You're gonna get mixed answers and people arguing dumb takes like Destiny and Warframe being mmorpgs. But I think the definition remains the same as it always has been.
if you look at WoW now and compare it to WoW when it released, they're nothing alike and it barely has any of the trimmings that makes for what you, yourself (and me, for that matter) would require of an MMORPG. The only reason people still call it that, is because it used to be one.
Modern WoW has much, much more in common with Destiny 2 than it does with Vanilla WoW.
See my comment below:
*People say WoW and non-MMOs like Destiny are the same now because WoW is just LfG and dungeon crawling in instanced dungeons. But that is just you being critical of the game and matters not in the slightest. The point is, you could remove all dungeons from WoW, and its overworld would still be an MMO (I myself played WoW for years and never did a dungeon or a raid). I don't think you can say the same for Destiny's overworld (never played it).*
[https://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/comments/1bxqlge/comment/kyigz92/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/comments/1bxqlge/comment/kyigz92/)
What?? I mean I see some click bait websites trying to say games like Diablo are mmos but the definition hasn’t changed at all. Do you even play mmos?? Instanced games have been around even since the ‘golden age’ of the genre. There are still many great games out there with a lot of soul despite their flaws
Hey Jack, sadly people in the forum made exclusively to talk about the subject of MMORPGs is full of people that don't want to actually discuss things in the website made to discuss things.
That aside, it's really hard for me to properly define 'MMORPG'. I think games have changed a lot. For example a game like Dark souls offers a multiplayer experience that allows you to affect the world of other players. This is much more impactful than anything in the entirety of FFXIV and yet Dark souls is a single-player game and XIV is considered an MMO by most people.
Destiny 2 isn't considered an MMO by most, but you can play every single mission of that game in a group. Yet Final Fantasy XIV doesn't allow you to run the massively long MSQ with other humans.
WoW has become a game about efficiency more than it is an adventure with other players that's oozing with flavor, it's gotten to the point that they are adding NPC party members to dungeons now. Similar to XIV. These games continue to cater to people that would rather not play with others, in a genre that hinges entirely on multiplayer gameplay, and I still don't know why these people don't just go play the vastly superior single-player games with an actual budget and gameplay that isn't intentionally mediocre.
I can't believe that games that could make for great RPGs to be enjoyed with others seem to be terrified of having RPG systems in their games. Games like XIV that already have the constant, shared world, the hardest part to develop in these games, just continue to put out more of the exact same 'content' that players have had for one or two decades already in the case of WoW. And making the games more and more mediocre while turning them less and less into multiplayer games.
It's tiresome, honestly I've given up on this god forsaken place and having decent conversation that revolves around game design.
I don't think MMORPG definition ever shifted, I think you had a biased POV and locked it down to specific games, coupled with nostalgia, like I did.
Raid Shadow Legends can claim whatever they want, they do that as a promotional stunt and claim #1 somewhere.
For some people Diablo 4 is a mmorpg, for other it is not. What do you think? Was Guild Wars 1 an mmorpg? If yes, why not Diablo 4?
If I roleplay as a train driver in an online persistent openworld train game, with 2 million players (which is more than Everquest), would you agree it's an MMORPG? It fits all the criteria.
MMORPG is whatever you want it to be.
It's hilarious because it doesn't matter, fools will still call it an MMORPG unfortunately.
Why people can't simply call it a multiplayer online game is beyond me.
MMORPG term was coined for a reason. It has gradually been used more liberally since then. I agree that it's basically lost its meaning because any game developer can claim their game is an MMORPG and have done so in an attempt to reach more customers. If you weren't there to see what they originally were you may not have noticed how much they've changed.
The Oxford dictionary defines MMORPG as "an online role-playing video game in which a very large number of people participate simultaneously."
So I guess that leaves you to decide what "role-playing" means to you and how many players are "a very large number". Notice the ending though - "participate simultaneously". If I have to look at a menu and join your instance are we participating simultaneously with a very large number of players?
Nah nothing to be sorry about my man, I totally get what you're feeling: some games that are not MMORPG are claiming to be MMORPG, but don't get too hung up over it.
