Is PSO a MMORPG

[lordofduct]

Now unless I am confused, i believe this is an MMORPG. Its an online rpg that allows multiple players. This prick keeps trying to tell me that it is not an MMORPG and that I am a moron for thinking it is.

 

[Malakai]

The only really massive thing about PSO are the decks, where people come to chat and such, and those decks only allow like 100 people. So, I don't consider that massive. In the actual game, you can only have 4 players per team. Of course, a lot of your MMORPGs, you only have 4-8 or so players per team, but you're still able to interact with and help others without being in the team, with games like everquest and such.

In PSO, you're not able to take whole clans to big bosses or challenging areas, or to have a higher person or team defend you or heal you or your team.

In PSO, there are stages, instead of just individual areas a whole, interactive world. So, in my opinion, it's more of an action rpg, with multiplayer gameplay, but either way you think about it, it's not worth fighting about.

 

[CrazyGoon]

Well that depends on your definition of what an MMORPG is (even though it's a genre that was created by fans of those type of games -- and created poorly I might add). It would also help if people understood the concept of the RPG rather than just label a game an RPG based of various things that are common to both the RPG genre and other genres.

Regardless of how stupid the name of the genre is (not to mention the "classic" RPG name), it shouldn't require their to be lots of players/ a minimum amount of players for it to be in this genre. Why? No matter how many players there are, that won't change how the game plays/ how you play the game - the objective of playing the game, and how you progress through the game. It is irrelevant.

As far as I have studied, this genre usually contains "quests", which are simple puzzle solving using object/ items (much like the Adventure genre - see Secret of Monkey island or Broken Sword). Except, you are not limited in the order of solving the many quests in the game (whereas, in Adventure games you follow a set path which contains the quests/ puzzles which of course will be solved in the order of appearance through the game). This "MMORPG" genre has more relationship with the structure of an Adventure game, than it does which the structure of an RPG. The way I am currently viewing this genre, is somewhat of a "Non-linear Adventure" game.

Of course, I also think (but I'm not sure about) that some games which are labled "MMORPG" contain no "quests" / puzzles to solve, and are just go nowhere games which people play just for the sake of killing the same shit over again in order to gain experience/ and level up. If the game fits this description, I would consider it to be a "Miscellaneous" game - not belonging to any of the primary genres.

Currently, I see that the only type of game that deserves the classification of "RPG" is one which has a Tactical Battle System - the system that is implemented during battles upon enemy encounters. This system would contain options of how to go about the situation, eg. Attack, Use item, Use magic, Defend, Run, etc. As far as I know, the very first videogame RPG's that were created, contained this system. It was this system that made them unique from the other genres. Deeming an game which has <insert your favourite "RPG element" here> an RPG is simply not valid, since all of the responses I've heard didn't affect how the game plays (which is rudimentary in deciding a genre), thus elemination of those said "elements" would result in the same principal used to go about playing/ progressing through the game.

The way I see it, those "RPG elements" (people who have fondly named it so) are just enhancements/ additions to the gameplay/ the games design. Much like cel-shading is a certain "enhancement" to the graphics to fit the theme of the game. Any genre can contain those elements and many do!. I suspect (just as cel-shading was) that these elements were implemented into games in order for the game to be more innovative. For example, take your classic Shoot-em-up/ shooter/ shmup (picture Raiden/ 1945), add an ("RPG") element (for example, stats/ experience/ leveling up), and you get a different take of the genre. And, what do you know, it just occured to me that a game has done exactly that: Radiant Silvergun. Anyway, that was just one of MANY many many examples I could think of which implement certain elements for a more innovative game for it's genre.

Of course, the more I study and think, the more accurate my genre definitions will get. You may not understand the importance of having correct genres, but I sure do, and it's for just the same reason as why genres for music and films are important - you feel like listening to a certain type of music, you search that genre of music. You want to watch a certain type of film, you search that genre of film. Although I'm aware that music has completely gone of the rails in regards to genres, you know what I mean. You search for a similar type of entertainment to the type that you enjoy. And if the genres are correct, then you will find it!

 

[lordofduct]

hmmmm... well this is the way i kinda put it for PSO that makes me call it an MMORPG.

