So, what's an MMO these days? According to MMORPG.com, mostly everything. What does future entail..

YumeTsukai

Hi Guys,

Before you burn me on a stick like some kind of heretic, I want you to take a deep breath, read this (it's rather short) and try to make some logical connections of your own(if possible).

Many years ago, a great passion was born for bringing great numbers of players together. Something to overcome traditional multiplayer games and do what was never done before. In the end they called it... MMO : Massively Multiplayer Online, which then became a new genre of games, with MMORPG being the most widely known. Today we have many types of MMOs... like MMORPGs, MMORTSs, MMOFPS, and MMO-whatever you want. But are they really all MMOs or is this just an over-abused term in order to cater to a bigger audience?

I was just browsing this the other days: https://www.mmorpg.com/games-list , trying to see if I can find something new worthwhile in there. However I remained a bit shocked to see how some titles were categorized, e.g. :

- Destiny 2 - MMOFPS (an online multiplayer game with shared lobby, 3-6 player party size, and 12 players max in PVP)

- Soulworker - MMORPG (an online multiplayer game with shared lobby, 4 player party size, and 12? players max in PVP)

- Vindictus - MMORPG (an online multiplayer game with shared lobby (towns), 8? player party size - haven't played this in some time)

And these are just some examples.


Why are these labeled MMOs (Massively Multiplayer Online) instead of MOs (Multiplayer online)? Where is the "Massive or Massively" part in them ? Is it the shared lobbies where you can dance with some dozen other players? Can they really compare to actual MMOs like World of Warcraft, Lineage 2, Dark Age of Camelot, Eve Online that actually brought hundreds or more players together, on the same server in the same place? Is it not a very wrong thing to lump them together?

Some of you might not care about the naming. But the way it looks right now, in the future every online multiplayer game with a shared lobby will be named an MMO (it's already happening), just to sell better. And I think it's an insult to both the developers and players that are looking towards creating/getting immersed in a true "massive" experience.

Thanks for reading. You decide the future.

TheScavenger

Games change

For example. We don't see the same style games from 1999 as we do now.

Look at RPGs. They started almost entirely as huge open worlds, with massive game length. Even games like Skyrim aren't anything like Daggerfall, the biggest open world game ever...Skyrim is nothing like Morrowind either.

Morrowind isn't even anything like Oblivion either

And then look at Fallout 1/2...vastly different than Fallout 3, NV and even more different is Fallout 4

Which are great examples of them all being RPGs, but very different than older RPGs. But just because they are different doesn't make them not RPGs

Sephiroso

TheScavenger said:

Games change

For example. We don't see the same style games from 1999 as we do now.

Look at RPGs. They started almost entirely as huge open worlds, with massive game length. Even games like Skyrim aren't anything like Daggerfall, the biggest open world game ever...Skyrim is nothing like Morrowind either.

Morrowind isn't even anything like Oblivion either

And then look at Fallout 1/2...vastly different than Fallout 3, NV and even more different is Fallout 4

Which are great examples of them all being RPGs, but very different than older RPGs. But just because they are different doesn't make them not RPGs

What you're describing and what OP is describing is like oil and water my man. Also i dont even know what you're on about. Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim all share a fuck ton of similarities. Just like Witcher 1-3 does. Well maybe not 1, i didn't play it but at least 2-3. They're all RPGs at their core despite the differences.

OP is right, none of those are MMOs, he's most right about Vindictus and Soul Worker. I came in this thread ready to lambast OP thinking he was yet another person going "Why is Diablo 3 and Path of Exile listed on the game list when they're not mmorpgs" when they're clearly labeled as ARPGs...but yea sure enough destiny is an mmofps and vindictus an mmorpg. lol

I'm curious where this goes.

YashaX

Monster Hunter World: set to be mmorpgs mmo of the year in 2018

TheScavenger

Sephiroso said:

TheScavenger said:

Games change

For example. We don't see the same style games from 1999 as we do now.

Look at RPGs. They started almost entirely as huge open worlds, with massive game length. Even games like Skyrim aren't anything like Daggerfall, the biggest open world game ever...Skyrim is nothing like Morrowind either.

Morrowind isn't even anything like Oblivion either

And then look at Fallout 1/2...vastly different than Fallout 3, NV and even more different is Fallout 4

Which are great examples of them all being RPGs, but very different than older RPGs. But just because they are different doesn't make them not RPGs

What you're describing and what OP is describing is like oil and water my man. Also i dont even know what you're on about. Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim all share a fuck ton of similarities. Just like Witcher 1-3 does. Well maybe not 1, i didn't play it but at least 2-3. They're all RPGs at their core despite the differences.

