lobby type thing, but that lobby is massively multiplayer. I'll agree with anyone who says that's a thin link into the MMORPG pool, but again, it's close enough.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
No.
It may be a massive multiplayer online rpg but it's not a massively multiplayer online rpg.
There are already a plethora of non-MMORPG's on this site anyway so there isn't any reason not to add Diablo 3 too.
How about hell (oh the irony) NO
its not a MMORPG and therefore shouldn't have a place on this site (same goes with DDO, GW 1...). We are already plagued with all the WoW, ToR fanboys no need to give the Diablo 3 fanboys another home (they have battlenet..).
Is it massive? No
is it an RPG? No
Its a single player game with a forced online requirement and coop modus. I think you guys, girls should stick more strictly to the MMORPG formula instead of adding non MMORPGs.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
That's a terrible reason to add it. Just because there's games that aren't quite MMOs listed as games on this site, isn't a reason to add more, that just bogs the site down with even more irrelevant and out of place information.
The non-MMO games should be removed from the site, or in the least not labled the same as actual MMORPGs and moved into a 'quasi'-MMO subsection of the site.