MMORPG - Massive Multi-player Online Role Playing Game; PSO Online is:

Online:it accesses the f-ing internet!

Multi-Player: You can enter the space station and meet with hundreds of people and chat. Then select a team and go down to Ragol and fight togeter. Sounds Multi-player to me!

Massive: Well this word choice for the style of game is a little opinionated. Is the game itself actually massive? Well when you figure in the hours it takes to level all the way upto level 200; YES! Or the massiveness of its network? Ummm, supporting thousands of users on SEGA's networks; it sounds pretty massive to me!

RPG: Do I really have to go over this one; Phantasy Star is SEGA's longest running RPG in its' history.

So, it sound like an MMORPG to me. Unless there is something else that defines MMORPG?

 

[CrazyGoon]

Originally posted by lordofduct@Sun, 2004-10-31 @ 03:00 AM

hmmmm... well this is the way i kinda put it for PSO that makes me call it an MMORPG.

MMORPG - Massive Multi-player Online Role Playing Game; PSO Online is:

Online:it accesses the f-ing internet!

Multi-Player: You can enter the space station and meet with hundreds of people and chat. Then select a team and go down to Ragol and fight togeter. Sounds Multi-player to me!

Massive: Well this word choice for the style of game is a little opinionated. Is the game itself actually massive? Well when you figure in the hours it takes to level all the way upto level 200; YES! Or the massiveness of its network? Ummm, supporting thousands of users on SEGA's networks; it sounds pretty massive to me!

RPG: Do I really have to go over this one; Phantasy Star is SEGA's longest running RPG in its' history.

So, it sound like an MMORPG to me. Unless there is something else that defines MMORPG?

[post=122121]Quoted post[/post]​

Sorry to be a bitch, but while I'm still here, I might as well point out a few things about your post:

You chose to use the name of the genre as an identifier to help define the genre. This is a no-no, because names mean shit when it comes to determining the genre (which is based upon gameplay - and nothing else). Want examples? Sure, cause there are plently of 'em, but I'll only list one example relating to games, and one relating to music:

First the game example: Hmm, ok - pick any genre, and lets look at the name. I'll use the Action genre this time, but I could have chosen any. Ok. Let's analyse the way you just did with the "MMORPG" genre. Action: The game contains plently of action. Hmm, what kind of action do you mean? Perhaps, explosions would come to mind, or lots of enemies. Maybe guns? Quite hard isn't it. We think we have come to the conclusion that if a game contains all of that stuff, it's an Action game, but the unfortunate part it that all you have described is only what the game offers - not the gameplay/ how the game plays/ how you progress through the game. What the game offers can be enjoyed through all of the genres, not just one. For example, Shoot-em-ups/ Shooters/ Shmups, offer the same as what was offered in the Action genre - explosions, lots of enemies, guns - action! You see?

Music example: You pick any genre of music, and analyse the name. For example: Pop. Now, you say pop music sounds like... um, well it pops ... i guess. Even harder.

And finally, you give the impression of the name of a game/ series will be a dead-set indicater of it's genre. Again, the name has nothing to do with it. There is nothing to say that the Phantasy Star franchise can't break off from it's original genre to other genres. It happens all the time. Easy example: Mario. You wanna apply your logic to this example then fine. Let's even have similar wording to the one in your post, shall we: "Super Mario is NINTENDO's longest running platformer in its' history.". But hasn't the Super Mario franchise branched out from platformers into other genres? You better believe it! What do you think Super Mario RPG is. If you want to be even more blunt, you could just say if the game has "Mario" in the title it's a platformer. Flawed logic.

Like I said in my above post - the MMORPG genre was created by fans of that type of game. And like I said, it was created poorly. The mere sound of the name is laughable to me. But unlike that guy you mentioned in your first post, I wouldn't say your a moron for misunderstanding genres, given the difficultly and frustration I have gone through thus far analysing them. The only people I would call morons are the ones who invented the stupid name, not the ones that blindly followed it.

