Agreed, MMO is too widely used. I've heard people refer to Diablo 3 as an MMO. Guy, if I can't see or play with more than 3 other people at the same time it is a very very far cry from an MMO.
OH its this subject again.... What is the proper way to pronounce potato? Is English from England proper or is American English proper? Well my American English teacher thinks what they teach is proper.
OH its this subject again.... What is the proper way to pronounce potato? Is English from England proper or is American English proper? Well my American English teacher thinks what they teach is proper.
of course. There are few long running subjects here.
Either this, or FFA pvp, or instanced vs open world, or sandbox vs themepark.
Maybe we should have a new terminology, i think Narius for once had an idea, how about for true 'massively' multiplayer games we have MMO, and for those that aren't we could have 'marginally' multiplayer, mMO's, which can include all those pesky MOBA's etc, with delusions of grandeur
OH its this subject again.... What is the proper way to pronounce potato? Is English from England proper or is American English proper? Well my American English teacher thinks what they teach is proper.
It's not a pronunciation difference. It's taxonomical, and every single facet of human existence uses some method of classification to make sense of disparate concepts. It's beyond bizarre that "MMO" is some apparent outlier in our normal course of categorizing things. Like if I say 'mobile phone' you know what I'm talking about. But if I pointed to a landline and called it a mobile phone, you'd think I'm nuts. I could argue that it's mobile because I can pick it up and move it around, therefore mobility.
The goal of this forum community should be to define "MMO" since its what we all know and love. I would consider one small aspect of the definition (coined by Richard Garrot in Ultima Online) that the number of players playing in the same space doesn't have a maximum amount of players in one area of the game at any time OR that you could have 36 players standing around the bank at some town while 27 are in "another city at the same time in the same world"
It's not soda it's pop its not pop it's coke its not pizza its pie It's fries not chips
The things some of you people worry about its ridiculous.
I wish one if you 1000s of people on at one time crowd would take a picture of that happening today.
So if your version of "massive" has 10,000 people on the same server at the same time but during a course of 3-4 hours you only see 50 of those players and interact with maybe 20 how is that any different then...
500 people on 20 servers but you still see 50 people during your 3-4 hours and interact with about 20.
How by your flawed logic is one more "massive" then the other?
fyi some stadiums hold 5000 people some can hold 100,000+ they are both called stadiums and they sure don't have some weird group of people claiming one is more of a stadium then the other.
EVE, over 3400 players in one system, pretty freaking massive. (only 6th highest of all time)
I like how this site used to define it, over 500 people in a single persistent world.
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
To a Ant, a Human is Massive. Massive is relative. So in turn if Massive is relative I.e. different for each persons view. it can only be defined with what YOU think is massive. I think WOW,BDO,TSW,GW to name a few, is massive. I don't think The Division is massive.
To a Ant, a Human is Massive. Massive is relative. So in turn if Massive is relative I.e. different for each persons view. it can only be defined with what YOU think is massive. I think WOW,BDO,TSW,GW to name a few, is massive. I don't think The Division is massive.
the first M in MMORPG stands for Massively, as in massively multiplayer(amount of people), not as in massive world (map size).
To a Ant, a Human is Massive. Massive is relative. So in turn if Massive is relative I.e. different for each persons view. it can only be defined with what YOU think is massive. I think WOW,BDO,TSW,GW to name a few, is massive. I don't think The Division is massive.
the first M in MMORPG stands for Massively, as in massively multiplayer(amount of people), not as in massive world (map size).
Massively has more meanings than just having a large amount of something.
To a Ant, a Human is Massive. Massive is relative. So in turn if Massive is relative I.e. different for each persons view. it can only be defined with what YOU think is massive. I think WOW,BDO,TSW,GW to name a few, is massive. I don't think The Division is massive.
the first M in MMORPG stands for Massively, as in massively multiplayer(amount of people), not as in massive world (map size).