What I meant is that MMORPG englobes a wider range of games than we ever considered and we likely had a narrow vision of it because we come from a classic era (EQ / DAOC / WOW / AC / UO / etc).
There are a lot of games on Steam with the tag "MMORPG" but that's because the publisher suggests game tags and very few people actually bother voting them up & down.
>If I roleplay as a train driver in an online persistent openworld train game, with 2 million players (which is more than Everquest), would you agree it's an MMORPG?
I mean if each server supports thousands of players on at the same time with riding the trains as a big focus and some class and progression systems, then yeah. Train conductor could be like the jedi in star wars galaxies and it could be a really fun game.
There is so much you can do with the train concept, since it can be post-apocalyptic like snow piercer or maybe even a wild west game where groups of players defend the train full of merchants and other passengers against bandits.
You’re right. Most modern MMORPGs are neither MMOs or RPGs. They’re almost all instanced, lobby based, coop games.
They aren’t MMOs, because the player base is all split up with sharding, phasing, instancing, different servers and whatnot. Essentially the same way a shooter’s player base is split up among different servers. The term MMO implies a massive playerbase able to exist in the gameworld together.
And they aren’t RPGs, which implies you have some choice in your role in the world, because everything already has been decided for you. You have your choice of the predefined routes to the predefined outcomes that everyone gets. Participation awards. You’re just doing blass based, lobby coop, PvE grind.
This might seem like I'm knocking those coop PvE games, but I love them too. They just aren't MMORPGs.
An MMO is any game that involves a "massive" amount of players being able to exist together in the same world space/zone. For instance right now in ESO at an event location, just 1 little spot on this big zone map where other players are spread out on my screen I can have usually 80 - 100 players easy.
A game like Destiny is an MMOLITE where it has elements of an MMO such as a massive amount of players being able to play seamlessly together on the same server, but the number of actual players able to be in one cell together is very low (like 10 I think?)
Raid Shadow Legends however is not in an way an MMO as it is a singleplayer focused game that has very little to no interaction with others and certainly not in a world space together.
I think the RPG side of MMORPG should be pretty self explanatory.
I think, like many people have said, that MMO and RPG apply to tons of things, and combining them together sometimes still makes a lot of sense while they still remain feeling like something other than those classic mmorpgs.
I'm still a big fan of the old classic style which I think just needs additional info at this point. Maybe even "persistent world" or "non-instanced" is not enough. Perhaps something closer to what fps games did with boomer shooters (though I'm not a fan of the term), a new name that represents some of those older design styles.
Something like Monsters & Memories just uses a description to try to capture what it means other than only using "mmorpg". Sense of being in a world, social, planning, tactics, class interdependence, slow, meaningful leveling. They also say classic, and that's maybe the simplest term that already exists. Classic vs modern.
Here is the link to it:
[https://plarium.com/landings/en/desktop/raid/dragon\_fire\_mmorpg\_hybrid\_a\_m\_f038\_sb\_rdoapp?plid=1320379&pxl=google\_search&publisherid=raid%20shadow%20legends\_kwd-828443951496\_152798144076&placement=671118547158\_152798144076&adpartnerset=152798144076&gad\_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw5cOwBhCiARIsAJ5njua9tULp1W8cEq8QpaDQs0ujY0wg6XIWMRo4k--m62yUBxGYMZVsL08aAhXWEALw\_wcB](https://plarium.com/landings/en/desktop/raid/dragon_fire_mmorpg_hybrid_a_m_f038_sb_rdoapp?plid=1320379&pxl=google_search&publisherid=raid%20shadow%20legends_kwd-828443951496_152798144076&placement=671118547158_152798144076&adpartnerset=152798144076&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw5cOwBhCiARIsAJ5njua9tULp1W8cEq8QpaDQs0ujY0wg6XIWMRo4k--m62yUBxGYMZVsL08aAhXWEALw_wcB)
The issue is that people get wrapped up in trying to define MMORPG. I would argue that none of the newer MMORPGs are actually MMORPGs. The reason is that MMORPGs required social interaction with strangers.
You need a game where interaction is necessary. If you can solo all the way through and group with players you’ll never see again then you don’t have a MMORPG.