OP is right, none of those are MMOs, he's most right about Vindictus and Soul Worker. I came in this thread ready to lambast OP thinking he was yet another person going "Why is Diablo 3 and Path of Exile listed on the game list when they're not mmorpgs" when they're clearly labeled as ARPGs...but yea sure enough destiny is an mmofps and vindictus an mmorpg. lol

I'm curious where this goes.

Morrowind is nothing like Skyrim lol. In morrowind, you grinding the skills up (sorta same in oblivion, morrowind is more similar to oblivion in some ways). That makes it really different in itself. Where as Skyrim its a perk tree like Fallout, makes the game really different. But many other changes to.

Though the biggest example I noticed you skipped... 

You can't say fallout 1 and 2 are anything like fallout 3, NV which are pretty different than fallout 4.

Fallout 1 and 2 are completely different style RPGs than bethesda's fallout...but they are still RPGs despite them being vastly different.

Sephiroso

I don't talk about things i haven't played. Never played any of the Fallouts because they didn't interest me. Perk tree or not, you grind your skills in both Morrowind and Skyrim. You're looking at some superficial differences acting like its the difference between the sky and earth when its really the difference between an orange tree and an apple tree

bonzoso21

I've never really considered those games to be MMOs and don't know anybody who does, despite the label they sometimes receive online. Games like The Division, Destiny, Warframe, and Sea of Thieves are relatively new and for some reason many find it hard to categorize them. I've seen the term "MMO-Lite" used quite a bit to label any shared-world games with some kind of persistence, progression, and a combination of PvE and PvP, but it still implies "massive" when they often cap players at 10-30 per instance. 

Even Battlefield has 64-player matches, but nobody's ever used an MMO-style category for it because it has no persistence (even though the Operations mode is bigger in scope than many MMO PvP Battlegrounds modes). Maybe those others games get lumped in with MMOs because they still have a lot of grindy progression after reaching the level cap.

Cryomatrix

This type of thread comes out like once every three weeks.

www.MMORPG.com branched out to cover more games and attract a larger audience and therefore keep themselves in business. 

Definitions aren't that important in video gaming. In other fields they are very important. 

Cryomatrix

Sephiroso

bonzoso21 said:

I've never really considered those games to be MMOs and don't know anybody who does, despite the label they sometimes receive online. Games like The Division, Destiny, Warframe, and Sea of Thieves are relatively new and for some reason many find it hard to categorize them. I've seen the term "MMO-Lite" used quite a bit to label any shared-world games with some kind of persistence, progression, and a combination of PvE and PvP, but it still implies "massive" when they often cap players at 10-30 per instance. 

Even Battlefield has 64-player matches, but nobody's ever used an MMO-style category for it because it has no persistence (even though the Operations mode is bigger in scope than many MMO PvP Battlegrounds modes). Maybe those others games get lumped in with MMOs because they still have a lot of grindy progression after reaching the level cap.

To me it's very simple. Just drop an M. That's all they gotta do. Multiplayer Online Game.

It's a spectrum. There's Single Player RPGS or RPG. There's Co-op RPGs for 2-4 or...well Co-op RPG. Then Multiplayer(Online if online) RPG or MORPG. And finally MMORPG.

I really don't get why people fight so hard to be dumb when it comes to labeling. But then again there's people who think vaccinations cause autism and that the earth is flat so what ya gonna do.

SBFord

Oh look! It's this week's thread...

*sighs*

We are a brand now. For us, it's not as simple as sticking to the old definition of what an MMORPG is since it's evolving and changing and so are we. It's not as if we can just drop the URL and not lose our brand name. Most tissues aren't Kleenex and most bandages aren't Bandaids, but that's what they are.

On the games list, we have clear categories that can sort the list by what type(s) of games you want to see. 

The bottom line is: We adapt or we die. 

*pulls out tired wrinkled paper*

We cover a lot of games here at MMORPG.com. We cover as much MMORPG news as we can but we have expanded coverage to fit in with the evolving nature of what online gaming is and, frankly, to pay the bills.

*folds the paper, stuffs it back into her pocket until next week*

Slapshot1188

Did not we normally wait a week between these?

Scorchien

Slapshot1188 said:

Did not we normally wait a week between these?

lmao , thats what i thought when i read the title , then .................

