Jump to content

How is this an MMO?


132 replies to this topic

#21 Scytale

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 742 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:14 PM

View PostDragonlord, on 08 August 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:


I think allot of the confusion here is related to something very simple

Most players are used to what is called MMORPG, where you have a character that moves around a persistent virtual world.
MWO is not an MMORPG, but it is an MMO.

I'm getting the impression that people expect an MMO to be like WOW, AION, AOC and the likes and cant understand that the MMO genre is more then just those types of games.
They may very well be thinking that MMO and MMORPG is one and the same, and I think the problem is that they are confusing the two with each other.

To add to the confusion is the fact that this game is just in an early beta stage, and as such most of the features of the game are not available yet, but many seem to think that Beta is the same as an early preview of the release version of the game.
So they think that what they see now is how the game will be, and is not what they would call an MMO

So the way I see it they not only confuse MMO with MMORPG, but they dont understand that this game is nowhere near finished yet.


Hope you're not talking about me =P I just posted about how this game is a long way from finished. But I do now wonder - is any exclusively online game an MMO? Could you say that Tribes Ascend is an MMO? If so, is/was Tribes 2 *also* an MMO? And what about MOBA games? Are those MMOs?

What *is* the definition of an MMO? Wikipedia states that it should be able to support thousands of players simultaneously, and that it features at least one persistent world. So by this definition, MOBA games, as well as all Tribes iterations etc are not MMOs. And MWO, AS IT STANDS, is not an MMO, though I think we can agree that upon implementation of the Community Warfare pillar, it will be.

#22 Rot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 104 posts
  • LocationSt Louis Mo.

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:14 PM

Relax, after all it could be ISW

#23 Scytale

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 742 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:17 PM

View Postknuckleduster05, on 08 August 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

What part of these words do persistant fit into? Massive Multiplayer Online ?


What parts of these words do "nuclear weapons" fit into?
Mutually
Assured
Destruction
?
They don't, but M.A.D. usually includes nuclear weapons of some form, no?

EDIT: Quote now seems irrelevant.

Edited by Scytale, 08 August 2012 - 03:18 PM.


#24 Boss Awesome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 233 posts
  • LocationBellingham WA

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:19 PM

View PostMcGamer, on 08 August 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

A MOG is what you are referring to. 23 other players is anything but "Massively" A persistent gameworld is also part of what makes an mmo.


Says who? You? They can classify the game however the hell they want to. There is no classification police. Next you are going to say that kill 10 rat quests are part of what makes an MMO. Or maybe killing stupid AI for epic lootz is what makes an MMO. And speaking of semantics...

#25 Scytale

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 742 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:22 PM

View PostBoss Awesome, on 08 August 2012 - 03:19 PM, said:


Says who? You? They can classify the game however the hell they want to. There is no classification police. Next you are going to say that kill 10 rat quests are part of what makes an MMO. Or maybe killing stupid AI for epic lootz is what makes an MMO. And speaking of semantics...


Says wikipedia. Unless you want to tailor definitions according to personal preference =P

EDIT: Yes, I know wikipedia isn't the authority on everything, but it's a damn sight better than most people here.

Edited by Scytale, 08 August 2012 - 03:22 PM.


#26 LackofCertainty

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 445 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:25 PM

View PostScytale, on 08 August 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

*snipped* ...MWO, AS IT STANDS, is not an MMO, though I think we can agree that upon implementation of the Community Warfare pillar, it will be.



^This

At the moment, the game is arena deathmatch.

Once the community warfare thing is added, it's all the different factions warring with each other over resources, with individual conflicts being fought through arena deathmatches.

Think of it like Guild Wars. Even though you can only have a small party of people with you when you head into the game world, (or in mwo's case the arena map) it's still considered an MMO.

Edited by LackofCertainty, 08 August 2012 - 03:25 PM.


#27 Boss Awesome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 233 posts
  • LocationBellingham WA

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:25 PM

View PostScytale, on 08 August 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:


Says wikipedia. Unless you want to tailor definitions according to personal preference =P

EDIT: Yes, I know wikipedia isn't the authority on everything, but it's a damn sight better than most people here.

I will be changing the wikipedia entry in order to support my post. Then we will see who is right.

#28 Derek Icelord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:27 PM

Despite what some people argue, this is not an MMO. Having 24 players in a game doesn't count as massive. If it did, games like Halo and Counterstrike would be MMOs, too. I also notice a common theme to these "it is an MMO" arguments... so before you accuse me of "clearing thinking of an MMORPG" let me state:

I do know the difference between an MMO(G) and an MMORPG. An MMORPG is a role-playing subset of the MMO(G) category.

Just because it has online play beyond 1-on-1 does not make it an MMO.

View PostBryan Ekman, on 17 November 2011 - 01:17 PM, said:

MWO is not an MMO, but has MMO like qualities.


View PostBryan Ekman, on 05 December 2011 - 09:54 AM, said:

MWO and EVE are not similar in so far as EVE allows unlimited* players to participate in core gameplay mechanics, such as mining, or fleet battles. MWO uses a match model - a limited numbers players join and play an instance of gameplay. The results of that instance are tabulated and then added to the metagame (stats, ranks, etc).

So I stand by my statement: MWO is not an MMO, however it has MMO like qualities.

