What actually is an MMORPG?

[Biomega]

I think the option itself to do it to such a degree as WoW means the game itself is failing in the MMO department.

Terminologically perhaps, but terminology is mutable, and the limits are often porous and/or fuzzy.

You should work together and interact a lot more with each other. It shouldn't be an option to such an enermous part as it is in WoW currently.

Why, though? Who gets to say "this is how you ought to do it, and no other way!", and by what justification? I get that it might be a problem if it means you CAN'T group, but that's not the case here - you totally can still do everything in groups, either directly (actually in a party) or indirectly (just interacting with other players while not in an actual party). You can just ALSO do it solo, for a large part, but that solo option doesn't take anything away from people who'd choose otherwise.

Otherwise it's just some co-op nonsense on top of what should be a SPRPG.

Seems to me you're just too hung up on the terminology maybe? Who cares, really, what label you put on things - it's about the actual experience.

The world quest are laughable compared to dynamic public events other games offer. Just to name one example.

That's a more cogent example, but it's also a conceptual difference in design - WoW puts a stronger emphasis on instanced content over world content, and for very clear reasons: it's easier to control, easier to balance, and provides and overall more satisfying experience as a result, especially at higher tiers of difficulty. Let's not forget that a big reason why some other titles have better public events is because they're less popular; that's not to say they're "worse" or anything nonsensical like that, but they're more niche in the sense that the players who choose these games tend to be more invested, and as a result, tend to play along better. If you tried that in a title like WoW, the amount of disruptive elements from players who aren't as invested in the fantasy would make those events FAR less successful.

MMO implies playing with other people. That's why I look for MMOs instead of single player games when I want to play with other people.

And you still play with other people in WoW. In fact a lot of the content you straight CAN'T DO without other people (edge cases like some Dk soloing an M+ in 10 hours aside). Your problem seems to be that for a lot of low-difficulty content, you CAN do it without other people; but you can still do it with groups, and many people do. So you're really just complaining about 1) the label they put on the game, which is a category that's always been subject to fuzzy definitions; and 2) that somehow other people are playing differently from what you'd expect and even though this doesn't impact your experience directly this seems to bother you for some reason.

I'm not sure what to tell you there other than to perhaps re-examine what your own framework is really doing to your thinking here.

[KrayZ33]

Seems to me you're just too hung up on the terminology maybe? Who cares, really, what label you put on things - it's about the actual experience.

Exactly.

And why do you declare something an "MMO" if it's no different to a lobby-coop game in terms of the experience you have in this game?

1) the label they put on the game, which is a category that's always been subject to fuzzy definitions;

Which is kinda the point of this thread, isn't it?

and 2) that somehow other people are playing differently from what you'd expect and even though this doesn't impact your experience directly this seems to bother you for some reason.

The reason isn't just "some reason" I said what my reason is.
It's not an *MMORPG* in my opinion if I play the RPG part solo.
I don't feel like I'm in a world with massive amounts of players, at all.
The story itself isn't written like that. So what makes this game something called MMORPG?

It's kinda pointless to call a game MMORPG if it's only on a technical (lots of people playing on the same server), non-game level.
It's pointless to *have* an MMORPG if you don't add mechanics that would make use of that.

It's like adding the most well designed shooter mechanics to a puzzle game, and you only need to hit blocks to activate them, or something.

Why is the current version of WoW not using a lobby-game system.
Where are the interactions aside from meeting DPS checks or getting a heal in every so often?
What is Genshin Impact compared to WoW... is it different, or is it the same?

[Biomega]

It's kinda pointless to call a game MMORPG if it's only on a technical (lots of people playing on the same server), non-game level.

But that's the point I'm making - YOU are portraying it like that just because people CAN play solo, despite the fact that for a lot of the most relevant content (dungeons/raids) they actually CAN'T and the solo option has zero impact on people who DO want to group (which they still can and do for all forms of content).

You're basically saying that your definition of MMORPG means that you HAVE to be in a group for EVERYTHING - otherwise we're just arguing about percentages, and where would you draw the line? Which is an incredibly strict definition that probably hardly any game ever would actually qualify for.

[KrayZ33]

You're basically saying that your definition of MMORPG means that you HAVE to be in a group for EVERYTHING - otherwise we're just arguing about percentages, and where would you draw the line? Which is an incredibly strict definition that probably hardly any game ever would actually qualify for.

