Discussion History Main / MassivelyMultiplayerOnlineRolePlayingGame

\\\"\\\'\\\'Your definition of what \\\"should be\\\" a massively multiplayer game only considers how many people are actively playing the game, not the kind of population the game\\\'s online mechanics are designed to handle. That means your criteria would award and strip games of the \\\"massively multiplayer\\\" title only by their current popularity, not by their game design. That\\\'s ... rather inadequate.\\\'\\\'\\\"

This is a rather hollow accusation, because you\\\'re saying that it\\\'s not what exactly I said, and is specifically something I didn\\\'t.

What I said: \\\"I think having at least one or two hundred players able to interact directly with each other at any given time would be a good place to start, because that\\\'s generally well above the upper-limit for simultaneous player counts in games that are distinctly non-massive.\\\"

What you apparently thought it meant: \\\"A game isn\\\'t massively-multiplayer if it isn\\\'t popular enough.\\\"

I\\\'m really perplexed as to where, exactly, you managed to [[AssPull pull that one from]], because it\\\'s not related to what I said in the least. Especially since I\\\'m directly referencing the game\\\'s ability to let people play together on such a scale, rather than how many people are actually doing it. Being that the only examples of more than four people (six in PhantasyStarUniverse) playing together happen to be in 3D chat lobbies with no real gameplay, I\\\'d say that\\\'s kind of a flimsy pseudo-technicality to try and rely on for your argument, being that these are social constructs to allow players the ability to organize actual gameplay. It\\\'s worth noting that these areas don\\\'t actually exist in PhantasyStarZero.

\\\"\\\'\\\'You\\\'ve already seen some of them. For example, Sega\\\'s own advertisement for PSO. The advertisement practically covers every critical aspect that makes a Massively Multiplayer Online Game what it is—and this was back in 2001, when the genre was young and only in its \\\"second generation.\\\"\\\'\\\'

\\\'\\\'Phantasy Star Online and Universe get billed as MMOs by a number of sources other than Sega—Wikipedia, which cites this article.\\\'\\\'\\\"

Wikipedia doesn\\\'t actually classify any of the PhantasyStar games as MMOs though - you may wish to read [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Online their]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Universe individual]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Zero articles]] and their discussions for some insight. Other related pages attest to this, such as the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MMORPGs List of MMORPGs]], and the article on [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMORPG#Console-based_MMORPGs MMORPGs]] even states, correctly, that the first MMORPG to appear on a console was in fact Final Fantasy XI. The history page you linked was just a fragment prior to the correction that the games are not actually MMORPGs, that had yet to be cleaned up.

For the original Sega advertisement for PhantasyStarOnline, it\\\'s worth noting that it doesn\\\'t actually make any mention of the genre-defining features of MMORPGs - it touts its accessibility to the world, online gameplay, and automatically-translated communication features, but it makes no mention of the gameplay actually being \\\"massive\\\" by any means. It is, of course, still limited to four people at once. Being that the \\\"massively-multiplayer\\\" monicker specifically pertains to the number of players capable of playing at once, that alone prevents the games from being considered as such.

\\\"\\\'\\\'Your definition of what \\\"should be\\\" a massively multiplayer game only considers how many people are actively playing the game, not the kind of population the game\\\'s online mechanics are designed to handle. That means your criteria would award and strip games of the \\\"massively multiplayer\\\" title only by their current popularity, not by their game design. That\\\'s ... rather inadequate.\\\'\\\'\\\"

This is a rather hollow accusation, because you\\\'re saying that it\\\'s not what exactly I said, and is specifically something I didn\\\'t.