Massively has more meanings than just having a large amount of something.
the way it is used in mmorpgs represents the amount of people playing the same game together. Just like single player represents 1 person playing the game. Coop represents usually 2-8 cooperatively, multiplayer pvp usually represents 4-64 people playing competitively, massively multiplayer online represents a massive amount of people playing on the same servers. I just wanted to clarify that it has nothing to do with map size. Witcher 3 is a single player game and its probably as big as WoW vanilla.
OH its this subject again.... What is the proper way to pronounce potato? Is English from England proper or is American English proper? Well my American English teacher thinks what they teach is proper.
How is that relevant?
In England it's 'saviour' but in America it's 'savior', and yet the word's meaning is unchanged.
There is no English dialect where the meaning of "massively multiplayer" is different.
The only vague relevance I can think of is that an MMO RTS only needs to be massive relative to RTS games (where 8-12 players is the typical maximum) whereas a MMO FPS would need to be massively relative to FPS games (where 16-64 players is the typical maximum.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It's not soda it's pop its not pop it's coke its not pizza its pie It's fries not chips
The things some of you people worry about its ridiculous.
I wish one if you 1000s of people on at one time crowd would take a picture of that happening today.
So if your version of "massive" has 10,000 people on the same server at the same time but during a course of 3-4 hours you only see 50 of those players and interact with maybe 20 how is that any different then...
500 people on 20 servers but you still see 50 people during your 3-4 hours and interact with about 20.
How by your flawed logic is one more "massive" then the other?
fyi some stadiums hold 5000 people some can hold 100,000+ they are both called stadiums and they sure don't have some weird group of people claiming one is more of a stadium then the other.
EVE, over 3400 players in one system, pretty freaking massive. (only 6th highest of all time)
I like how this site used to define it, over 500 people in a single persistent world.
You, the rest of the bitter old school vets, and this site don't get to make up the definitions. It's really that simple. As for EVE from the news they are lucky to have 3400 people sign on in a week let alone at one time.
OH its this subject again.... What is the proper way to pronounce potato? Is English from England proper or is American English proper? Well my American English teacher thinks what they teach is proper.
How is that relevant?
In England it's 'saviour' but in America it's 'savior', and yet the word's meaning is unchanged.
There is no English dialect where the meaning of "massively multiplayer" is different.
The only vague relevance I can think of is that an MMO RTS only needs to be massive relative to RTS games (where 8-12 players is the typical maximum) whereas a MMO FPS would need to be massively relative to FPS games (where 16-64 players is the typical maximum.)
I will use your own logic against you. You are using a word that was well known in the English as Saviour and it was changed by another culture to be Savior. The word went through a transition phase like many words do and meanings with them sometimes. We are talking about the same thing here with a word that is barely 15 years old. Word's definitions and dialects change with culture over time and yes there's some words that never change but you see how many do change. Which is why arguing over the definition of a 15 year old word is like arguing over the proper way to spell Savior or pronounce potato. We aren't talking about the difference between a baseball and glove. Its the difference between a baseball and softball. Sometimes culture combines them under the word ball. Which seems to be what is happening to the term mmo.
Maybe we should have a new terminology, i think Narius for once had an idea, how about for true 'massively' multiplayer games we have MMO, and for those that aren't we could have 'marginally' multiplayer, mMO's, which can include all those pesky MOBA's etc, with delusions of grandeur
It already exists....MO.
Multiplayer Online.
As in Multiplayer Online Battle Arena.
The problem isn't that a term doesn't exist to define what type of game something is. The problem is people being too lazy or ignorant to use the correct term.
OH its this subject again.... What is the proper way to pronounce potato? Is English from England proper or is American English proper? Well my American English teacher thinks what they teach is proper.
How is that relevant?
In England it's 'saviour' but in America it's 'savior', and yet the word's meaning is unchanged.
There is no English dialect where the meaning of "massively multiplayer" is different.
The only vague relevance I can think of is that an MMO RTS only needs to be massive relative to RTS games (where 8-12 players is the typical maximum) whereas a MMO FPS would need to be massively relative to FPS games (where 16-64 players is the typical maximum.)
