Guild Wars 2

Galphar.3901:

MassIneffective.2364:

Vayne.8563:

8 years ago, Anet provided more content to a lobby game. So noted.

I’m not sure what you’re calling a “lobby game”. The original Guild Wars was a fully-fleshed MMO. Granted it had three separate storylines that didn’t really intermingle (although they tried to force this somewhat with the advent of heroes in Nighfall).

I really hate to defend Vayne here but he is correct. Guild Wars, by A-Net’s own description, is not a MMORPG but a CoRPG. In order to really be called an MMO you need the Massive part and the biggest party you could have in GW was 12 for DoA. GW limited your party size in every aspect of the game and also you had to leave an instance and come back to it in order to respawn enimies

Dungeons and Dragons Online is considered an MMO and it is identical on the surface. They are both instanced games with parties rather than open-worlds. They both have/had huge populations were you could have tons of people in your friends list and chat with. Both have the same limitation of not being able to enjoy content with large groups but that doesn’t make them not MMOs. I don’t care what the developers want to call it. Marvel Heroes 2015 is considered an MMO also, its just an ARPGMMO. All you need to be classified as an MMO is a massive amount of people in the game at the same time but they don’t have to all be in the same instance at the same time.

Lobo Dela Noche.5127:

Galphar.3901:

MassIneffective.2364:

Vayne.8563:

8 years ago, Anet provided more content to a lobby game. So noted.

I’m not sure what you’re calling a “lobby game”. The original Guild Wars was a fully-fleshed MMO. Granted it had three separate storylines that didn’t really intermingle (although they tried to force this somewhat with the advent of heroes in Nighfall).

I really hate to defend Vayne here but he is correct. Guild Wars, by A-Net’s own description, is not a MMORPG but a CoRPG. In order to really be called an MMO you need the Massive part and the biggest party you could have in GW was 12 for DoA. GW limited your party size in every aspect of the game and also you had to leave an instance and come back to it in order to respawn enimies

Dungeons and Dragons Online is considered an MMO and it is identical on the surface. They are both instanced games with parties rather than open-worlds. They both have/had huge populations were you could have tons of people in your friends list and chat with. Both have the same limitation of not being able to enjoy content with large groups but that doesn’t make them not MMOs. I don’t care what the developers want to call it. Marvel Heroes 2015 is considered an MMO also, its just an ARPGMMO. All you need to be classified as an MMO is a massive amount of people in the game at the same time but they don’t have to all be in the same instance at the same time.

Honestly, I’m pretty sure whatever the first M in MMO meant probably changed over time. I mean what really is the difference between Phantasy Star Online, Diablo 3, and Diablo 2 in terms of their classification as an MMO or not? I still think that we are getting away from the point of this question. I believe that the answer is not as important as why it is a question. People are looking to GW1 as a guideline for open world game design and believe that the same principles and techniques can be applied to GW2. People have actually suggested bringing back vanquishing and hard mode to maps. There’s…just….so…much…to think about here that I feel people choose to ignore. Or at the very least, don’t consider the technical implications of their ideas.

Technically Gw1 is an mmo. It doesn’t matter what Arenanet labeled it as. They could label it as a fps, but that doesn’t make it so.
It might not feel like it to some , but it fits every definition of an mmorpg.

Years ago it was more difficult to label a game as an mmo. These days it doesn’t take much at all. Take a look at all these browser/mobile mmos.

Harper.4173:

This unfortunate but true.

It’s the new state of the industry – so many casual “neverplayedgamesbeforebutthislooksfun” people joining in now that games have been watered down to the extreme just to make them approachable by this type of player.

It’s sad – and it’s happening all over the gaming industry. Everything is becoming more " streamlined " and “user-friendly” in order to practically reduce every game mechanic and game type down to bite sized chunks that this sort of audience can manage to digest.

@Karla Grey – unfortunately you’re the one who’s in the wrong. Apparently “dumbing games down” is the way to go because the gaming industry as a collective has been doing it for years now.
Do you know why? Because there’s far more of these “casual players” that are bad than there are hardcore players that are good. But that doesn’t matter – because in the end casual money is still money.

And you can make more money making a game that will sell to casuals than to hardcore players.

There is nothing wrong with a game being >accessible< to casual players. As a matter of fact, it is virtually a requirement that a modern mmo, rts, or fps is accessible to a variety of players who aren’t veteran gamers.
My qualms are that the game is dumbed down to a point there is ‘nothing left’ – when the game only runs skin deep, or as deep as a pizza pan, lacking any real challenge. Look at LoL, for example – really simple to pick up and yet it’s complex enough on high levels of play that it’s become a major success on the esport scene. While GW2 is also easy to pick up, there’s no real depth to provide the longivety and challenge on higher levels of play, or simply to keep things interesting and prevent monotomy.
I can say with high certainty that games who only cater to the lowest common denominator in terms of skill 1) will not have the longevity a game needs to sustain itself, unless it’ll be pushing out new content continuously, which will be able to keep the masses engaged, and 2) will be just another game in a million you see come and go – if it is not memorable, it doesn’t really matter in the long run. However Anet managed to ruin most of the goodwill they built up with GW, so I suppose there won’t be a GW3 anyway.

On the point of GW not being an mmo…well I always considered and played it as such, so that’s an accomplishment on Anet’s side. But it was a big, big spoil to us vertical progression haters, because all other mmos just cannot hold a candle to that original and innovative concept GW so masterfully brought to life. THAT is how special the original is on the mmo scene, while GW2 feels and plays just like your typical gear-grind over-9000-levels mmo/h&s.