With today's shifting loyalties and players jumping from one game to the next and the next and so on, how many games can realistically expect that more than 100 would actually participate?
I've been in multiple battles that featured over 100 players in the late days of Darkfall. If a dying Darkfall can pull it off, any successful game can provided they want major battles to be a focus of their game.
I will however say that 100+ man battles sound much more epic than they feel when you are there. Reading an article about them makes them sound like the pinnacle of MMO gameplay. Being present feels like a giant mess, and even in the most well organized battles you are just listening to and following orders. They don't get your adrenaline running like small group combat does. You don't get the chance to stand out and be the hero like you do in small group combat.
However, if only 10 people can play on the server a 10 man battle means everyone is present in the same place fighting. That does not happen randomly. That happens when the game either sticks 10 people in the same small enclosed space of when 10 people agree to meet up and fight.
If a few hundred or thousand players can inhabit the same world then you will absolutely get small group PvP that happens out in the world as opposed to in pre-arranged battles. Those instances where you are trying to hit some resources out in the open world with your buddies, and another group shows up and combat happens.
And that is always way more of a rush than some prearranged combat in an arena.
So even though small group PvP is my favorite PvP, I absolutely require an MMO to do it the way I enjoy: organically and out in the open world.
A game is more likely to catch my interest if it supports 100's of players at the very least, than just a few dozen, maybe its because i view MMO's as a more 'social' experience, which is something you don't really get in games with few players in, you might just as well play a single player offline game as one that has only a few players, i just feel that your more likely to meet new people and make friends if there are thousands of players, particularly if its a persistent world, as i think people tend to invest in, or at least be more open to, social activities if its not a game with a small playerbase, though this i think also applies to games using megaservers, as the players don't tend to stay on the same instance together for any length of time.
can someone give me a game title that has a max of less than 100 that is labeled as an MMO please?
As said in the above post. Istaria, had 35 people in chat, to be safe 40 at most
Ryzom also has very few people playing, though a lot more than Istaria but not sure how much. Ryzom far more active, but probably had 100-200 people playing and anything in that number is pretty good.
I've played many older indie MMOs, and most are pretty active. Istaria is the main example I can think of, its labeled as an MMO but very dead and has far less people playing than any of the survival sandbox games.
But they are capable of handling more. MMO is not defined by how many are actually playing it but by how many it can support.
Quote straight from google "an online role-playing video game in which a very large number of people participate simultaneously."
It does not say "a large number of people that CAN participate simultaneously."
it in fact says a large number of people playing at the same time.
There is nothing massively multiplayer about a tiny amount of people playing (less than Ark servers).
Other than lag and your individual experience which is completely subjective the game itself is the exact same, the same features, rules, gameplay, quests, crafts, dungeons, auction... With 50 or 100 people as with 10 million. Please name one feature other than a subjective experience which is different.
When the term was coined it was in reference to the infrastructure that allowed a lot of people to connect to it, more than was previously allowed in multiplayer games. That's it. Whether those people came or not is a question of marketing and whether the game was good not about how many people it could support.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
people really dont. They just use this as an excuse to tell you how shitty a game is. Bottom line is that the game is shitty.
be careful here .. you have not seen those who argue until their faces are blue that MMO has to be "massively multiplayer"?
They will pull up dictionaries, wiki, age old quotes from has-been developers, and probably gospels from Jesus Christ himself to show you that they have the authority to change how the whole internet use a simple 3 letters "MMO".
Funny though ... not even the OP of this website listens to them ...
I will however say that 100+ man battles sound much more epic than they feel when you are there. Reading an article about them makes them sound like the pinnacle of MMO gameplay. Being present feels like a giant mess, and even in the most well organized battles you are just listening to and following orders. They don't get your adrenaline running like small group combat does. You don't get the chance to stand out and be the hero like you do in small group combat.
Nah, not for me. The best experience I've ever had was the largest Siege I ever participated in. It was a lineage 2 siege, we have something like 30+ clans and they had a bit more.
I like the epic feel of these types of battles. Where every "front" has their own story going on.
