The number of players that determine if it’s “massive” will be subjective, but there’s more to the definition than just that. A CoD game isn’t an MMO just because it has a 16vs16 lobby for example. Gameplay design is still always going to be a big factor into the genre definitions.
poeple are bored shitless with fps style multiplayer games, and after that, bored shitless of crappy lead tier mmos likes WoW, NW, GW2 etc whose endgame is really shit. Compared to Champions of Regnum or DAOC, all the lead tiers are boring as hell. Zero endgame creativity – the only thing that makes mmos worthwhile is solid endgame RvR open pvp. If ur mmo doe not have it, then you will perish like The Day Before.
By that definition an MMO has never existed as all of them are divided by servers.
But!
Let’s say an MMO becomes unpopular and there’s only one server left and at most 70 concurrent players, is the game not an MMO anymore because some games with 100 players on the same server aren’t considered MMOs?
While the servers are indeed likely to be joined, I highly doubt there isn’t an instancing system in case every eve player decides to travel to the exact same coordinates at the same time.
Otherwise a large enough corp could essentially “chunk ban” an area.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
Well it’s M for ‘massively’, right? I am not aware of any extraction shooter that could really be considered massively multiplayer.
As an old school gamer, anything over 8 players is massive
The number of players that determine if it’s “massive” will be subjective, but there’s more to the definition than just that. A CoD game isn’t an MMO just because it has a 16vs16 lobby for example. Gameplay design is still always going to be a big factor into the genre definitions.
MMO kind of implies that you’re online with everyone at once, at least in the overworld
poeple are bored shitless with fps style multiplayer games, and after that, bored shitless of crappy lead tier mmos likes WoW, NW, GW2 etc whose endgame is really shit. Compared to Champions of Regnum or DAOC, all the lead tiers are boring as hell. Zero endgame creativity – the only thing that makes mmos worthwhile is solid endgame RvR open pvp. If ur mmo doe not have it, then you will perish like The Day Before.
By that definition an MMO has never existed as all of them are divided by servers.
But!
Let’s say an MMO becomes unpopular and there’s only one server left and at most 70 concurrent players, is the game not an MMO anymore because some games with 100 players on the same server aren’t considered MMOs?
I’m pretty sure EVE is a single server.
While the servers are indeed likely to be joined, I highly doubt there isn’t an instancing system in case every eve player decides to travel to the exact same coordinates at the same time.
Otherwise a large enough corp could essentially “chunk ban” an area.
There’s a separate server for China!
Absolutely there with you. I have it on my list to try some of those ‘99’ games on Switch. Must just be a hilarious nutty experience.
Those aren’t MMOs tho
No, you are correct, but I was responding to the comment about games with more than eight players…