*Unlimited is a theoretical possibility. Anyone who has played EVE knows what I'm talking about.


#29 Graxus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 148 posts
  • LocationHessen

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:28 PM

Its no MMO, its a beta !
Check next year ;)

#30 Dragonlord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,230 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:29 PM

View PostScytale, on 08 August 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:


Hope you're not talking about me =P I just posted about how this game is a long way from finished. But I do now wonder - is any exclusively online game an MMO? Could you say that Tribes Ascend is an MMO? If so, is/was Tribes 2 *also* an MMO? And what about MOBA games? Are those MMOs?

What *is* the definition of an MMO? Wikipedia states that it should be able to support thousands of players simultaneously, and that it features at least one persistent world. So by this definition, MOBA games, as well as all Tribes iterations etc are not MMOs. And MWO, AS IT STANDS, is not an MMO, though I think we can agree that upon implementation of the Community Warfare pillar, it will be.


Yes and we all know that wikipedia is absolute truth.
And you seem to be confusing MMO with Games that Have a multiplayer aspect

Once this game is finished it will have a persistent world, and it will be able to support thousands of players simultaneously.

As I already stated in my post this game is not finished yet, as such trying to classify it now would be moot.

#31 Astor Cain

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:29 PM

Does anyone's opinion about the game change based on the initials applied to it???

#32 nksharp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 838 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:31 PM

Here I was thinking it was just MWO. Who cares about trivial acronyms :/

#33 Scytale

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 742 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:32 PM

View PostBoss Awesome, on 08 August 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

I will be changing the wikipedia entry in order to support my post. Then we will see who is right.


A disingenuous argument at best, dodging the point at worst. Considering that wikipedia is peer-reviewed, there's probably a good reason for it saying that.

#34 Malkabian

    Rookie

  • 5 posts
  • LocationLondon

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:37 PM

My biggest hope for this game is for it to be similar to Planetside 2, but with Mechs.

That is, persistence, territory, all the things mentioned about Community Warfare,

Also, does anyone else say MMORPG's, as "more pigs"?

Edited by Malkabian, 08 August 2012 - 03:38 PM.


#35 Derek Icelord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:40 PM

View PostDragonlord, on 08 August 2012 - 03:29 PM, said:


Yes and we all know that wikipedia is absolute truth.
And you seem to be confusing MMO with Games that Have a multiplayer aspect

Once this game is finished it will have a persistent world, and it will be able to support thousands of players simultaneously.

As I already stated in my post this game is not finished yet, as such trying to classify it now would be moot.

When the game is finished, it will have a persistent meta-game. Thousands of players can be online at a given time, but there will still only be 24 (at most) in any given match. Again, just having thousands of people online at once doesn't make an MMO. They have to be able to interact with each other beyond a matchmaking system.

#36 brento73

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 68 posts
  • LocationMidwest US

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:41 PM

I just want to point out that a CTRL-F search of this page:

http://mwomercs.com/game

on the character sequence 'MMO' returns no hits. So, the official game description seems to make no claim of this sort.

#37 Derek Icelord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:43 PM

View PostScytale, on 08 August 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:


A disingenuous argument at best, dodging the point at worst. Considering that wikipedia is peer-reviewed, there's probably a good reason for it saying that.

It's not peer reviewed. Peer reviewed doesn't just mean other people look at it. If Wikipedia were peer reviewed, you could cite it as a source in research projects/papers.

View PostMalkabian, on 08 August 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

My biggest hope for this game is for it to be similar to Planetside 2, but with Mechs.

That is, persistence, territory, all the things mentioned about Community Warfare,

Also, does anyone else say MMORPG's, as "more pigs"?

There will be some sort of territory control, but it's a meta-game. You can't pilot your jump/dropship from planet A to planet B. And Planetside allows for 300 people to a fight in a 3-way battle. Here, it will be 24 with 12v12 at most.

#38 Mariko

    Rookie

  • 6 posts

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:46 PM

View PostScytale, on 08 August 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:


Persistence is going to be implemented eventually, as one of the pillars of the game - "Community Warfare". It still seems to be a way off - they said they'd get it in "after launch".


If what you stated is true, it is very disappointing. The "Community Warfare" is the primary reason I am interested in this game. In fact, even if there was no mech combat in MWO and the game only consisted of the politics, characters, and grand planetary invasion mechanics of the Battletech universe I would buy this game in a heartbeat. I love that stuff. If I wanted mech deathmatches I would load up Mechwarrior 4: Mercenaries (which is actually what I've done with the rerelease by Mektek). Improved physics and graphics don't mean much to me. I relealize I am probably in the minority in that regard, but it is my honest opinion.

Edited by Mariko, 08 August 2012 - 03:47 PM.


#39 Ignatius Spectre

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • LocationFort McMurray AB Canada

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:47 PM

Massive:
This is the Dev post regarding the persistent inner sphere and the planets/factions that will be constantly battling for control over the IS.
http://mwomercs.com/...munity-warfare/

Hopefully that was what you were looking for.

#40 Ghostrider45

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 157 posts
  • LocationThibodaux La, 70301

Posted 08 August 2012 - 03:47 PM

Right now this is not mech warrior this plays more like a ghost ron are any other first person shooter they have out there and that is not what I want to PLAY!!!!!!!!!! I want MECHWARRioR!!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users