Yeah pretty much, not exactly, but pretty much. (edit: I mean, we are not talking about "HAVING" to do it, but there is basically no benefit or some kind of enhanced experience to do something with others unless you quite literally *have* to do it. That just sucks and shouldn't be the case in the MMO genre)
Yes we are arguing about percentages, because these perecentages have a direct impact on how the game *feels* when you play it.
Is it beneficial if I have someone else craft for me? Is it possible to specialize in that.
Is it beneficial to explore something together, or is it just annoying?
Is it needed, is it simpler, is it more fun, is it the same?
Are dungeons excluding you from the MMO part, do they feel like they are in the game or outside of it?
There is stuff going and going against my idea of a proper MMO.

etc. etc. etc.

Group content =/= MMO.
WoW group content is small and lobby based. There is not even a *chance* to make something massive because there is literally no gameplay supporting it. No sieges, no massive encounters, no massive public events, nothing.
Or... well...to go back to percentages: Maybe 5% or something.
Seems to me like the whole "everyone is walking around in the same area as you" is kinda wasted when there is no gameplay where you want players to be near or if the game actively tries to ignore them by fading them out for you and all that stuff.

And I'm not arguing about what game meets the criteria, GW2 for example certainly has a better open world/MMO feeling while leveling and doing something than WoW even though the MSQ is basically a SPRPG experience. And that doesn't mean I think GW is a good example for the MMO genre. It's just one part of it.

edit:
Yes, they cater to a variety of players now, but that also means they cater for those in direct conflict to others.. and I'm not sure if that's what shoud be done, but that's another question I guess.

So I'm basically in the boat of:
"MMO means to play and interact with others and it should always be the "go-to" thing and only avoided if it's not possible otherwise" and the game's system should support that. Keep in mind that it doesn't mean you *have* to do it with others.
WoW is basically the opposite atm (and has been for quite some time), you do everything alone unless it can't be avoided anymore. And the game's system support that.

[Biomega]

Yeah pretty much, not exactly, but pretty much.
Yes we are arguing about percentages, because these perecentages have a direct impact on how the game *feels* when you play it.

So what percentage? And why that percentage?

All the examples you're giving are vague and tentative, which makes me think your real point is "WoW doesn't feel like an MMORPG to me" - which is entirely legitimate, but is VERY different from "WoW isn't an MMORPG" or "WoW doesn't deserve the MMORPG label". People can have differing understandings of categories when it comes to the fine details, that's entirely normal and in no way invalidates the category as a whole.

If you don't like the way WoW handles groups, that's fine. You can accept it, try to change it, or play something else. But there's a reason they're doing it this way, and it works for a lot of people; many of whom would be entirely comfortable calling it an MMORPG even with a good portion of solo options. In fact, to a lot of people WoW is attractive precisely BECAUSE it allows a lot of the everyday maintenance stuff to be done solo, rather than being dependent on a group for everything. That is as legitimate a position as yours, because there's nothing objective about your argument that would indicate mislabeling (and how could there be, given that the label itself is a subjective form of categorization).

[Hildibrand Manderville]

I'll tell you what an MMORPG is or was even.

Goddamn Everquest. That was arguably the most magical time in MMORPG history imo. Logging in after a hard day at school and just exploring and killing baddies with these people halfway across the world potentially.

I miss those days.

[KrayZ33]

So what percentage? And why that percentage?

All the examples you're giving are vague and tentative, which makes me think your real point is "WoW doesn't feel like an MMORPG to me" - which is entirely legitimate, but is VERY different from "WoW isn't an MMORPG" or "WoW doesn't deserve the MMORPG label". People can have differing understandings of categories when it comes to the fine details, that's entirely normal and in no way invalidates the category as a whole.

If you don't like the way WoW handles groups, that's fine. You can accept it, try to change it, or play something else. But there's a reason they're doing it this way, and it works for a lot of people; many of whom would be entirely comfortable calling it an MMORPG even with a good portion of solo options. In fact, to a lot of people WoW is attractive precisely BECAUSE it allows a lot of the everyday maintenance stuff to be done solo, rather than being dependent on a group for everything. That is as legitimate a position as yours, because there's nothing objective about your argument that would indicate mislabeling (and how could there be, given that the label itself is a subjective form of categorization).

I did edit quite a bit.
I think I adressed why WoW doesn't deserve the MMO part.
You might still even now disagree with it but in my opinion I'm not vague at all there (now).

WoW is designed as a solo experience
That shouldn't be the case in an MMO.
It's not about "playing solo is optional" it's about the game being made for a solo-player experience outside of group content that is forced upon you.
It feels unnatural. It's not a game design that needs the MMO part to work.
And for that it's basically the same as a shooter that has horrible gun mechanics that you don't want to use unless you have to and are optional for the majority of the game.