Moral of the story - names mean shit when it comes to determining genres. Now I hope you don't think I'm a prick for analysing your logic, and pointing out it's flaws :banana

 

[lordofduct]

Ummm, no using an already proven example as proof is viable when proving part of a whole. Phantasy star is already proven to be an RPG... anyone would admit this. So this proves only the part RPG of the whole MMORPG. Not a no no. Such as in physics the acceleration of gravity on earth is 9.8 m/s2 which is proven by finding the mass of earth and blaw blaw blaw... so when startine any equation that deals with earth you dont have to prove that the rate of gravitational acceleration is 9.8 m/s2... its already KNOWN. Just the same is Phantasy star known as an RPG so when adding on MMO; PS=>RPG is a given. So not a no no.

Let me point out the mistake you made in criticizing my 4th part of my proof... which is a half ass proof anyways. But for bitching sake like you said (wow we are way off topic of PS and now in the basics of proofs and equations; which are literal such as in debating... this is a big problem i have with people) I like to put the mistake in these words so its nice and universal.

All oranges are fruit, but not all fruit are oranges!

I am not proving all RPG's are Phantasy Star... but that all Phantasy Stars are RPG's... this has been proven by concenses! Now you want to also bring up it can branch off genre, but like i had said this was something i stated somewhere else, which also in said debate PS=>RPG was proven. Your nit picking is just annoying for the factor, WHAT NEED WAS IT! That was not the topic.

Oh and if you want to test my logic... you wanna head butt. LETS HEAD BUTT! Put me to the test, it may be petty, but you love to take so much time to nit pick!

 

[CrazyGoon]

No, we are not in any way off topic, I'm afraid. And although I enjoy opportunities to have conversation about game design, in my experience it has proven to be uneventful to argue with those who have adopted the way of thinking done by the right side of the brain, as opposed to the left. I'm guessing your a right-side thinker, since your fruit analogy was non-sensical. Also if you were a left-side thinker, you would have known that the mere fact that a game is simply known as a certain genre means nothing, because simply saying it's a certain genre by itself doesn't prove anything - you need evidence to backup your claims! Thus you would have looked into why people say it's a certain genre rather than just agree without knowledge of the reason behind peoples claims!

I hope I'm not the only one here that fully comprehended my previous posts...

 

[schi0249]

I would compare PSO more with the Diablo than an "MMORPG" like Everquest.

Diablo: offline content, lobby area to chat with hundreds (or thousands), form a team and play the game.

PSO: offline content, lobby area to chat with hundreds, form a team and play the game.

Everquest (or MMORPG): no offline content, world of thousand to interact with, form a team (or even a clan) and quest together.

 

[lordofduct]

your logic is screwed brother. We are off topic, you began discussing my logic and how it works. The topic is PSO and MMORPG's.

Schi0249 - true true... makes sense.

 

[CrazyGoon]

Originally posted by lordofduct @ Mon+ 2004-11-01 @ 04:15 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lordofduct @ Mon @ 2004-11-01 @ 04:15 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Originally posted by lCrazyGoon@Mon, 2004-11-01 @ 03:36 AM

Originally posted by lordofduct @ Mon@ 2004-11-01 @ 12:50 AM

[post=122195]Quoted post[/post]​

horror is a theme... but "survival horror" is a genre. The genre is named after the themes that the game has.

If you agree horror is a theme, then you should understand that "survival horror" is a theme coupled with an aspect of the game (surviving). And when we talk about genre we are talking about the gameplay - nothing else. Not the way the game looks, sounds, it's aspects, or theme. Only it's gameplay. And most of these (so-called) "survival horror" games' gameplay has strong foundations of the gameplay that it found in most "adventure" games. There is no reason to invent a new genre for a game when it's roots (gameplay) is alreaded founded upon another genre! The only reason I can think of why Capcom has called it a "survival horror" is for the sake of being innovative - after they started calling it a "survival horror" game, people started to "fall for it" - believing that they had never experienced a "survival horror" game before, and thus Capcom gets undeserved credit for being innovative. Load of bollocks..

Who the hell says that a genre in videogame on describes the GAMEPLAY? This makes no sense at all. Genre by definition is a style of art described by its content and similarities. May it be paintings with there themes (i.e. gothic) there look (i.e. surrealism, cubism) there topic (i.e. fiction, non fiction, political, biographical). Video Games, like music or movies or paintings, is creative ART.

