Why are these games marketed as MMOs?

[ExplosiveBolts]

They are nothing but match based multiplayer games.

[South Paw]

FFXAuron님이 먼저 게시:

Explosive Bolts님이 먼저 게시:

They are nothing but match based multiplayer games.

MMO translation is... Massive Multiplayer Online.. Any game and even alot of games are not to be identified as this. Meant to to be or to have been.. the mmo title.. is a title at wrong.

Title: isn't to be used and nor to be used. In any way, anyways..
Misfit is the conglomeration of everything, Strange isn't it?
But which path will You Take?

Words means nothing. If nobody is there to say them. //\\

what?

[eobet]

I was just about to make a thread asking about this.

To quality as an MMO, you need to see a massive amount of players AT THE SAME TIME (as in a hundred or more)! So it at least needs a hub world/lobby to showcase your car builds, even if all combat is instanced.

If you can only ever see 8-20 people at the same time, it's just a multiplayer game.

Battlefield, for example, is not an MMO, even though it has 64 player matches, so unless I missed something, this game shouldn't be one either.

[Kshahdoo]

xTremePower님이 먼저 게시:

MMO : Massively Multiplayer Online

This game are an Online game with Massively Multiplayer community ....

MMO is not MMORPG ! MMO is all kind of game played online versus multiple other persons at same time

So CoD and Battlefield are MMOs? I see.

[Mr. Vulcanator]

Kshahdoo님이 먼저 게시:

xTremePower님이 먼저 게시:

MMO : Massively Multiplayer Online

This game are an Online game with Massively Multiplayer community ....

MMO is not MMORPG ! MMO is all kind of game played online versus multiple other persons at same time

So CoD and Battlefield are MMOs? I see.

Yup so is Portal 2 apparently.

[Mr. Vulcanator]

This is pretty much Robocraft mixed with World of Tanks. This is not an MMO and it may never be one.

[hamskin]

Mr. Vulcanator님이 먼저 게시:

This is pretty much Robocraft mixed with World of Tanks. This is not an MMO and it may never be one.

Yep. I was expecting Auto Assault 2.0 from the page. But it's not there.

[ReaperV]

Saikron님이 먼저 게시:

You're wrong on basically every point... I already explained patiently to you what the word massively in MMO means, and it's not a multiplayer online game with a lot of players in a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ lobby (lol).

You have to first have an understanding of the English language, then understand how the meaning of terms change as new mechanics are developed.

There were no games with in-depth progression systems and player markets in-game for games with lobbies in the past. An active community where chatting AND playing with/against other players WITH continuing progression is "Massive" without your own personal definition of it requiring a giant open world for you to do your WoW YouTube dance videos in.

I'm sorry, but if you are going to argue that the fking DICTIONARY definition is not good enough for you, then there is really no point in talking to you, since you already fking know everything.

Kyle님이 먼저 게시:

Planetside 2 an RPG? do you know what RPG stands for? Fallout, Witcher those games are RPG's. Planetside two is a single instance FPS game for players to kill each other. That is not an RPG, you are not playing a role of some character on a quest or a mission.

Are you serious?

Well, if you stopped bouncing off the walls in your self-created "CoD death-match mode", then you would have noticed the character classes, exp-based levels, level-based ability unlocks, equipment, the missions you claim are not there, AND a story/lore.

[Doubanjiang]

ReaperV님이 먼저 게시:

An active community where chatting AND playing with/against other players WITH continuing progression is "Massive"

This is plainly wrong. Sorry kiddo.

[Zalzany]

Saikron님이 먼저 게시:

ReaperV님이 먼저 게시:

An active community where chatting AND playing with/against other players WITH continuing progression is "Massive"

This is plainly wrong. Sorry kiddo.

No its right, I know wow told you other wise, but this just you bad with english. Its basic vocab, you play with hundreds of others, that is MMO, what you thinking of would be Open World MMO or MMORPG. This isn't rust or CS go there is no game servers you can host or pick and choose your on all on the same master server, then you hit battle and it puts you instances.

Its like saying Wow Isn't an MMO becuase it has Battlgrounds, and instances, I mean hell wow is just a huge series of servers meshed together so you hardly notice when you got form one to the other is all. Now stop confusing MMORP with MMO, whats next, Planetside isn't because there is server cap on continets and you want to pretend your on the same map as 20k others, well your not, heck in STO space stations and open maps are broken into groups you could be on instance one with 40 others, and your freind is on instance 8 depedening on how many are in that same spot in the game lol

But child, its ok WoW spoiled you, but that isn't what an MMO is that is just one style of MMO.

[CloversDrop]

I think online games where 100s of people can interact with each other can be called an MMO.
Don't think it's got anything to do with a game having a persistent world.

MMOs tend to have a global chat system in 1 form or another which allowes 100 of players to interact with each other.

Some MMOs just use the text chat for this, others use something with a bit more bling.

STO has a big world you can fly around and interact with each other in, it also has many instances of the same world in case one becomes full. You can't do much in that world, other than start missions, interact with inventory items, nocs or crafting systems, or of course, join pvp/pve queues... hence it's just a glorified global chat system.