Heck, the whole and sole reason I decided to try an mmo was because of the sieges that were advertised in Lineage 2.
If there was a game with "just huge sieges" that might be enough for me.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Effective communication is one of the most valuable skills to learn.
Part of that is learning that words have meaning and are chosen for that meaning in order to communicate and idea. Different words will communicate a different idea reducing the effectiveness of your communication.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Effective communication is one of the most valuable skills to learn.
Part of that is learning that words have meaning and are chosen for that meaning in order to communicate and idea. Different words will communicate a different idea reducing the effectiveness of your communication.
That's really what this issue boils down to for me.
While I've learned that if nairusseldon is talking about MMOs he could be talking about anything from pong, to chicken soup, to a particularly satisfying dump he took this morning, when I'm using it I mean a game where hundreds or thousands of players can inhabit the non-instanced portions of the world at the same time. That is what I expect anyone else is talking about when they say MMO.
If I install a game claiming to be an MMO and it's not an MMO, the way I define an MMO, I delete it. Because if what I am looking for is a massively multiplayer experience a Clash of Clans / League of Legends / Diablo rip off just isn't going to cut it.
people really dont. They just use this as an excuse to tell you how shitty a game is. Bottom line is that the game is shitty.
be careful here .. you have not seen those who argue until their faces are blue that MMO has to be "massively multiplayer"?
They will pull up dictionaries, wiki, age old quotes from has-been developers, and probably gospels from Jesus Christ himself to show you that they have the authority to change how the whole internet use a simple 3 letters "MMO".
Funny though ... not even the OP of this website listens to them ...
HUH?
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
people really dont. They just use this as an excuse to tell you how shitty a game is. Bottom line is that the game is shitty.
be careful here .. you have not seen those who argue until their faces are blue that MMO has to be "massively multiplayer"?
They will pull up dictionaries, wiki, age old quotes from has-been developers, and probably gospels from Jesus Christ himself to show you that they have the authority to change how the whole internet use a simple 3 letters "MMO".
Funny though ... not even the OP of this website listens to them ...
HUH?
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Actually his argument as I understand it is since so many use it incorrectly and call games MMOs which clearly aren't (this site being one of the offenders) at what point does it fail to matter?
Sadly he's not unique in being wrong but as with others here I feel precision in terms is important and worth maintaining in this case.
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
people really dont. They just use this as an excuse to tell you how shitty a game is. Bottom line is that the game is shitty.
be careful here .. you have not seen those who argue until their faces are blue that MMO has to be "massively multiplayer"?
They will pull up dictionaries, wiki, age old quotes from has-been developers, and probably gospels from Jesus Christ himself to show you that they have the authority to change how the whole internet use a simple 3 letters "MMO".
Funny though ... not even the OP of this website listens to them ...
HUH?
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Actually his argument as I understand it is since so many use it incorrectly and call games MMOs which clearly aren't (this site being one of the offenders) at what point does it fail to matter?
Sadly he's not unique in being wrong but as with others here I feel precision in terms is important and worth maintaining in this case.
But MMO literally is an acronym meaning Massively Multiplayer Online... it's like claiming ATM doesn't mean automated teller machine...
Thats a bizarre argument.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
It's funny -- as I've watched Camelot Unchained test 3000 bots to try out server load capacity and I see other MMOs bragging about battles with thousands (or hundreds?) of participants, I always think....really? With today's shifting loyalties and players jumping from one game to the next and the next and so on, how many games can realistically expect that more than 100 would actually participate?
Just like I hate gigantic crowds in real life, I hate 'em in my games. As @keller said, most people spend the vast majority of their time in any "MMO" with 3-9 other people. Seeing hundreds of others running around that I don't give a damn about doesn't make the experience more compelling -- just more annoying.
Conceptually, I like the idea of servers as they are now, though I don't think it would be bad to allow for up to 200. I just wish all the games that did such things weren't survival games (yes, I know that those features can be toned way down or even off but the point stands).
I absolutely LOVED Neverwinter Nights persistent worlds and played on one that regularly had 50-100 people on it with active DMs that were interacting with us. I played on one (GLORWING!) for about 2 years and never felt the world was underpopulated. I miss those days.