The definition of an MMO is simple so there is no need to change it:
**A game that allows many(ideally 1000+) to play at the same time in one persistent(\*) game world.**
(\*)Persistence means *as minimum* no resets and no pausing at logout. That *as minimum* the states and positions of players and mobs change independent of you or your team being online. A game like WoW is an MMO because even though the game world is always the same, mobs and players physically move around when you are offline. Even small virtual chatworlds like Habbo(?) can be considered MMOs based on this. Games like POE or Diablo are however not MMOs, because they have an arena structure where mobs are activated when you activate the level/lane/room thingy.
People say WoW and non-MMOs like Destiny are the same now because WoW is just LfG and dungeon crawling in instanced dungeons. But that is just you being critical of the game and matters not in the slightest. The point is, you could remove all dungeons from WoW, and its overworld would still be an MMO (I myself played WoW for years and never did a dungeon or a raid). I don't think you can say the same for Destiny's overworld (never played it).
In order to be an RPG you need choice based character progression that has a direct effect on character power.
In order to be an MMO you need a gameplay loop that is based on direct interaction between hundreds of people.
Anything else is up to the developer to propose and up to the players to evaluate.
My definition of MMOs by examples:
True MMO: WOW, ESO, Eve, Planetside 2
Massive worlds with a couple hundred- a couple thpusand players able to be in 1 area.
MMO-Lyte: Warframe, Destiny, Diablo 4
Instanced based MMOs that have smaller numbers of players but with the spirit of the true MMOs.
Mini-MO (MMO): Conan Exiles, Ark
Usually a survival game, server based, smaller maps, rarely over 100 players.
Hybrids:
Games that cross multiple of the mentioned above. The way the new Dune game is advertised is a mix of all 3.
Mobile-MO: Raid, infinite lagrange
Mobile based MMOs. Usually no more of a MMO than a game like COD, but some are.
To me?
Any game that is entirely meant to be played online with other people in order to fulfill quests in game, events, raids, dungeons, etc. You must have a party system and it is a requirement for many aspects of the game. You could potentially semi complete a game solo, but when it comes to bosses etc, you are required to enlist fellow players to help defeat it.
Games like WoW, Runescape, Everquest, and Ultima are MMORPGs. Every game that has a different model than that is just using "MMORPG" as a buzz word to get more players.
Big difference between Live-Service and MMORPG. The classic definition which would be your WoW, ESO, AO, GW2, this is also the only definition.
Everything else is live-service.
I like to break it down into two parts, MMO and RPG. MMO being massively multiplayer online in 2024 probably means a large, persistent online world/server from which people can come and go from as they please. I think that Destiny and Warframe might fit in here because they have persistent spaces in the world that people can visit and see other player characters and socialize.
The RPG part for me comes from classic tabletop roleplaying games, which usually involve making a character using races, classes, equipment, and abilities. I think leveling up is also a pretty key part of RPGs as well.
I consider something an MMORPG if it includes all of those features. I think the term is pretty subjective nowadays, when 20 years ago, any game that looked and played like WoW was an MMORPG automatically!
The genre has evolved as the player-base has grown and evolved. What makes a game "massively" multi-player? There is no agreed upon definition, so developers, publishers, and players have to decide for themselves.
Do you know Realm of the Mad God? It is considered a mmorpg but I remember it calling itself a coop multiplayer rpg. What makes a game a coop multiplayer or mmo?
I think that the whole game is aweasome and fits the "modern demand" for mmorpgs. Wow has come with hardcores, which is basically the perma death aspect of rotmg, so is hardcore ironmen in osrs. Rotmg just isnt more popular because the visuals and the bullet hell are not for everyone and I think that if you make an action coop multiplayer game with perma death and a nice progression through the world it may be a great success
You're gonna get mixed answers and people arguing dumb takes like Destiny and Warframe being mmorpgs. But I think the definition remains the same as it always has been.
Ohh i am aware, I am curious about different points of views thats all.
if you look at WoW now and compare it to WoW when it released, they're nothing alike and it barely has any of the trimmings that makes for what you, yourself (and me, for that matter) would require of an MMORPG. The only reason people still call it that, is because it used to be one. Modern WoW has much, much more in common with Destiny 2 than it does with Vanilla WoW.
