MMORPG.com Writers

seldin

I been gone for awhile and since I been back I feel like I don't recognize any of the names of the writers.  Did mmorpg.com have a change over of the writers/reviewers semi-recently?

lotrlore

seldin said:

I been gone for awhile and since I been back I feel like I don't recognize any of the names of the writers.  Did mmorpg.com have a change over of the writers/reviewers semi-recently?

Hey Seldin - great to have you back!

Yes, Bill and Suzie moved on to new challenges, however Mike B has stayed on as community manager. 

Appreciate your reading the site and hope to see more of you here in the future. 

Amathe

Woot for Mike B. Best wishes to Bill and Suzie. 

madazz

I am kind of happy that Bill has left. He said there was an argument for League of Legends to be an MMO, once voted for it as best MMO on a fake MMO Hall of fame site, and even said that click bait titles where he called non-mmo's as MMO's was justified to get views. 

There still one person dramatically worse than him, and thats Bree from massivelyop. Shes the one who helped perpetuate that any game can be an MMO as long as there are multiple players online. Not sure if anyone recalls but she states that any 32 vs 32 player game is an MMO (she started with world of tanks). Her justification was that as long as a ton of people were playing it, even if not together but it had a multiplayer component than it was an MMO. Basically how Bill tried to justify a 5 vs 5 game (League of Legends) was an MMO. But she really doubled down.

I only say kind of happy because Bill was an excellent writer with a gentle hand in the way he dealt with the community. Sure we don't have properly moderated forums like we did over a decade ago, but people seem pretty okay with it. While I disagree with the guy on some stuff he came off as genuinely a good person. I can honestly say I wish him well.

Bree can go fuck herself though.

Scot

I am sure no one needs to go anywhere because they don't have the same opinion you do, but I agree what qualifies as a MMORPG or even a MMO is stretched beyond breaking point.

I can remember when we used to blame the companies mostly, they would call anything they brought out after WoW's success a MMO. But after MMOs came of the boil it was the gaming journalists who were mostly using it, even when the company would not use "MMO" to describe their game.

We can wish them all well, even if they are mislead as to what a MMORPG is.

Kyleran

Scot said:

I am sure no one needs to go anywhere because they don't have the same opinion you do, but I agree what qualifies as a MMORPG or even a MMO is stretched beyond breaking point.

I can remember when we used to blame the companies mostly, they would call anything they brought out after WoW's success a MMO. But after MMOs came of the boil it was the gaming journalists who were mostly using it, even when the company would not use "MMO" to describe their game.

We can wish them all well, even if they are mislead as to what a MMORPG is.

You know my feelings on the subject...

AAAMEOW

Don't know why people get so attached to the term MMO.  See many people insisting MMO = MMORPG.

I doubt people from other genre care.  They just call themselves MOBA or shooters.  If other people don't care I don't see why MMORPG players should care.

Kyleran

AAAMEOW said:

Don't know why people get so attached to the term MMO.  See many people insisting MMO = MMORPG.

I doubt people from other genre care.  They just call themselves MOBA or shooters.  If other people don't care I don't see why MMORPG players should care.

While all MMORPGs are MMOs, all MMOs are not necessarily MMORPGs.

Not sure where the breakpoint for using the term MMO is, but certainly anything like 64 x 64 or less can't qualify.

Its not so hard....ArcheAge is both an MMO and MMORPG, FO76 is neither, falling clearly in the multiplayer game space. 

Granted, FO76 probably has fewer total players than a single AA Unchained server has waiting in its queue to play, but the point still stands. 

TheJoda

madazz said:

I am kind of happy that Bill has left. He said there was an argument for League of Legends to be an MMO, once voted for it as best MMO on a fake MMO Hall of fame site, and even said that click bait titles where he called non-mmo's as MMO's was justified to get views. 

There still one person dramatically worse than him, and thats Bree from massivelyop. Shes the one who helped perpetuate that any game can be an MMO as long as there are multiple players online. Not sure if anyone recalls but she states that any 32 vs 32 player game is an MMO (she started with world of tanks). Her justification was that as long as a ton of people were playing it, even if not together but it had a multiplayer component than it was an MMO. Basically how Bill tried to justify a 5 vs 5 game (League of Legends) was an MMO. But she really doubled down.