Yeah - you CAN shoot the gun - but it's neither needed for most of the stuff nor is it fun. (edit: the important word here is "nor" - the game should be enhanced by pulling the trigger.)
Should've been a different game then, because the jump&run mechanics in this game were quite fun.

I still think WoW would work as a lobby game and 95% of the playerbase wouldn't notice the difference.
The remaining playerbase is tuned to that kind of thing in the first place (including me)

[Darththeo]

I did edit quite a bit.
I think I adressed why WoW doesn't deserve the MMO part.
You might still even now disagree with it but in my opinion I'm not vague at all there (now).

WoW is designed as a solo experience
That shouldn't be the case in an MMO.
It's not about "playing solo is optional" it's about the game being made for a solo-player experience outside of group content that is forced upon you.
It feels unnatural. It's not a game design that needs the MMO part to work.
And for that it's basically the same as a shooter that has horrible gun mechanics that you don't want to use unless you have to and are optional for the majority of the game.

Yeah - you CAN shoot the gun - but it's neither needed for most of the stuff nor is it fun. (edit: the important word here is "nor" - the game should be enhanced by pulling the trigger.)
Should've been a different game then, because the jump&run mechanics in this game were quite fun.

I still think WoW would work as a lobby game and 95% of the playerbase wouldn't notice the difference.
The remaining playerbase is tuned to that kind of thing in the first place (including me)

MMORPGs cannot survive without a single player experience. If you lean too heavy on needing to group, the game dies. MMOs are a forever game, meaning they are designed for people to play without a designed ending (Unlike say Madden or Fifa which is designed for people to play for a year and get the new one or Pokemon meant for people to play for 3 to 4 years before the next generation of games). Without a strong single player experience, you aren't going to retain the necessary player base to make an successful MMO.

Without a good single player experience, people are just not going to stay. MMOs are already a niche audience and appealing to a niche group in the niche audience never really works for long term success. If you are going to have grouping (not a requirement for an MMO), you need to make people want to group rather than feel they have to group.

In fact, if you want to have grouping be the main focus of the game. You are better off just making an instanced lobbied game where players can go group and face challenges in their own instance than a MMORPG.

[Biomega]

WoW is designed as a solo experience
That shouldn't be the case in an MMO.

That seems an outrageous accusation to make against a game whose arguably main selling point has been its outstanding instanced GROUP content, i.e. dungeons and raids (and to some extent, instanced PvP as well). If there's ever anything people agree on when it comes to WoW, it's that.

[KrayZ33]

That seems an outrageous accusation to make against a game whose arguably main selling point has been its outstanding instanced GROUP content, i.e. dungeons and raids (and to some extent, instanced PvP as well). If there's ever anything people agree on when it comes to WoW, it's that.

Geez... I'm pretty sure in context it was clear what meant right?
What you said applies to CS:GO or D3 as well at least to the degree and how WoW has implemented it.

But it really doesn't matter to me, I've said what I wanted to say.

MMORPGs cannot survive without a single player experience. If you lean too heavy on needing to group, the game dies.

WoW doesn't have a "good" SP experience either and it managed and when you say group content you are probably thinking about 5mans and dungeons or stuff like that.
I am not. I am simply thinking about how the player is engaged naturally to interact with other players and not naturally getting phased out of that experience.
Public events, WQs etc. is the natural way to do it. It just so happens that WoW doesn't have good ones, neither does it feel rewarding to do them. Not many games do, FFXIV doesn't either other than maybe hunts. But FFXIV has other ways to do it, at least in the social area like guild housing and actual events... which WoW is lacking in as well.
WoW has instanced content which is fun to play, but as the name suggest "instanced" isn't really massive by any means.

[Kumorii]

As people have said already. It's a game which allows for a large number of players play inside the same persistent world.
Anything beyond that is just what you desire.

[Darththeo]

WoW doesn't have a "good" SP experience either and it managed and when you say group content you are probably thinking about 5mans and dungeons or stuff like that.
I am not. I am simply thinking about how the player is engaged naturally to interact with other players and not naturally getting phased out of that experience.
Public events, WQs etc. is the natural way to do it. It just so happens that WoW doesn't have good ones, neither does it feel rewarding to do them. Not many games do, FFXIV doesn't either other than maybe hunts. But FFXIV has other ways to do it, at least in the social area like guild housing and actual events... which WoW is lacking in as well.
WoW has instanced content which is fun to play, but as the name suggest "instanced" isn't really massive by any means.