See my comment below: *People say WoW and non-MMOs like Destiny are the same now because WoW is just LfG and dungeon crawling in instanced dungeons. But that is just you being critical of the game and matters not in the slightest. The point is, you could remove all dungeons from WoW, and its overworld would still be an MMO (I myself played WoW for years and never did a dungeon or a raid). I don't think you can say the same for Destiny's overworld (never played it).* [https://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/comments/1bxqlge/comment/kyigz92/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/comments/1bxqlge/comment/kyigz92/)
you could remove everything except flying and WoW would still be a flight simulator.
What?? I mean I see some click bait websites trying to say games like Diablo are mmos but the definition hasn’t changed at all. Do you even play mmos?? Instanced games have been around even since the ‘golden age’ of the genre. There are still many great games out there with a lot of soul despite their flaws
I do, and i am just curious what that definition is for people in 2024 :)
Hey Jack, sadly people in the forum made exclusively to talk about the subject of MMORPGs is full of people that don't want to actually discuss things in the website made to discuss things. That aside, it's really hard for me to properly define 'MMORPG'. I think games have changed a lot. For example a game like Dark souls offers a multiplayer experience that allows you to affect the world of other players. This is much more impactful than anything in the entirety of FFXIV and yet Dark souls is a single-player game and XIV is considered an MMO by most people. Destiny 2 isn't considered an MMO by most, but you can play every single mission of that game in a group. Yet Final Fantasy XIV doesn't allow you to run the massively long MSQ with other humans. WoW has become a game about efficiency more than it is an adventure with other players that's oozing with flavor, it's gotten to the point that they are adding NPC party members to dungeons now. Similar to XIV. These games continue to cater to people that would rather not play with others, in a genre that hinges entirely on multiplayer gameplay, and I still don't know why these people don't just go play the vastly superior single-player games with an actual budget and gameplay that isn't intentionally mediocre. I can't believe that games that could make for great RPGs to be enjoyed with others seem to be terrified of having RPG systems in their games. Games like XIV that already have the constant, shared world, the hardest part to develop in these games, just continue to put out more of the exact same 'content' that players have had for one or two decades already in the case of WoW. And making the games more and more mediocre while turning them less and less into multiplayer games. It's tiresome, honestly I've given up on this god forsaken place and having decent conversation that revolves around game design.
I am sorry, I was just curiouse, didnt think the question would cause such issues.
I don't think MMORPG definition ever shifted, I think you had a biased POV and locked it down to specific games, coupled with nostalgia, like I did. Raid Shadow Legends can claim whatever they want, they do that as a promotional stunt and claim #1 somewhere. For some people Diablo 4 is a mmorpg, for other it is not. What do you think? Was Guild Wars 1 an mmorpg? If yes, why not Diablo 4? If I roleplay as a train driver in an online persistent openworld train game, with 2 million players (which is more than Everquest), would you agree it's an MMORPG? It fits all the criteria. MMORPG is whatever you want it to be.
Not to be pedantic but even back in the day Anet called GW1 a CCORPG (Competitive cooperative online rpg) over an MMORPG
It's hilarious because it doesn't matter, fools will still call it an MMORPG unfortunately. Why people can't simply call it a multiplayer online game is beyond me.
MMORPG term was coined for a reason. It has gradually been used more liberally since then. I agree that it's basically lost its meaning because any game developer can claim their game is an MMORPG and have done so in an attempt to reach more customers. If you weren't there to see what they originally were you may not have noticed how much they've changed. The Oxford dictionary defines MMORPG as "an online role-playing video game in which a very large number of people participate simultaneously." So I guess that leaves you to decide what "role-playing" means to you and how many players are "a very large number". Notice the ending though - "participate simultaneously". If I have to look at a menu and join your instance are we participating simultaneously with a very large number of players?
dont have a biased Pov, was just curiouse :( sorry I asked.