Art - Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature. (dictionary.com)

Videogames are art for the fact that it is humans trying to immitate real life through; drawings, 3d, story, interaction with the player, music, immitation of physics(i.e. half life 2), need i continue!

In such it should also be categorized like art would be. Thus keeping in mind its look, feel, and gameplay. Survival Horrors are usually third person perspective shorters with puzzles and a horrific atmosphere usually portrayed through cinematic angles. Seen in the still shots in games like RE or AitD and SH... This draws emotion out of the viewer of the art.

genre - A category of artistic composition, as in music or literature, marked by a distinctive style, form, or content. [dictionary.com] for further proof... thats conitinue with composition

composition - Arrangement of artistic parts so as to form a unified whole.

So to continue... a genre of video game would be - A categorized arrangement of natural immitating or alerteration created by humans to create a videogame.

[/b]

A videogames' genre must indicate gameplay (and only gameplay), simply because the purpose of a game is to play it. If you insist we look at genres for other forms of entertainment (ie, not games), then so be it. In fact, I think it'll be a good way to put things into perspective. And before we start, let me say that this is not just directed at lordofduct, but everybody who has an interest in game design, game genres, or would just like to see how their opinions hold up against my rock solid (*cough*) statements. And this is NOT off-topic, as the original question of the thread "Is PSO a MMORPG?" requires an insight into game design to answer accurately! And beware that this post (including quotes) is ~2000 words long. So it might be advisable to stretch you legs, or drink a cuppa during reading

Music

Music's genre indicates the sound of the music. I don't think it's actually possible for it to indicate something else, for that matter. And the main purpose for listening to music is to here the sound. Music CD's/ Mp3s is where this form of entertainment thrives.

Film

Film's genre indicates the story (which relates to the theme). And the main purpose for watching a film is to here a story. Film and Books are where this form of entertainment thrives.

We understand so far? So press onto games.

Games

A game (these days) in general, contains 4 things: Music, story, graphics, and gameplay. Regardless of how good the music, graphics and story is, the game is still meant to be played. They are designed to be played! This is why games differ from Music, books, and Film. The first time I played a videogame, I immediately recognised it to be a wonderful combination of those various forms of entertainment. Though it was clear to me back then as it's still clear to me today, that the main purpose for a videogame was to play it (and pass it). For videogames are where this form of entertainment thrives. You cannot find this sort of entertainment anywhere else. So... so far, does it sound like a smart reason for games to have it's genre indicate gameplay? Continue, there's more to discuss:

Examples!

Ok. Now we'll test out what you'd get if a videogames genre indicated music, story, graphics, and gameplay. First, music!:

Music example: Super Adventure Island. The music is overall "funky", boppin' music (sorry, but how else do you describe it? ). Now, this sort of music represents a certain genre. To be in this genre, the game must feature "funky", boppin' music. Now, take Super Bomberman 2 (for example - not internally! :devil). This game also has "funky", boppin' music. Therefore, by rule of how it sounds, Super Adventure Island and Super Bomberman 2 are the same type of game! No way!

There could be many more examples like this, but I think you know what I mean And what would you do with games which didn't have music? Leave them out of all genres? Classify a game with no sound as a certain genre? If you did that, you'd get a lot of different "unique" games with no sound in your basket.

Story example: Final Fantasy. The plot of the story is basically "save the world". Now, this sort of story represents a certain genre. To be in this genre, a game must have a "save the world" plot. Heaven's there are a lot of those type of stories in games (maybe I didn't narrow it down enough, huh? Yeah, but if I narrowed it down too much, then only the game and perhaps the rest in it's series would fit in the genre. Thus you'd end up with countless genres (like the music industry). Ok, so take Ecco the Dolphin (as an example!). This game also features a story with the similar plot of "save the world". Therefore, by rule of plot of story, Final Fantasy and Ecco the Dolphin are the same type of game! Heavens forbid!