I read some time ago that Dark Age of Camelot had massive PvP battles in their Realm Vs Realm conflicts. Just moments ago I did a google search and found a brief article at RPGamer that mentioned a battle with more than 1,500 concurrently fighting characters in early 2005.
I imagine that with Camelot Unchained being the spiritual successor to that game they want to ensure it is more than capable of matching it when it comes to battle size.
I don't know if a battle that large could happen again over a decade later with all the changes in the industry and player tastes, but then again I wouldn't have expected such to occur back in 2005 either, so I suppose it is possible.
people really dont. They just use this as an excuse to tell you how shitty a game is. Bottom line is that the game is shitty.
be careful here .. you have not seen those who argue until their faces are blue that MMO has to be "massively multiplayer"?
They will pull up dictionaries, wiki, age old quotes from has-been developers, and probably gospels from Jesus Christ himself to show you that they have the authority to change how the whole internet use a simple 3 letters "MMO".
Funny though ... not even the OP of this website listens to them ...
HUH?
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Actually his argument as I understand it is since so many use it incorrectly and call games MMOs which clearly aren't (this site being one of the offenders) at what point does it fail to matter?
Sadly he's not unique in being wrong but as with others here I feel precision in terms is important and worth maintaining in this case.
But MMO literally is an acronym meaning Massively Multiplayer Online... it's like claiming ATM doesn't mean automated teller machine...
Thats a bizarre argument.
Been down this road many times before, next comes "well how many is massively?" "Who gets to decide?" "If this site and others have changed the definition, who are you to say otherwise?" Or my personal favorite, "massively refers to the size of the world."
You aren't wrong, but you would be surprised how many will disagree with your point.
Is all good, playing a single player game atm, wait, does that stand for "at the moment" or automated teller machine?
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
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Not really. Just look at the game list here. Lost of games, classified as MMO, are not "massively multiplayer". It is not my argument .. it is just an observation.
See .. the argument is not that MMO does not mean "massively MP". The argument is that most people don't care, and so websites and the industry are taking liberty with it.
So certainly you can argue until you are blue in your face that they are wrong, and many have done that here. But the net effect ... ZERO.
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Not really. Just look at the game list here. Lost of games, classified as MMO, are not "massively multiplayer". It is not my argument .. it is just an observation.
See .. the argument is not that MMO does not mean "massively MP". The argument is that most people don't care, and so websites and the industry are taking liberty with it.
So certainly you can argue until you are blue in your face that they are wrong, and many have done that here. But the net effect ... ZERO.
It's not your argument, it's your personal crusade.
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Not really. Just look at the game list here. Lost of games, classified as MMO, are not "massively multiplayer". It is not my argument .. it is just an observation.
See .. the argument is not that MMO does not mean "massively MP". The argument is that most people don't care, and so websites and the industry are taking liberty with it.
So certainly you can argue until you are blue in your face that they are wrong, and many have done that here. But the net effect ... ZERO.
It's not your argument, it's your personal crusade.
It very much is; I'm just surprised he hasn't gotten bored at this point. How many years can a person go on and on about something that they really don't even care about? This ridiculous behavior really does speak volumes about one's character, though. Sad stuff.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
Not really. Just look at the game list here. Lost of games, classified as MMO, are not "massively multiplayer". It is not my argument .. it is just an observation.
See .. the argument is not that MMO does not mean "massively MP". The argument is that most people don't care, and so websites and the industry are taking liberty with it.
So certainly you can argue until you are blue in your face that they are wrong, and many have done that here. But the net effect ... ZERO.
It's not your argument, it's your personal crusade.
It very much is; I'm just surprised he hasn't gotten bored at this point. How many years can a person go on and on about something that they really don't even care about? This ridiculous behavior really does speak volumes about one's character, though. Sad stuff.
Ack, quiet, now I'm starting to feel I strongly resemble him, just in another light.
We're all just beating dead horses at this point, it's just that, its so much darn fun.