    " Oh know he didnt"

Kyleran

TheScavenger said:

Sephiroso said:

TheScavenger said:

Games change

For example. We don't see the same style games from 1999 as we do now.

Look at RPGs. They started almost entirely as huge open worlds, with massive game length. Even games like Skyrim aren't anything like Daggerfall, the biggest open world game ever...Skyrim is nothing like Morrowind either.

Morrowind isn't even anything like Oblivion either

And then look at Fallout 1/2...vastly different than Fallout 3, NV and even more different is Fallout 4

Which are great examples of them all being RPGs, but very different than older RPGs. But just because they are different doesn't make them not RPGs

What you're describing and what OP is describing is like oil and water my man. Also i dont even know what you're on about. Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim all share a fuck ton of similarities. Just like Witcher 1-3 does. Well maybe not 1, i didn't play it but at least 2-3. They're all RPGs at their core despite the differences.

OP is right, none of those are MMOs, he's most right about Vindictus and Soul Worker. I came in this thread ready to lambast OP thinking he was yet another person going "Why is Diablo 3 and Path of Exile listed on the game list when they're not mmorpgs" when they're clearly labeled as ARPGs...but yea sure enough destiny is an mmofps and vindictus an mmorpg. lol

I'm curious where this goes.

Morrowind is nothing like Skyrim lol. In morrowind, you grinding the skills up (sorta same in oblivion, morrowind is more similar to oblivion in some ways). That makes it really different in itself. Where as Skyrim its a perk tree like Fallout, makes the game really different. But many other changes to.

Though the biggest example I noticed you skipped... 

You can't say fallout 1 and 2 are anything like fallout 3, NV which are pretty different than fallout 4.

Fallout 1 and 2 are completely different style RPGs than bethesda's fallout...but they are still RPGs despite them being vastly different.

All of those older RPGs are single player titles, same for your more modern examples.

You are arguing about what "perspective" they play from, and differences in mechanics are irrelevant.

MMORPGs from 1999 were "massively" multiplayer with hundreds if not thousands online in the same game world.  You could also get at least a couple of hundred folks in the same zone.

Heck, EQ1 had raids 5 times larger than the titles you are defending as "MMOs."

Sure, times change, but massively still does not mean a 12 person dungeon run.

No surrender. 

Slapshot1188

Scorchien said:

Slapshot1188 said:

Did not we normally wait a week between these?

lmao , thats what i thought when i read the title , then .................

    " I know he didnt"

Ok then... @OP please close this and repost on Monday.

Thx

bonzoso21

Who buys bandages other than Band-Aids?!

Sephiroso

SBFord said:

Oh look! It's this week's thread...

*sighs*

We are a brand now. For us, it's not as simple as sticking to the old definition of what an MMORPG is since it's evolving and changing and so are we. It's not as if we can just drop the URL and not lose our brand name. Most tissues aren't Kleenex and most bandages aren't Bandaids, but that's what they are.

On the games list, we have clear categories that can sort the list by what type(s) of games you want to see. 

The bottom line is: We adapt or we die. 

*pulls out tired wrinkled paper*

We cover a lot of games here at MMORPG.com. We cover as much MMORPG news as we can but we have expanded coverage to fit in with the evolving nature of what online gaming is and, frankly, to pay the bills.

*folds the paper, stuffs it back into her pocket until next week*

Look, I was ready to defend you if he was bringing out the whole "Why do they cover console games" or "Why is Path of Exile on the game list" when you guys clearly list it as an ARPG and not an mmorpg.

But that's not what he did. He showed games that are clearly not MMORPGs, that you list as MMORPGs. He's not saying "Why do they have these games in the game list" rather, why are you listing them as MMORPGs when they clearly arent?

This thread wouldn't have even been made if they were properly labeled. In Destiny's case. Your pick. MOFPS or FPS. It isn't an MMOFPS though. Even more so in the case of Soul Worker and Vindictus.

I couldn't have said it better than Kyleran. Time's change, sure, but massively will never mean 8-12 people per map period.

Rudedawg007

Personally I do not care if "games are changing"; I'd rather they developed a sister site for all of these other "games" I come here for MMO's.

Not rpg's, not pay to win browser games, and whatever else they have been throwing into the soup.

Agree with the poster 110%!

Iselin

There are two different questions:

1. What sort of games should mmorpg.com cover? and...
2. What makes a game deserve the MMO category.

Question 1 is easy: whatever the fuck they feel like covering. This has changed over the years and we, the regulars here, like it this way.

