So, I’ve noticed a lot of folks posting here that seem to be operating under the misconception that MMO and MMORPG mean the same thing… that they’re synonymous.
Well, just so ya know… this isn’t the case.
MMO is a genre category that encompasses a very wide range of games. In fact, this category is so broad, it includes things that we’d be hard-pressed to call games at all. For example, Second Life qualifies as an MMO, but whether or not it can be counted as a game is quite debatable, to say the least.
MMOs all share three basic defining attributes. 1: they are hosted, online, 2: they have some manner of a shared and persistent world, independent of user interaction and 3: they are able to accommodate a large number of users (thousands or more). MMOs are, by definition, a social experience.
MMORPG is a subgenre of the MMO genre category. Even with this refinement of focus, it’s still a very encompassing designation. To see what I mean, you can check out this list of over 200 MMORPGs, past, present and planned.
MMORPGs are typically defined by the following characteristics: 1. having a player avatar (character) that the player can customize, 2. an “immersive” world, 3. some form of character progression and 4. the building and organization of social groups (guilds and the like).
A MMORPG is also, by definition, a social experience. This means a MMORPG is not just a game. It has design and development considerations that are not game-oriented, but are instead all about social dynamics. While such design concerns have crept into other genres in ever-increasing degrees, for the MMORPG it is a fundamental consideration.
There are many MMORPG conventions, but conventions change, and the genre is constantly evolving. The “traditional” model we see today is distinct from its antecedents in many ways. There is no singular, definitive MMORPG game model, and there never really has been (as the list cited above should clearly illustrate). The genre has a history that goes back 20, even 30 years, depending on where one draws the line in the scope of definition. There are many models that have enjoyed varying degrees of success. And if one were to factor retention of audience into their measure of success, rather than just the sheer number of box sales, the most profitable games have actually been outperformed by (much) smaller enterprises.
Which is a clear indication that the MMORPG audience is not monolithic. Not only does it represent a wide variety of play preferences and styles, how any given player prioritizes those preferences and styles can vary dramatically. There are niches in the market that can be successfully and profitably exploited. Many already have been. What this shows is that there is no single rigid, narrow, proper way to design and develop a MMORPG, regardless of any authoritative declarations to the contrary.
I offer all of this in the hope that it will inform and expand the dialogue. This is a forum in which we can discuss Guild Wars 2 in the broader context of genre, convention and industry. That’s something I’m always going to be inclined to engage in, because my interest in games, and MMORPGs in particular, goes beyond just playing them.
I have a MMORPG ideal. Guild Wars 2 is not it, and, honestly, it never will be. But that doesn’t mean I don’t want it to move closer to that mark. I’d like it to do so while being as inclusive as possible. And that’s going to take reasonable and informed discussion.
Thanks for reading.