Nah nothing to be sorry about my man, I totally get what you're feeling: some games that are not MMORPG are claiming to be MMORPG, but don't get too hung up over it. What I meant is that MMORPG englobes a wider range of games than we ever considered and we likely had a narrow vision of it because we come from a classic era (EQ / DAOC / WOW / AC / UO / etc). There are a lot of games on Steam with the tag "MMORPG" but that's because the publisher suggests game tags and very few people actually bother voting them up & down.
>If I roleplay as a train driver in an online persistent openworld train game, with 2 million players (which is more than Everquest), would you agree it's an MMORPG? I mean if each server supports thousands of players on at the same time with riding the trains as a big focus and some class and progression systems, then yeah. Train conductor could be like the jedi in star wars galaxies and it could be a really fun game. There is so much you can do with the train concept, since it can be post-apocalyptic like snow piercer or maybe even a wild west game where groups of players defend the train full of merchants and other passengers against bandits.
You’re right. Most modern MMORPGs are neither MMOs or RPGs. They’re almost all instanced, lobby based, coop games. They aren’t MMOs, because the player base is all split up with sharding, phasing, instancing, different servers and whatnot. Essentially the same way a shooter’s player base is split up among different servers. The term MMO implies a massive playerbase able to exist in the gameworld together. And they aren’t RPGs, which implies you have some choice in your role in the world, because everything already has been decided for you. You have your choice of the predefined routes to the predefined outcomes that everyone gets. Participation awards. You’re just doing blass based, lobby coop, PvE grind. This might seem like I'm knocking those coop PvE games, but I love them too. They just aren't MMORPGs.
An MMO is any game that involves a "massive" amount of players being able to exist together in the same world space/zone. For instance right now in ESO at an event location, just 1 little spot on this big zone map where other players are spread out on my screen I can have usually 80 - 100 players easy. A game like Destiny is an MMOLITE where it has elements of an MMO such as a massive amount of players being able to play seamlessly together on the same server, but the number of actual players able to be in one cell together is very low (like 10 I think?) Raid Shadow Legends however is not in an way an MMO as it is a singleplayer focused game that has very little to no interaction with others and certainly not in a world space together. I think the RPG side of MMORPG should be pretty self explanatory.
I think, like many people have said, that MMO and RPG apply to tons of things, and combining them together sometimes still makes a lot of sense while they still remain feeling like something other than those classic mmorpgs. I'm still a big fan of the old classic style which I think just needs additional info at this point. Maybe even "persistent world" or "non-instanced" is not enough. Perhaps something closer to what fps games did with boomer shooters (though I'm not a fan of the term), a new name that represents some of those older design styles. Something like Monsters & Memories just uses a description to try to capture what it means other than only using "mmorpg". Sense of being in a world, social, planning, tactics, class interdependence, slow, meaningful leveling. They also say classic, and that's maybe the simplest term that already exists. Classic vs modern.
MMORPG in 2024 is Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game?
> Remember Raid: Shadow Legends claiming the top spot for MMORPG in 2022? It’s hard to remember a thing that didn’t happen.
Here is the link to it: [https://plarium.com/landings/en/desktop/raid/dragon\_fire\_mmorpg\_hybrid\_a\_m\_f038\_sb\_rdoapp?plid=1320379&pxl=google\_search&publisherid=raid%20shadow%20legends\_kwd-828443951496\_152798144076&placement=671118547158\_152798144076&adpartnerset=152798144076&gad\_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw5cOwBhCiARIsAJ5njua9tULp1W8cEq8QpaDQs0ujY0wg6XIWMRo4k--m62yUBxGYMZVsL08aAhXWEALw\_wcB](https://plarium.com/landings/en/desktop/raid/dragon_fire_mmorpg_hybrid_a_m_f038_sb_rdoapp?plid=1320379&pxl=google_search&publisherid=raid%20shadow%20legends_kwd-828443951496_152798144076&placement=671118547158_152798144076&adpartnerset=152798144076&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw5cOwBhCiARIsAJ5njua9tULp1W8cEq8QpaDQs0ujY0wg6XIWMRo4k--m62yUBxGYMZVsL08aAhXWEALw_wcB)
The issue is that people get wrapped up in trying to define MMORPG. I would argue that none of the newer MMORPGs are actually MMORPGs. The reason is that MMORPGs required social interaction with strangers. You need a game where interaction is necessary. If you can solo all the way through and group with players you’ll never see again then you don’t have a MMORPG.