I only say kind of happy because Bill was an excellent writer with a gentle hand in the way he dealt with the community. Sure we don't have properly moderated forums like we did over a decade ago, but people seem pretty okay with it. While I disagree with the guy on some stuff he came off as genuinely a good person. I can honestly say I wish him well.

Bree can go fuck herself though.

I wasn't aware that your opinion was gospel.  Glad no one else has their own.

Jensyn

Hi, my name is Emily-nice to meet you! I enjoy world-building and d&d. I've been a lurker for years so don't mind my newbie green. Just stepping in to help out from time to time because I love to write and game. Still finding my journalism voice-so I hope if you read anything of mine that you gain something useful from it.

madazz

Scot said:

I am sure no one needs to go anywhere because they don't have the same opinion you do, but I agree what qualifies as a MMORPG or even a MMO is stretched beyond breaking point.

I can remember when we used to blame the companies mostly, they would call anything they brought out after WoW's success a MMO. But after MMOs came of the boil it was the gaming journalists who were mostly using it, even when the company would not use "MMO" to describe their game.

We can wish them all well, even if they are mislead as to what a MMORPG is.

Where did I say anyone needs to go anywhere? Please don't make false implications. Not a big fan of that.

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works then they are wrong. MMO stands for Massively Multiplayer Online. Not for "A massive amount of people playing the same game" which many people pretend it is. The absolutely only subjective part of MMO is how many are people are required for it to actually be a massive quantity. We can safely say 32 vs 32 games are pretty standard and absolutely not a massive quantity. We can also say 15-20 player games are not MMO's. 

Also, "we can wish them well", is exactly what I already did. 

Next time actually respond to what I wrote instead of implying my post was anything other than what it was.

You are right that we used to blame the companies though. Very true. Again, started with World of Tanks in my opinion. 32 vs 32 battles advertised as massively multiplayer, only for people like Bree to pretend it is too.

madazz

AAAMEOW said:

Don't know why people get so attached to the term MMO.  See many people insisting MMO = MMORPG.

I doubt people from other genre care.  They just call themselves MOBA or shooters.  If other people don't care I don't see why MMORPG players should care.

Heres some logic that has never crossed your mind I guess, but what if people are looking for something and certain words describe it clearly but other people who don't understand it use it wrong? 

How are the people in the know supposed to communicate when people insist it means something it clearly doesnt?

You think its cool for people to recommend a 16 player game when I am clearly looking for one with hundreds of people?

Its called a descriptor and they are important. 

Sovrath

madazz said:

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works 

Last I heard, and have pointed out before, the english language (nay, all languages) change and morph over time and meanings of terms and words change drastically all the time.

So "no" MMO does not have to mean the same thing in perpetuity. If it did then it would probably be one of the first things that didn't change over time.

madazz

TheJoda said:

madazz said:

I am kind of happy that Bill has left. He said there was an argument for League of Legends to be an MMO, once voted for it as best MMO on a fake MMO Hall of fame site, and even said that click bait titles where he called non-mmo's as MMO's was justified to get views. 

There still one person dramatically worse than him, and thats Bree from massivelyop. Shes the one who helped perpetuate that any game can be an MMO as long as there are multiple players online. Not sure if anyone recalls but she states that any 32 vs 32 player game is an MMO (she started with world of tanks). Her justification was that as long as a ton of people were playing it, even if not together but it had a multiplayer component than it was an MMO. Basically how Bill tried to justify a 5 vs 5 game (League of Legends) was an MMO. But she really doubled down.

I only say kind of happy because Bill was an excellent writer with a gentle hand in the way he dealt with the community. Sure we don't have properly moderated forums like we did over a decade ago, but people seem pretty okay with it. While I disagree with the guy on some stuff he came off as genuinely a good person. I can honestly say I wish him well.

Bree can go fuck herself though.

I wasn't aware that your opinion was gospel.  Glad no one else has their own.