What I said: \\\"I think having at least one or two hundred players able to interact directly with each other at any given time would be a good place to start, because that\\\'s generally well above the upper-limit for simultaneous player counts in games that are distinctly non-massive.\\\"

What you apparently thought it meant: \\\"A game isn\\\'t massively-multiplayer if it isn\\\'t popular enough.\\\"

I\\\'m really perplexed as to where, exactly, you managed to [[AssPull pull that one from]], because it\\\'s not related to what I said in the least. Especially since I\\\'m directly referencing the game\\\'s ability to let people play together on such a scale, rather than how many people are actually doing it. Being that the only examples of more than four people (six in PhantasyStarUniverse) playing together happen to be in 3D chat lobbies with no real gameplay, I\\\'d say that\\\'s kind of a flimsy pseudo-technicality to try and rely on for your argument, being that these are social constructs to allow players the ability to organize actual gameplay. It\\\'s worth noting that these areas don\\\'t actually exist in PhantasyStarZero.

\\\"\\\'\\\'You\\\'ve already seen some of them. For example, Sega\\\'s own advertisement for PSO. The advertisement practically covers every critical aspect that makes a Massively Multiplayer Online Game what it is—and this was back in 2001, when the genre was young and only in its \\\"second generation.\\\"

Phantasy Star Online and Universe get billed as MMOs by a number of sources other than Sega—Wikipedia, which cites this article.\\\'\\\'\\\"

Wikipedia doesn\\\'t actually classify any of the PhantasyStar games as MMOs though - you may wish to read [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Online their]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Universe individual]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Zero articles]] and their discussions for some insight. Other related pages attest to this, such as the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MMORPGs List of MMORPGs]], and the article on [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMORPG#Console-based_MMORPGs MMORPGs]] even states, correctly, that the first MMORPG to appear on a console was in fact Final Fantasy XI. The history page you linked was just a fragment prior to the correction that the games are not actually MMORPGs, that had yet to be cleaned up.

For the original Sega advertisement for PhantasyStarOnline, it\\\'s worth noting that it doesn\\\'t actually make any mention of the genre-defining features of MMORPGs - it touts its accessibility to the world, online gameplay, and automatically-translated communication features, but it makes no mention of the gameplay actually being \\\"massive\\\" by any means. It is, of course, still limited to four people at once. Being that the \\\"massively-multiplayer\\\" monicker specifically pertains to the number of players capable of playing at once, that alone prevents the games from being considered as such.

\\\"\\\'\\\'Your definition of what \\\"should be\\\" a massively multiplayer game only considers how many people are actively playing the game, not the kind of population the game\\\'s online mechanics are designed to handle. That means your criteria would award and strip games of the \\\"massively multiplayer\\\" title only by their current popularity, not by their game design. That\\\'s ... rather inadequate.\\\'\\\'\\\"
This is a rather hollow accusation, because you\\\'re saying that it\\\'s not what exactly I said, and is specifically something I didn\\\'t.

What I said: \\\"I think having at least one or two hundred players able to interact directly with each other at any given time would be a good place to start, because that\\\'s generally well above the upper-limit for simultaneous player counts in games that are distinctly non-massive.\\\"

What you apparently thought it meant: \\\"A game isn\\\'t massively-multiplayer if it isn\\\'t popular enough.\\\"

I\\\'m really perplexed as to where, exactly, you managed to [[AssPull pull that one from]], because it\\\'s not related to what I said in the least. Especially since I\\\'m directly referencing the game\\\'s ability to let people play together on such a scale, rather than how many people are actually doing it. Being that the only examples of more than four people (six in PhantasyStarUniverse) playing together happen to be in 3D chat lobbies with no real gameplay, I\\\'d say that\\\'s kind of a flimsy pseudo-technicality to try and rely on for your argument, being that these are social constructs to allow players the ability to organize actual gameplay. It\\\'s worth noting that these areas don\\\'t actually exist in PhantasyStarZero.