I will use your own logic against you. You are using a word that was well known in the English as Saviour and it was changed by another culture to be Savior. The word went through a transition phase like many words do and meanings with them sometimes. We are talking about the same thing here with a word that is barely 15 years old. Word's definitions and dialects change with culture over time and yes there's some words that never change but you see how many do change. Which is why arguing over the definition of a 15 year old word is like arguing over the proper way to spell Savior or pronounce potato. We aren't talking about the difference between a baseball and glove. Its the difference between a baseball and softball. Sometimes culture combines them under the word ball. Which seems to be what is happening to the term mmo.
The problem, however, is that people are too loose with their use of MMO. With words evolving over time, the thing many people fail to see/realize is that despite the meaning seemingly changing, every definition practically means the same (or similar) idea. Massively Multiplayer was used to describe games that could hold massive amounts of players. While one could claim that the definition is evolving into games that can simply support multiplayer (or force you to only play online), that does not fit the word massive. Rather than claim every game is an MMO, it literally isn't that hard to simply say online only, or drop massively and just say multiplayer.
For example, Destiny and the Division have many MMO mechanics. People on forums will insist that they are MMOs. However, not a single person I have met in those games have dubbed it as such. While I commend their idea of randomly running into players only occasionally (so it feels more unique I suppose), that is not massive at all. This is the exact reason Bungie themselves have refused to call the game an MMO. And, for this same reason, people should be reluctant to refer to MOBAs as MMOs purely because it has an online element.
To a Ant, a Human is Massive. Massive is relative. So in turn if Massive is relative I.e. different for each persons view. it can only be defined with what YOU think is massive. I think WOW,BDO,TSW,GW to name a few, is massive. I don't think The Division is massive.
the first M in MMORPG stands for Massively, as in massively multiplayer(amount of people), not as in massive world (map size).
Massively has more meanings than just having a large amount of something.
Indeed. And often massively implied "lots of content" "a big world which would take significant time to travel. Never ending. Expanding. etc.
Which is why Oblivion was considered an off-line mmorpg. It met all the criteria of an mmorpg except the online multiplayer bit.
(And as far as early game servers went they didn't support 10k populations.)
Comments
answer #2: few cares about accuracy of labels, and they use it for convenience.
Take your pick.
Either this, or FFA pvp, or instanced vs open world, or sandbox vs themepark.
Just my random thought, carry on.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
It's not a pronunciation difference. It's taxonomical, and every single facet of human existence uses some method of classification to make sense of disparate concepts. It's beyond bizarre that "MMO" is some apparent outlier in our normal course of categorizing things. Like if I say 'mobile phone' you know what I'm talking about. But if I pointed to a landline and called it a mobile phone, you'd think I'm nuts. I could argue that it's mobile because I can pick it up and move it around, therefore mobility.
I like how this site used to define it, over 500 people in a single persistent world.
"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
To a Ant, a Human is Massive. Massive is relative. So in turn if Massive is relative I.e. different for each persons view. it can only be defined with what YOU think is massive. I think WOW,BDO,TSW,GW to name a few, is massive. I don't think The Division is massive.
In England it's 'saviour' but in America it's 'savior', and yet the word's meaning is unchanged.
There is no English dialect where the meaning of "massively multiplayer" is different.
The only vague relevance I can think of is that an MMO RTS only needs to be massive relative to RTS games (where 8-12 players is the typical maximum) whereas a MMO FPS would need to be massively relative to FPS games (where 16-64 players is the typical maximum.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Multiplayer Online.
As in Multiplayer Online Battle Arena.
The problem isn't that a term doesn't exist to define what type of game something is. The problem is people being too lazy or ignorant to use the correct term.
For example, Destiny and the Division have many MMO mechanics. People on forums will insist that they are MMOs. However, not a single person I have met in those games have dubbed it as such. While I commend their idea of randomly running into players only occasionally (so it feels more unique I suppose), that is not massive at all. This is the exact reason Bungie themselves have refused to call the game an MMO. And, for this same reason, people should be reluctant to refer to MOBAs as MMOs purely because it has an online element.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Which is why Oblivion was considered an off-line mmorpg. It met all the criteria of an mmorpg except the online multiplayer bit.
(And as far as early game servers went they didn't support 10k populations.)