At this point, you could also bring in themes, and what you'd get if a videogames' genre indicated a certain theme. Let's use Final Fantasy again, 'cause the theme is obvious (it's 'Fantasy', right guys?). Now this 'fantasy' theme represents a certain genre. To be in this genre, a game must have a 'fantasy' theme. Hmm. "McDonald's Treasure Land Adventure" looks as though it's theme is 'fantasy' also. "Magical Chase" also appears to be a 'fantasy' game. Therefore, by rule of theme, Final Fantasy, McDonald's Treasure Land Adventure, and Magical Chase are the same type of game! Can you believe it?

And again, there could have been many more examples like this.. also, consider games which have no stories or themes (puzzle games, pinball, many tetris/ block games). What are you going to do with them... ah the possibilities!

Graphics Example: Now you could answer this one in two ways: bits (eg, 8-Bit, 16-Bit, etc.) and viewpoints (side-view, top-view front-view, side-isometric view, etc.), but the first way is stupid, since it would mean all 8-bit games are of a certain genre, all 16-bit games are of another genre, etc. So this example deals with viewpoints: Grand Theft Auto (the original btw). The viewpoint is top-down (birds-eye/ eagle). Now, this sort of viewpoint represents a certain genre. To be in this genre, a game must have a top-down view. Let's take the shooter "1945" for example. This game also has a top-down view. Therefore, by rule of viewpoint, Grand Theft Auto and 1945 are both the same type of game! Blimey!

And would you believe that there could many countless more examples just like this one? You'd better believe it!

Gameplay example Finally we get to the last one. Gameplay! Now, I'm going to pick some of the easier to explain "types of gameplay", just to make life easier for all readers here. Besides, I don't think anyone's ready for any detailed descriptions of some of the other more complex "types of gameplay". So here we go: Virtua Racing. In this game, the player is required to race (against the time or other players) to compete for the fastest time/ or first to the finish line. The game's purpose lies solely in this description. This is an example of one "type of gameplay". Now, this "type of gameplay" represents a certain genre. To be in this genre, a game must have the same (or remarkably similar) "type of gameplay". Go ahead an choose some games for comparison. For this example, I'll choose Fatal Fury. Does this game require the player to race? No. No need to ask anymore questions about this game then!

But let's just explain the "type of gameplay" Fatal Fury has, for completists' sake. In Fatal Fury the player engages in a one-on-one fight (with or without weapons) with another player (either human or the computer - depends on whether the game is 2 player or not). Each player is given equal amount of life, and the best fighter wins (wins can be achieved by depleting the enemies health bar to 0% or having more health when (if) time runs out). This games purpose lies solely in this description. This is an example of another "type of gameplay". Now, this "type of gameplay" represents a certain genre. And to be in this genre, the game must have the same (or remarkably similar) "type of gameplay".

So far so good. We have kept two "types of gameplay" from inhabiting the same genre! Now, for the final example: Sega Rally. In this game, the player is required to race (against the time or other players) to compete for the fastest time/ or first to the finish line. The game's purpose lies solely in this description. Well, it seems Sega Rally fits the exactly same description as Virtua Racing. Therefore, they both belong to the same genre! Correctamundo! That's what I would call smart genre forming, wouldn't you? I mean, you have games which play the same in the same genre. Making sense? It should by now.

<!--QuoteBegin-lordofduct @ Mon@ 2004-11-01 @ 04:15 AM

OH OH OH, my logic is based on that of FACT and RESEARCH and general intuition you confrontational dick weed!

And I am sorry if this sounds like a flame to anyone else other then schmuck her crazygoon... but he just pissed me off when he wanted to judge my LOGIC by criticizing a stupid little post of mine that was also there to show how LITTLE I admittedly knew about MMORPG's. What the hell else would of I asked the question back there if I knew what one was?... I am an old school console gamer.

[/quote]

They why do you have a problem when I throw up some points for you (and anyone else who is interested for that matter) to ponder?

And I really am sorry, that it sounds like I'm attacking you. Truly, that's definitely not the reason why I write such lengthy and in depth posts about the topic.

Once again, sorry if it's pissed you off. Just countering your statements with some of my own, basically so that other people can have a nice comparison between our statements. Anyway, I'm not half as concerned with arguing with you (it really wouldn't matter which user posted this thread) than I am with putting forward my views on game design for other readers to ponder.

Also, if this post pisses you of again and you choose to attack "me" rather than my words then grow up - I have better things to do than partake in a pointless flamewar.