So which opinion is it that you have an issue with?

1- Kinda happy bill left
2- Bill is an excellent writer
3- Bill had a gentle hand in dealing with the community
4- Bree sucks

Cause what MMO means is not an opinion. Its three words. All three are in the dictionary too. The only subjective part is the number of players required to be deemed a massive quantity. That's it. 

So which of those 4 opinions do you have an issue with?

Hluill

Sovrath said:

madazz said:

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works 

Last I heard, and have pointed out before, the english language (nay, all languages) change and morph over time and meanings of terms and words change drastically all the time.

So "no" MMO does not have to mean the same thing in perpetuity. If it did then it would probably be one of the first things that didn't change over time.

~laughs~

So it comes down to how someone defines "Massive".  

It is interesting that modern usage of hyperbolic words is becoming more popular.  We use extreme words like "massive", or "most" or "best" in a less than accurate way just to get attention.  While using "massive" to describe a group of twenty makes my wince, it's certainly not as glaring as "most unique"!

cheyane

I am curious for a game to be massively multiplayer do all the thousands of players have to play with each other or can they be in different instances of the game? Specific reference to hub games.

Sovrath

Hluill said:

Sovrath said:

madazz said:

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works 

Last I heard, and have pointed out before, the english language (nay, all languages) change and morph over time and meanings of terms and words change drastically all the time.

So "no" MMO does not have to mean the same thing in perpetuity. If it did then it would probably be one of the first things that didn't change over time.

~laughs~

So it comes down to how someone defines "Massive".  

It is interesting that modern usage of hyperbolic words is becoming more popular.  We use extreme words like "massive", or "most" or "best" in a less than accurate way just to get attention.  While using "massive" to describe a group of twenty makes my wince, it's certainly not as glaring as "most unique"!

Not sure why this is hard (though I can very much guess) but "massive" means a lot of people. Right? But, it doesn't "have to" mean a lot of people in one space now does it? Oh yes that is what is started out to be but now people seem to want it to mean a massive amount of people signing into a game where a person can feasibly play with any one of them but only a small group at a time.

People can stomp their feet and scream all they want but whatever will be will be.

Amathe

Hluill said:

So it comes down to how someone defines "Massive".  

In games, as in certain aspects of life.

Scot

madazz said:

Scot said:

I am sure no one needs to go anywhere because they don't have the same opinion you do, but I agree what qualifies as a MMORPG or even a MMO is stretched beyond breaking point.

I can remember when we used to blame the companies mostly, they would call anything they brought out after WoW's success a MMO. But after MMOs came of the boil it was the gaming journalists who were mostly using it, even when the company would not use "MMO" to describe their game.

We can wish them all well, even if they are mislead as to what a MMORPG is.

Where did I say anyone needs to go anywhere? Please don't make false implications. Not a big fan of that.

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works then they are wrong. MMO stands for Massively Multiplayer Online. Not for "A massive amount of people playing the same game" which many people pretend it is. The absolutely only subjective part of MMO is how many are people are required for it to actually be a massive quantity. We can safely say 32 vs 32 games are pretty standard and absolutely not a massive quantity. We can also say 15-20 player games are not MMO's. 

Also, "we can wish them well", is exactly what I already did. 

Next time actually respond to what I wrote instead of implying my post was anything other than what it was.

You are right that we used to blame the companies though. Very true. Again, started with World of Tanks in my opinion. 32 vs 32 battles advertised as massively multiplayer, only for people like Bree to pretend it is too.

I was obliquely referencing your comment about Bree, there is no need to attack or personalise your attack on gaming journalists. But like you I don’t have their take on what a MMORPG is. I try not to use swear words in my posts, call me old fashioned but that's me.

I don’t think it is possible to precisely define a MMORPG, we have been here before many times on this site and disappeared down a rabbit hole of semantics. Where I find posters like ourselves find common ground is not in something like the exact number of players needed to call a game a MMO but rather the gulf that lies between what was once a MMO and what games can get that appellation today.