If they made an area in Crossout where say 50 ppl could join the same instance, drive their vehicles to crafting stations, the garage, the auction house or areas that start pvp/pve missions, would it them become an MMO?

[dylan]

MMO doesn't mean what it use to. Devs in recent years have more and more been using that term to try and appeal to and pull in those MMO markets. Now the term doesn't mean jack, just like the term "alpha" doesn't mean ♥♥♥♥ either. You got games out there that say they are in EA ALPHA that are almost complete and others that are so bare bones it's a joke they are even in EA at all.

[ReaperV]

Maratropa님이 먼저 게시:

8v8 is in no way remotely massively multiplayer. Simple fact.

Having thousands of people online, trading with each other through the market, and going from mission to mission with a persistent character/vehicle that may have had hundreds of hours invested in it's design, with a lobby of thousands of people to go into the mission with you IS, though... only by the English definition of the term, though. Open world =/= MMO. There are tons of games out there, including the original Ex Machina: Hard Truck Apocalypse that had entirely no multiplayer of any kind but had a fairly large 'open world.'

"Massively Multiplayer" means the game has a large focus on the multiplayer component, not that you are all together in the same exact instance on missions.

Over-simplification is not show a sign of understanding...

[dylan]

ReaperV님이 먼저 게시:

Maratropa님이 먼저 게시:

8v8 is in no way remotely massively multiplayer. Simple fact.

Having thousands of people online, trading with each other through the market, and going from mission to mission with a persistent character/vehicle that may have had hundreds of hours invested in it's design, with a lobby of thousands of people to go into the mission with you IS, though... only by the English definition of the term, though. Open world =/= MMO. There are tons of games out there, including the original Ex Machina: Hard Truck Apocalypse that had entirely no multiplayer of any kind but had a fairly large 'open world.'

"Massively Multiplayer" means the game has a large focus on the multiplayer component, not that you are all together in the same exact instance on missions.

Over-simplification is not show a sign of understanding...

Just because the game has a chat box and you can sell stuff to others, doesn't make it an MMO. Sure those are uncommon features in most multiplayer games, but that's it. The other two things you said are redundant.

There's nothing special about this game that stands out and says MMO. In fact I have a hard time naming any games that are MMO's that aren't MMORPG's lol. The only one that comes to mind right now is PlanetSide 2, that is most deff an MMO. This game? sorry but not even close...

This is my opinion, I don't want to discuss it, just wanted to give my take.

[Purple Sauce]

Do you understand the difference between an MMO and an MMORPG because it's apparent that you don't. Try using google for once.

This is an online game focused with interactions with other players aka an MMO. And MMORPG involves the same thing but with a character that you created or was created for you in a game world that was created for you to travel and adventure in with other players. It's a really easy concept to understand.

[ReaperV]

I'm just going to leave this here:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/mmo?s=t

[em-em-oh or em-mog, em-em-oh-jee]
Spell Syllables
Word Origin
Digital Technology.
1.
massively multiplayer online game: any online video game in which a player interacts with a large number of other players.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world (a.k.a. "persistent world")
Open world and free roam are terms for video games where a player can move freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in regards to how or when to approach particular objectives, as opposed to other video games that have a more linear structure to its gameplay.

https://mmos.com/editorials/what-defines-an-mmo
Persistent or Instanced Based World
MMOs typically have persistent or instance-based worlds, allowing players to interact in real-time. Ultima Online and EverQuest are popular examples of early persistent world MMOs. Their environments are linked together so that players seamlessly travel from one area to the next. Or more recently, in World of Warcraft players can run from the Ruins of Silvermoon to Booty Bay without loading each zone—but I don’t recommend the journey.
Other MMO’s employ instanced worlds. Players join a central hub and then branch out to zones. Each area is not connected but exists independently from the rest, such as in The Secret World, so that players must load each zone. Although, many open world games also rely on instanced zones for dungeons, PvP battlegrounds, and specialized areas for other events. So that, many MMOs end up with a melange of both persistent and instanced worlds.

Once and for all: Open world/persistent world =/= (does NOT equal) "MMO." The TYPE of interaction between players is not important towards the definition, although being able to group with a very large number of players (when they add "guilds"), selling your aquired gear on a market, and having a large pool of players to be able to go into matches/missions with is far above the "all we can do is chat" statement made by a bunch of you.

The above references are great sources of definitions used in the English language to define the term's proper 'industry' usage. Stating your opinions based on your own limited interpretation of the terms does not make them fact or industry standards. The world has changed a lot since the 90's and not every "MMO" is an "MMORPG" even if every "MMORPG" is an "MMO."

Yes, we all wanted Ex Machina Online or Auto Assault, but we don't have that yet... all we have is a lobby-based MMO with persistent progression and instances for "groups." The open world may or may not come later in development (like with Star Conflict)... that still won't turn this game "into an MMO," because it already is one.

Deal with it.