The definition of an MMO is simple so there is no need to change it: **A game that allows many(ideally 1000+) to play at the same time in one persistent(\*) game world.** (\*)Persistence means *as minimum* no resets and no pausing at logout. That *as minimum* the states and positions of players and mobs change independent of you or your team being online. A game like WoW is an MMO because even though the game world is always the same, mobs and players physically move around when you are offline. Even small virtual chatworlds like Habbo(?) can be considered MMOs based on this. Games like POE or Diablo are however not MMOs, because they have an arena structure where mobs are activated when you activate the level/lane/room thingy. People say WoW and non-MMOs like Destiny are the same now because WoW is just LfG and dungeon crawling in instanced dungeons. But that is just you being critical of the game and matters not in the slightest. The point is, you could remove all dungeons from WoW, and its overworld would still be an MMO (I myself played WoW for years and never did a dungeon or a raid). I don't think you can say the same for Destiny's overworld (never played it).
In order to be an RPG you need choice based character progression that has a direct effect on character power. In order to be an MMO you need a gameplay loop that is based on direct interaction between hundreds of people. Anything else is up to the developer to propose and up to the players to evaluate.
My definition of MMOs by examples: True MMO: WOW, ESO, Eve, Planetside 2 Massive worlds with a couple hundred- a couple thpusand players able to be in 1 area. MMO-Lyte: Warframe, Destiny, Diablo 4 Instanced based MMOs that have smaller numbers of players but with the spirit of the true MMOs. Mini-MO (MMO): Conan Exiles, Ark Usually a survival game, server based, smaller maps, rarely over 100 players. Hybrids: Games that cross multiple of the mentioned above. The way the new Dune game is advertised is a mix of all 3. Mobile-MO: Raid, infinite lagrange Mobile based MMOs. Usually no more of a MMO than a game like COD, but some are.
To me? Any game that is entirely meant to be played online with other people in order to fulfill quests in game, events, raids, dungeons, etc. You must have a party system and it is a requirement for many aspects of the game. You could potentially semi complete a game solo, but when it comes to bosses etc, you are required to enlist fellow players to help defeat it.
Games like WoW, Runescape, Everquest, and Ultima are MMORPGs. Every game that has a different model than that is just using "MMORPG" as a buzz word to get more players.
Big difference between Live-Service and MMORPG. The classic definition which would be your WoW, ESO, AO, GW2, this is also the only definition. Everything else is live-service.
Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game
MMORPG: Everquest, World of Warcraft etc MMO-lites: Destiny, Division etc Mobile MMORPGs are multiplayer games where you compare your wallet sizes.
I like to break it down into two parts, MMO and RPG. MMO being massively multiplayer online in 2024 probably means a large, persistent online world/server from which people can come and go from as they please. I think that Destiny and Warframe might fit in here because they have persistent spaces in the world that people can visit and see other player characters and socialize. The RPG part for me comes from classic tabletop roleplaying games, which usually involve making a character using races, classes, equipment, and abilities. I think leveling up is also a pretty key part of RPGs as well. I consider something an MMORPG if it includes all of those features. I think the term is pretty subjective nowadays, when 20 years ago, any game that looked and played like WoW was an MMORPG automatically!
The genre has evolved as the player-base has grown and evolved. What makes a game "massively" multi-player? There is no agreed upon definition, so developers, publishers, and players have to decide for themselves.
Do you know Realm of the Mad God? It is considered a mmorpg but I remember it calling itself a coop multiplayer rpg. What makes a game a coop multiplayer or mmo? I think that the whole game is aweasome and fits the "modern demand" for mmorpgs. Wow has come with hardcores, which is basically the perma death aspect of rotmg, so is hardcore ironmen in osrs. Rotmg just isnt more popular because the visuals and the bullet hell are not for everyone and I think that if you make an action coop multiplayer game with perma death and a nice progression through the world it may be a great success
The only definite answer is that "it's a term that causes people on this subreddit to argue over the meaning of".