So posters here might suggest your numbers go up or down, but when we are asked is Destiny or LoL a MMO we all say no! There is such a huge difference in the setup, size and type of gameplay in these modern games it is laughable they are called MMOs.

Scot

cheyane said:

I am curious for a game to be massively multiplayer do all the thousands of players have to play with each other or can they be in different instances of the game? Specific reference to hub games.

To be honest in todays MMOs where players hardly notice each other running by I would want to address that issue and give them more reasons to interact. Like having to listen to minstrels play in a tavern to refresh their abilities, that sort of gameplay. You can have tens, you can have thousands, what does it matter unless they in some way play together before raid dungeons at top level and they don't even all do that now?

madazz

Scot said:

madazz said:

Scot said:

I am sure no one needs to go anywhere because they don't have the same opinion you do, but I agree what qualifies as a MMORPG or even a MMO is stretched beyond breaking point.

I can remember when we used to blame the companies mostly, they would call anything they brought out after WoW's success a MMO. But after MMOs came of the boil it was the gaming journalists who were mostly using it, even when the company would not use "MMO" to describe their game.

We can wish them all well, even if they are mislead as to what a MMORPG is.

Where did I say anyone needs to go anywhere? Please don't make false implications. Not a big fan of that.

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works then they are wrong. MMO stands for Massively Multiplayer Online. Not for "A massive amount of people playing the same game" which many people pretend it is. The absolutely only subjective part of MMO is how many are people are required for it to actually be a massive quantity. We can safely say 32 vs 32 games are pretty standard and absolutely not a massive quantity. We can also say 15-20 player games are not MMO's. 

Also, "we can wish them well", is exactly what I already did. 

Next time actually respond to what I wrote instead of implying my post was anything other than what it was.

You are right that we used to blame the companies though. Very true. Again, started with World of Tanks in my opinion. 32 vs 32 battles advertised as massively multiplayer, only for people like Bree to pretend it is too.

I was obliquely referencing your comment about Bree, there is no need to attack or personalise your attack on gaming journalists. But like you I don’t have their take on what a MMORPG is. I try not to use swear words in my posts, call me old fashioned but that's me.

I don’t think it is possible to precisely define a MMORPG, we have been here before many times on this site and disappeared down a rabbit hole of semantics. Where I find posters like ourselves find common ground is not in something like the exact number of players needed to call a game a MMO but rather the gulf that lies between what was once a MMO and what games can get that appellation today.

So posters here might suggest your numbers go up or down, but when we are asked is Destiny or LoL a MMO we all say no! There is such a huge difference in the setup, size and type of gameplay in these modern games it is laughable they are called MMOs.

Actually there is a reason and you are being honestly ignorant. She personally attacked me on Reddit for correcting her articles about how Path of Exile, Destiny, World of Tanks and more were all NOT MMO's. She insulted me for knowing what MMO stands for and pointing out that she does not. She doesn't even play anymore (her own words) and hasn't for many years. Also, you do have her take on what an MMO is if you choose. She posted it on her own website many times. She is very clear that any game can be an MMO regardless of how many are in the game together. She even made an article about me in September 2019 on MassivelyOP but fails to mention I haven't posted on her site for over a year now. Hell, possibly two years.

Also, as I stated the absolute only subjective part about MMO (specifically MMO, not RPG) is the quantity of players it takes in order for it to be considered a massive amount. It's three words and your (not you specifically) failure to understand them does not make those that do understand them wrong. It also does't make the entire meaning subjective. Its a YOU (not you specifically) problem. MMORPG as a genre is very subjective as the RPG portion isn't exactly defined.

MMO only stands as a descriptor for the genre it is appended too. It servers no other purpose other than to describe that the game has a massive quantity of players in one shared reality. It does not stand for persistence, it does not stand for world size.

From this very site: https://www.mmorpg.com/columns/mmorpgcoms-weekly-watercooler-whats-in-an-acronym-the-mmo-definition-debate-1000011697

Also, not everyone on this site says no to Destiny or LoL being considered an MMO. In fact, Bill said there was an argument otherwise. Its in the above link.

