Quote:
Originally Posted by Fett
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
If you have a link or such referencing a dev journal that shows what the EQ designers thought, I would like to see it. Personally, however the EQ designers word is not gospel.
MUD is an old term. The term MMO hadn't even come into use at the time MUD was being used. All we have to do is use a little logic in this siutation though. What makes a MMO comes down to two simple things.
- A persistent world. Even if everyone logs off, the world continues to exists, and does not reset.
- A large amount of concurrent users. This is of course a little more grey, because what is a "large amount"?
MUD's usually fall into category 1, as the worlds are usually persistent and do not reset. If Gemstone 4 (or other MUDs) can host hundreds, if not a thousand users at the same time I'd say it easily falls into category 2.
MMO is certainly a newer term than MUD, but there's no reason that older games don't meet the definition for the word. |
Well, if a MUD is an MMO so is Diablo. No the world isn't persistent like in eq or UO but then again what happens when you log out and back in...its the same world with the same mobs. You kill a mob in eq it pops up again. The world refreshes itself in both games just in a different way.
And this is why i say MUDs are MUDs and MMO's are MMO's. If you start saying MUDs are mmos then Sims online becomes an MMO. And we havent even got into FPS and RTS games.
MMO by definition would encompass a lot more than just eq style games. But its a classification...like MUD, FPS, RTS, RPG, ARPG. Is it wrong? I would say yes. But as of right now we have no other term to classify EQ and WoW etc. so they stay MMO's while other games stay MUDs or RPGs etc.