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
It very much is; I'm just surprised he hasn't gotten bored at this point. How many years can a person go on and on about something that they really don't even care about? This ridiculous behavior really does speak volumes about one's character, though. Sad stuff.
As much as your follow-up "how can he repeat this" comment here.
And to be fair (check the post logs), i got bored for a while. But hey, if you are here to flog dead horses (be a man, admit it!), i don't see why i shouldn't come back to do the same.
Comments
I will however say that 100+ man battles sound much more epic than they feel when you are there. Reading an article about them makes them sound like the pinnacle of MMO gameplay. Being present feels like a giant mess, and even in the most well organized battles you are just listening to and following orders. They don't get your adrenaline running like small group combat does. You don't get the chance to stand out and be the hero like you do in small group combat.
However, if only 10 people can play on the server a 10 man battle means everyone is present in the same place fighting. That does not happen randomly. That happens when the game either sticks 10 people in the same small enclosed space of when 10 people agree to meet up and fight.
If a few hundred or thousand players can inhabit the same world then you will absolutely get small group PvP that happens out in the world as opposed to in pre-arranged battles. Those instances where you are trying to hit some resources out in the open world with your buddies, and another group shows up and combat happens.
And that is always way more of a rush than some prearranged combat in an arena.
So even though small group PvP is my favorite PvP, I absolutely require an MMO to do it the way I enjoy: organically and out in the open world.
When the term was coined it was in reference to the infrastructure that allowed a lot of people to connect to it, more than was previously allowed in multiplayer games. That's it. Whether those people came or not is a question of marketing and whether the game was good not about how many people it could support.
They will pull up dictionaries, wiki, age old quotes from has-been developers, and probably gospels from Jesus Christ himself to show you that they have the authority to change how the whole internet use a simple 3 letters "MMO".
Funny though ... not even the OP of this website listens to them ...
I like the epic feel of these types of battles. Where every "front" has their own story going on.
Heck, the whole and sole reason I decided to try an mmo was because of the sieges that were advertised in Lineage 2.
If there was a game with "just huge sieges" that might be enough for me.
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
Part of that is learning that words have meaning and are chosen for that meaning in order to communicate and idea. Different words will communicate a different idea reducing the effectiveness of your communication.
While I've learned that if nairusseldon is talking about MMOs he could be talking about anything from pong, to chicken soup, to a particularly satisfying dump he took this morning, when I'm using it I mean a game where hundreds or thousands of players can inhabit the non-instanced portions of the world at the same time. That is what I expect anyone else is talking about when they say MMO.
If I install a game claiming to be an MMO and it's not an MMO, the way I define an MMO, I delete it. Because if what I am looking for is a massively multiplayer experience a Clash of Clans / League of Legends / Diablo rip off just isn't going to cut it.
Your argument is that MMO doesn't mean Massively Multiplayer Online?
Thats just... unique!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Sadly he's not unique in being wrong but as with others here I feel precision in terms is important and worth maintaining in this case.
"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
Thats a bizarre argument.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I imagine that with Camelot Unchained being the spiritual successor to that game they want to ensure it is more than capable of matching it when it comes to battle size.
I don't know if a battle that large could happen again over a decade later with all the changes in the industry and player tastes, but then again I wouldn't have expected such to occur back in 2005 either, so I suppose it is possible.
You aren't wrong, but you would be surprised how many will disagree with your point.
Is all good, playing a single player game atm, wait, does that stand for "at the moment" or automated teller machine?
Weird.
"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
Not really. Just look at the game list here. Lost of games, classified as MMO, are not "massively multiplayer". It is not my argument .. it is just an observation.
See .. the argument is not that MMO does not mean "massively MP". The argument is that most people don't care, and so websites and the industry are taking liberty with it.
So certainly you can argue until you are blue in your face that they are wrong, and many have done that here. But the net effect ... ZERO.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
We're all just beating dead horses at this point, it's just that, its so much darn fun.
"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
So I guess you have no problem with how the 3 letters MMO are used in this game list?
And to be fair (check the post logs), i got bored for a while. But hey, if you are here to flog dead horses (be a man, admit it!), i don't see why i shouldn't come back to do the same.
Way to be hypocritical!