From the article above:

"Bill Murphy: That's a lot of games, really. Guild Wars 1 comes to mind, but then even ArenaNet didn't call that game an MMO, so there's an argument there.

To me, if I must put a definition - it's any persistent online game that hosts thousands of players and lets them play together. Even MOBAs could be considered MMOs of a kind. But they're certainly not MMORPGs."

So please, don't try and be virtuous. I have been personally slandered by Bree, Bill has stated that he believes Moba's are MMOs, and I have been on this site since 2003 and have witnessed people calling ANYTHING an MMO including Team Fortress.

Iselin

madazz said:

Also, not everyone on this site says no to Destiny or LoL being considered an MMO. In fact, Bill said there was an argument otherwise. Its in the above link.

From the article above:

"Bill Murphy: That's a lot of games, really. Guild Wars 1 comes to mind, but then even ArenaNet didn't call that game an MMO, so there's an argument there.

To me, if I must put a definition - it's any persistent online game that hosts thousands of players and lets them play together. Even MOBAs could be considered MMOs of a kind. But they're certainly not MMORPGs."

I agree with you and I'll go a bit further: one of my own pet peeves is the idiocy that appending RPG to MMO somehow modifies the MMO part. It does no such fucking thing. It's just a sad attempt to justify calling games MMOs that have no business being referred to as such.

The concurrent player requirement is no more and no less for an MMOFPS or an MMOanything than it is for an MMORPG.

AAAMEOW

madazz said:

AAAMEOW said:

Don't know why people get so attached to the term MMO.  See many people insisting MMO = MMORPG.

I doubt people from other genre care.  They just call themselves MOBA or shooters.  If other people don't care I don't see why MMORPG players should care.

Heres some logic that has never crossed your mind I guess, but what if people are looking for something and certain words describe it clearly but other people who don't understand it use it wrong? 

How are the people in the know supposed to communicate when people insist it means something it clearly doesnt?

You think its cool for people to recommend a 16 player game when I am clearly looking for one with hundreds of people?

Its called a descriptor and they are important. 

I just felt MMORPG players are so niche that it dont' matter in the grand picture.  

Beside to avoid confusing just search MMORPG instead of MMO.  

And if you are searching 100 people MMO which aren't MMORPG, that are even more niche, that you should use other search criteria.  

vandal5627

madazz said:

AAAMEOW said:

Don't know why people get so attached to the term MMO.  See many people insisting MMO = MMORPG.

I doubt people from other genre care.  They just call themselves MOBA or shooters.  If other people don't care I don't see why MMORPG players should care.

Heres some logic that has never crossed your mind I guess, but what if people are looking for something and certain words describe it clearly but other people who don't understand it use it wrong? 

How are the people in the know supposed to communicate when people insist it means something it clearly doesnt?

You think its cool for people to recommend a 16 player game when I am clearly looking for one with hundreds of people?

Its called a descriptor and they are important. 

Welcome to the English language where words and meanings of words gets added all the time.

Kyleran

Iselin said:

madazz said:

I agree with you and I'll go a bit further: one of my own pet peeves is the idiocy that appending RPG to MMO somehow modifies the MMO part. It does no such fucking thing. It's just a sad attempt to justify calling games MMOs that have no business being referred to as such.

The concurrent player requirement is no more and no less for an MMOFPS or an MMOanything than it is for an MMORPG.

I think Jean Luc sums it up best.

Scot

madazz said:

Scot said:

madazz said:

Scot said:

I am sure no one needs to go anywhere because they don't have the same opinion you do, but I agree what qualifies as a MMORPG or even a MMO is stretched beyond breaking point.

I can remember when we used to blame the companies mostly, they would call anything they brought out after WoW's success a MMO. But after MMOs came of the boil it was the gaming journalists who were mostly using it, even when the company would not use "MMO" to describe their game.

We can wish them all well, even if they are mislead as to what a MMORPG is.

Where did I say anyone needs to go anywhere? Please don't make false implications. Not a big fan of that.