\\\"\\\'\\\'You\\\'ve already seen some of them. For example, Sega\\\'s own advertisement for PSO. The advertisement practically covers every critical aspect that makes a Massively Multiplayer Online Game what it is—and this was back in 2001, when the genre was young and only in its \\\"second generation.\\\"

Phantasy Star Online and Universe get billed as MMOs by a number of sources other than Sega—Wikipedia, which cites this article.\\\'\\\'\\\"

Wikipedia doesn\\\'t actually classify any of the PhantasyStar games as MMOs though - you may wish to read [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Online their]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Universe individual]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Zero articles]] and their discussions for some insight. Other related pages attest to this, such as the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MMORPGs List of MMORPGs]], and the article on [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMORPG#Console-based_MMORPGs MMORPGs]] even states, correctly, that the first MMORPG to appear on a console was in fact Final Fantasy XI. The history page you linked was just a fragment prior to the correction that the games are not actually MMORPGs, that had yet to be cleaned up.

For the original Sega advertisement for PhantasyStarOnline, it\\\'s worth noting that it doesn\\\'t actually make any mention of the genre-defining features of MMORPGs - it touts its accessibility to the world, online gameplay, and automatically-translated communication features, but it makes no mention of the gameplay actually being \\\"massive\\\" by any means. It is, of course, still limited to four people at once. Being that the \\\"massively-multiplayer\\\" monicker specifically pertains to the number of players capable of playing at once, that alone prevents the games from being considered as such.

[[quote]]Your definition of what \\\"should be\\\" a massively multiplayer game only considers how many people are actively playing the game, not the kind of population the game\\\'s online mechanics are designed to handle. That means your criteria would award and strip games of the \\\"massively multiplayer\\\" title only by their current popularity, not by their game design. That\\\'s ... rather inadequate.[[/quote]]
This is a rather hollow accusation, because you\\\'re saying that it\\\'s not what exactly I said, and is specifically something I didn\\\'t.

What I said: \\\"I think having at least one or two hundred players able to interact directly with each other at any given time would be a good place to start, because that\\\'s generally well above the upper-limit for simultaneous player counts in games that are distinctly non-massive.\\\"

What you apparently thought it meant: \\\"A game isn\\\'t massively-multiplayer if it isn\\\'t popular enough.\\\"

I\\\'m really perplexed as to where, exactly, you managed to [[AssPull pull that one from]], because it\\\'s not related to what I said in the least. Especially since I\\\'m directly referencing the game\\\'s ability to let people play together on such a scale, rather than how many people are actually doing it. Being that the only examples of more than four people (six in PhantasyStarUniverse) playing together happen to be in 3D chat lobbies with no real gameplay, I\\\'d say that\\\'s kind of a flimsy pseudo-technicality to try and rely on for your argument, being that these are social constructs to allow players the ability to organize actual gameplay. It\\\'s worth noting that these areas don\\\'t actually exist in PhantasyStarZero.

[[quote]]You\\\'ve already seen some of them. For example, Sega\\\'s own advertisement for PSO. The advertisement practically covers every critical aspect that makes a Massively Multiplayer Online Game what it is—and this was back in 2001, when the genre was young and only in its \\\"second generation.\\\"

Phantasy Star Online and Universe get billed as MMOs by a number of sources other than Sega—Wikipedia, which cites this article.[[/quote]]

Wikipedia doesn\\\'t actually classify any of the PhantasyStar games as MMOs though - you may wish to read [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Online their]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Universe individual]] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Zero articles]] and their discussions for some insight. Other related pages attest to this, such as the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MMORPGs List of MMORPGs]], and the article on [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMORPG#Console-based_MMORPGs MMORPGs]] even states, correctly, that the first MMORPG to appear on a console was in fact Final Fantasy XI. The history page you linked was just a fragment prior to the correction that the games are not actually MMORPGs, that had yet to be cleaned up.

For the original Sega advertisement for PhantasyStarOnline, it\\\'s worth noting that it doesn\\\'t actually make any mention of the genre-defining features of MMORPGs - it touts its accessibility to the world, online gameplay, and automatically-translated communication features, but it makes no mention of the gameplay actually being \\\"massive\\\" by any means. It is, of course, still limited to four people at once. Being that the \\\"massively-multiplayer\\\" monicker specifically pertains to the number of players capable of playing at once, that alone prevents the games from being considered as such.

Evidently the last Yonkou is [[spoiler: A woman called Big Mom?]]