 

[Alexvrb]

Calm down people, or at least keep it short, I can't read that!

 

[lordofduct]

Because it is based on opinion and no factual research is brought into the subject.

You bring up valid points... these dont cancel out my points in any way! Just because you say because i have this point means that you point can be forgotten. No, it can contain both points of the matter. Also where I am coming to is that it is an attack on me when you attack something as trivial as what I said in the first place. If you didnt want to fight, then why spend literally hours posting the posts you have posted. You know you can see how long people are posting by clicking on that link on the front of the forum page to locate members!

But anyways... yes i would like to now stop this bs of fighting with your close minded ass. I have no problem with being PROVED wrong, i hate being TOLD im wrong with no relevant research or fact based behind also being told my logic is wrong with again no actual proof other then a silly mock "proof" on the break down of the words in mmorpg! Which also was admittedly an opinion thing, filled with words like I think and I believe... key words hinting to opinion!

Oh, and if you want a reason why i bothered posting such a stupid proof about the breakdown of the words in mmorpg... it seems IM not the ONLY one who thinks PSO is an mmorpg, check out the poll!... oh and I started the poll, because i didnt KNOW!

 

[CrazyGoon]

Originally posted by lordofduct@Mon, 2004-11-01 @ 09:06 PM

Also where I am coming to is that it is an attack on me when you attack something as trivial as what I said in the first place.

[post=122389]Quoted post[/post]​

It doesn't matter to me how trivial another person thinks something is. The whole point of asking questions is to get answers, and if you say I'm "attacking" you simply because you regard what you said as "trivial", then I don't see how I could have done anything to avoid it - unless you said something below your "trivial" post that warned possible repliers to not answer or comment on it, or else it would be considered an attack on you..

If you didnt want to fight, then why spend literally hours posting the posts you have posted.

I don't quite understand why you see this as a fight - to me it's just an exchange of ideas/ opinions!

But anyways... yes i would like to now stop this bs of fighting with your close minded ass. I have no problem with being PROVED wrong, i hate being TOLD im wrong...

So I'm assumming you think I told you that you were wrong? Listen, if I wanted to tell you that you were wrong, I could have done that in just one sentence. For example: "You are wrong".. but of course, this doesn't mean anything to anyone wanting reasons why he/ or she is wrong. I myself, won't accept a one liner saying I'm wrong, because I myself need to here the reason behind why the other person thinks I'm wrong. Knowing this, I always try to give as much good, and solid reasons as I can, when making my points.

And to me, it's not about "proving" someone else is wrong, because that's a bit unfront and disrespective to the other person and his/her opinions. Instead, I try to counter other peoples opinions/ reasoning, with my own. It doesn't directly prove that they are wrong, but instead gives the person time to have a look at both his/ her arguments and mine, and ultimately come to a decision for themselves.

I think I have been more than fair in my arguments. If you think otherwise, then I'm sorry, but I tried my best..

Which also was admittedly an opinion thing, filled with words like I think and I believe... key words hinting to opinion!

And opinions tend to have reason behind them (the reason behind your opinion). I have put forward some points and examples, and have made my point clear, through the display of the reasoning of my opinon. You also displayed reasoning behind your opinion, but I thought it could have some room for improvement so I brought up some points for you to think about. You got a problem with that? Sheesh...

Oh, and if you want a reason why i bothered posting such a stupid proof about the breakdown of the words in mmorpg... it seems IM not the ONLY one who thinks PSO is an mmorpg, check out the poll!... oh and I started the poll, because i didnt KNOW!

If you thought it was stupid then why did you post it? :lol And I know you're not the only one who thinks PSO is an MMORPG, and why would I care anyway? My aim was to put forward my logic and reasoning, and compare it against others. I did that. FYI, you may be astonished (but hell if I know! ) to learn that my vote was the same as yours. I thought most would have already known that, since the evidence can be found in my first post of this thread!

And the only reason why I'm bothering replying to this post (since it doesn't follow-up on anything that I have said about the topic), is because you keep trying to make it sound like I'm attacking you. So please not trying to convice you/ me/ everyone that I'm the enemy! You have seriously misperceived my intentions. chill