Also, what MMO means is not a matter of opinion. Its not my opinion so please don't pretend it is. It's three words and if someone fails to grasp the meaning and is then educated on those three words and STILL refuses to acknowledge how the English language works then they are wrong. MMO stands for Massively Multiplayer Online. Not for "A massive amount of people playing the same game" which many people pretend it is. The absolutely only subjective part of MMO is how many are people are required for it to actually be a massive quantity. We can safely say 32 vs 32 games are pretty standard and absolutely not a massive quantity. We can also say 15-20 player games are not MMO's. 

Also, "we can wish them well", is exactly what I already did. 

Next time actually respond to what I wrote instead of implying my post was anything other than what it was.

You are right that we used to blame the companies though. Very true. Again, started with World of Tanks in my opinion. 32 vs 32 battles advertised as massively multiplayer, only for people like Bree to pretend it is too.

I was obliquely referencing your comment about Bree, there is no need to attack or personalise your attack on gaming journalists. But like you I don’t have their take on what a MMORPG is. I try not to use swear words in my posts, call me old fashioned but that's me.

I don’t think it is possible to precisely define a MMORPG, we have been here before many times on this site and disappeared down a rabbit hole of semantics. Where I find posters like ourselves find common ground is not in something like the exact number of players needed to call a game a MMO but rather the gulf that lies between what was once a MMO and what games can get that appellation today.

So posters here might suggest your numbers go up or down, but when we are asked is Destiny or LoL a MMO we all say no! There is such a huge difference in the setup, size and type of gameplay in these modern games it is laughable they are called MMOs.

Actually there is a reason and you are being honestly ignorant. She personally attacked me on Reddit for correcting her articles about how Path of Exile, Destiny, World of Tanks and more were all NOT MMO's. She insulted me for knowing what MMO stands for and pointing out that she does not. She doesn't even play anymore (her own words) and hasn't for many years. Also, you do have her take on what an MMO is if you choose. She posted it on her own website many times. She is very clear that any game can be an MMO regardless of how many are in the game together. She even made an article about me in September 2019 on MassivelyOP but fails to mention I haven't posted on her site for over a year now. Hell, possibly two years.

Also, as I stated the absolute only subjective part about MMO (specifically MMO, not RPG) is the quantity of players it takes in order for it to be considered a massive amount. It's three words and your (not you specifically) failure to understand them does not make those that do understand them wrong. It also does't make the entire meaning subjective. Its a YOU (not you specifically) problem. MMORPG as a genre is very subjective as the RPG portion isn't exactly defined.

MMO only stands as a descriptor for the genre it is appended too. It servers no other purpose other than to describe that the game has a massive quantity of players in one shared reality. It does not stand for persistence, it does not stand for world size.

From this very site: https://www.mmorpg.com/columns/mmorpgcoms-weekly-watercooler-whats-in-an-acronym-the-mmo-definition-debate-1000011697

Also, not everyone on this site says no to Destiny or LoL being considered an MMO. In fact, Bill said there was an argument otherwise. Its in the above link.

From the article above:

"Bill Murphy: That's a lot of games, really. Guild Wars 1 comes to mind, but then even ArenaNet didn't call that game an MMO, so there's an argument there.

To me, if I must put a definition - it's any persistent online game that hosts thousands of players and lets them play together. Even MOBAs could be considered MMOs of a kind. But they're certainly not MMORPGs."

So please, don't try and be virtuous. I have been personally slandered by Bree, Bill has stated that he believes Moba's are MMOs, and I have been on this site since 2003 and have witnessed people calling ANYTHING an MMO including Team Fortress.

Just because somebody insults you does not mean you have to stoop to their level and that's talking as someone who as done just that. So I am not pretending I have always been able to be as calm on the internet as I would like, you just have to try.

Massive to me means world size, so we depart there, which is one of the reasons I would not include MOBA's. But the issue about the naming of MMO's is endemic in gaming today, game descriptors are just stuck on even when they are ill fitting. The idea seems to be better to give the game a name you know like "adventure game" rather than make something that fits, if the consumer does not instantly recognise what a game is they move on. That's the idea anyway I would like to think we had an attention span longer than a gold fish but they don't think we do.