Question 2 is a whole different story and around here it's the topic that never ends... my friends.

SBFord

Rudedawg007 said:

Personally I do not care if "games are changing"; I'd rather they developed a sister site for all of these other "games" I come here for MMO's.

Not rpg's, not pay to win browser games, and whatever else they have been throwing into the soup.

Agree with the poster 110%!

The games list sorts by whatever kind of game you want to see.

And just for an example:

News since Thursday:

LOTRO x2
FFXIV
Bless x2
WoW x4
Star Trek Online
TERA x2
ESO
GW2
Star Citizen
MapleStory 2 x2 
Black Desert 
Neverwinter
Champions Online
Ascent: Infinite Realm x2
Trove
Crowfall
Closers
SWTOR
Wild West Online
APB Reloaded (with Fallen Earth included in the piece)
Riders of Icarus
Blade & Soul
World of Speed
Lineage 2 Revolution

In addition to all of the above:

LoL
a general Blizzard piece that includes WoW
Sea of Thieves
Heroes of the Storm x2
Conan Exiles, though it is an in-between x2
Warframe
Path of Exile
Anthem
PUBG
DayZ

Other:
3 hardware reviews -- gaming headsets

Which list is longer? That's just 3 days' worth.

Oh yeah...and we do have a sister site: GameSpace.com. Never heard of it or visited? And you wonder why we put other-than-MMORPG news here. 

GeezerGamer

1st thoughts on this thread............

This again?

Kyleran

Rudedawg007 said:

Personally I do not care if "games are changing"; I'd rather they developed a sister site for all of these other "games" I come here for MMO's.

Not rpg's, not pay to win browser games, and whatever else they have been throwing into the soup.

Agree with the poster 110%!

Funny story, they actually have a sister site called GameSpace.com.

I don't think many people visit it, not sure why, maybe they mislabel social apps and include them as games, wouldn't surprise me.

Asch126

SBFord said:

Oh look! It's this week's thread...

*sighs*

We are a brand now. For us, it's not as simple as sticking to the old definition of what an MMORPG is since it's evolving and changing and so are we. It's not as if we can just drop the URL and not lose our brand name. Most tissues aren't Kleenex and most bandages aren't Bandaids, but that's what they are.

On the games list, we have clear categories that can sort the list by what type(s) of games you want to see. 

The bottom line is: We adapt or we die. 

*pulls out tired wrinkled paper*

We cover a lot of games here at MMORPG.com. We cover as much MMORPG news as we can but we have expanded coverage to fit in with the evolving nature of what online gaming is and, frankly, to pay the bills.

*folds the paper, stuffs it back into her pocket until next week*

I love how you seem to get upset about this, yet ALWAYS feel the need to comment and get angrier.

Kyleran

Asch126 said:

SBFord said:

Oh look! It's this week's thread...

*sighs*

We are a brand now. For us, it's not as simple as sticking to the old definition of what an MMORPG is since it's evolving and changing and so are we. It's not as if we can just drop the URL and not lose our brand name. Most tissues aren't Kleenex and most bandages aren't Bandaids, but that's what they are.

On the games list, we have clear categories that can sort the list by what type(s) of games you want to see. 

The bottom line is: We adapt or we die. 

*pulls out tired wrinkled paper*

We cover a lot of games here at MMORPG.com. We cover as much MMORPG news as we can but we have expanded coverage to fit in with the evolving nature of what online gaming is and, frankly, to pay the bills.

*folds the paper, stuffs it back into her pocket until next week*

I love how you seem to get upset about this, yet ALWAYS feel the need to comment and get angrier.

Even more fascinating is how off point her reply is.....

TheDarkrayne

I don't know why people care about this. 

I like having news about other games on this site. I'm not so stupid that I don't already know what is or isn't an MMO.

SBFord

Honestly, given how many people play MMOs like single-player or very small group games, why not include all kinds of games that can have 100 or so per server in them? Survival games do. Battle royale games do. Even lobby-based games do. The lines have blurred hugely.

I dunno. I like both reading about and covering all kinds of games. We've kept the scope here pretty narrow, tbh. 

We're trying to expand the categories on the Games List and on the featurette slider images by labeling them as what they are.

And, once again, it's adapt or die. 

IceAge

"Many years ago..."

That nailed it. This is the present. Even if we like it or not, is..happening ! So yeah , no more MMO's like "Many years ago.." . I suggest get used with , or .. change sides !