Basic interactions are not "group content" they are world content.

If you include just seeing other people and doing the same thing as them as "group content", you are using definition that most people don't share. Group content implies that you have grouped with someone. If that is your definition, you are 100% arbitrarily drawing a line that you cannot justify between single player and group content as ALL content can be done in that manner or grouped.

You are including World Event Content as "group content" and that is not a definition I agree with. If you aren't in a group, you are not doing group content (unless you are doing outdated group content solo.)

[Val the Moofia Boss]

A classic MMO like Ultima Online or Everquest was a world in which you could do your own thing and you interacted with other players. So many different things you could do. Sadly classic MMOs have been out of fashion for 16 years. Today they are all dead or are private servers with only a few hundred to a few thousand players.

The MMOs of today are themepark MMOs. Player interaction isn't really encouraged here. For the most part they are singleplayer games where you see other people walking around but you never have to interact with them. Also you have nowhere near the same amount of freedom in themepark MMOs like you had in classic MMOs. Most themepark MMOs today are based off of a pre-existing IP, and deliver new content every now and then, so the main draw is being able to play a game set in your favorite franchise and get new content every now and then (rather than a one and done deal like most singleplayer games).

[Edge-]

Sadly classic MMOs have been out of fashion for 16 years. Today they are all dead or are private servers with only a few hundred to a few thousand players.

Hey now, Ultima Online still gets updates and even had a paid expansion a few years back. I can never get into the game, but it's an impressive that it's not just still running 24 years later, but that it's still seeing any level of developer support/new content. I doubt it's got a big population, but it's big enough to fund at least a few folks working on new content.

[ippollite]

Whats the alternative case though, that isnt just 'outdated perspective'? Im going to pull back once again to the early days of wow (since it was my first mmo). I remember being in Loch modan when i got my first taste of world pvp. It lasted about an hour and was stupid fun. Through that battle (and since i was a priest) i got invited to a group running deadmines. We grouped up. We cleared our way to the entrance, and i just stared at the portal in genuine disbelief (sorry group, i think i sat there for at least a minute). I had no idea what was behind it. I was terrified, amazed, scared and (above all) explosively excited. It was one of the most memorable experiences i ever had in game. Theres this idea in my head that were i not there at that time, i might have missed out on that experience, and just leveled up. And that any time i was supposed to run a dungeon, i'd have just been completely frozen in terror at the idea (and carried on leveling to max in world - perfectly feasible). Its such an iconic moment for me, and it was brought about by not only world grouping but that acting as a conduit to group content. Its sort of the 'donut philosophy' in action and on the smallest scale imaginable.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Many people simply play MMOs because they keep getting updates. The roots of a glorified chat service were kinda forgotten ages ago.

[schwarzkopf]

Even easy ones like 4-5 man dungeons.

Nothing easy about grouping for a 5 man dungeon .. the THDDD mantra makes it difficult enough that I avoid doing many of them unless I'm lucky enough to get a guild group.

[Runicblood]

I think it's funny how there's a group of people that want to be able to solo all content, but at the same time want realm community and no LFG/LFR panels.

LFG/LFR makes playing "solo" that much easier.

[Witchblade77]

Just to be clear my post was not meant to be hostile but I was rather surprised at how many people actively play MMOs and yet loathe grouping activities. Even easy ones like 4-5 man dungeons.

there are other ways to actualy socialize in a game beyond the unimaginative force group content? I play MMO's because I enjoy playing around other people, I enjoy actualy socializing with them, the role play aspect, various guild events. being in guild where you can all just hang out together is a uniquely MMO thing.

I'm going to give you an example I have been giving to people for a while. ever gone to a public park? just to sit on a bench and read while life is happening around you? I have. all the time. but why go to the park just to be on your own when you can read at home you ask? exactly. I go to the park rather then stay at home BECAUSE of that life happening around me. I enjoy the ambience. it is more fun to be on my own but still a part of a larger whole sometimes.

[Crazozourus]

Hey now, Ultima Online still gets updates and even had a paid expansion a few years back. I can never get into the game, but it's an impressive that it's not just still running 24 years later, but that it's still seeing any level of developer support/new content. I doubt it's got a big population, but it's big enough to fund at least a few folks working on new content.

Not only that. Old School RuneScape, Albion, EVE, Black Desert are full of players. Sandbox MMORPGs have more players than ever.