Elite Dangerous no longer an MMO?

15 x 15 !!!!!!!!!

WoT is nothing but a multiplayer shooter with tanks. There's nothing massive about it, except the levels of profanity in chat. Nobody likes playing World of Tanks, the players are so very angry all the time.


Also, 90% of what they write on their english homepage is usually wrong, as you can read e.g. on FTR Wot news.
 
It's just like people calling 3840 x 2160 monitors 4K when they are actually UHD.

4K = 4096 x 2160.

But ultimately, nobody cares :rolleyes:

4K is not one specific resolution, but a term that encompasses all resolutions that have ~4000 points horizontally. 3840 isn't 4000 exactly but neither is 4096. Both are 4K. Just like 1080 references all resolutions with 1080 lines vertically. Which could be 1920x1080 (2K) or 1440x1080 or even 2560x1080 equally.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe they canceled EVERY SINGLE REFERENCE TO THE WORD MMO on their siteLOOOOOOOOOOOOOLIt was EVERYWHERE, and now it is gone. XDThey can't be THAT childish.
They gave away billions of credits, without blinking an eye. Do you really think they care?
 
The answer is actually no. By that logic, call of duty is considered an MMO.

Then you better tell them that, because they advertise it as such.

Just in case I hadn't made it clear, I don't care :rolleyes:

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

i care so that didnt take long to find someone who cares


Good for you, has that altered the fact that those monitors are marketed and sold as 4K?

Nope, and this game is an MMO or it isn't, nobody apart from you ( possibly ) and some other people with nothing better to do, actually care.
 
4K is not one specific resolution, but a term that encompasses all resolutions that have ~4000 points horizontally. 3840 isn't 4000 exactly but neither is 4096. Both are 4K. Just like 1080 references all resolutions with 1080 lines vertically. Which could be 1920x1080 (2K) or 1440x1080 or even 2560x1080 equally.



3840 x 2160 = UHD

Not 4K.
 
Semantics about MMO vs Non-MMO aside - in a talk, David Braben put multiplayer down as the 2nd most important thing, after moment-to-moment game-play.

Given how poorly is implemented, and given that I doubt that they'd want to just "slap it on", I suspect the model they chose bit them in the bum, and will continue to do so. The fact that Wings were not ready for release shows how much of a problem it has been.

It's a genuine shame, I love the game - but without 2nd rate multi-player features that work for some, don't work for others, and masses of instances full to the brim of NPCs in other-wise player-crowded systems - is a darn shame. And playing with my buddy is pot-luck, and depends on whether Mars is in Venus.

Hope it gets sorted soon.
 
Massively multiplayer and online. Sorry but it's an mmo. Lots of people connected to and influencing (albeit vaguely) the same game. COD is not an mmo because it has lots of people playing lots of mini games on servers that don't affect each other.
 
Because it's not false advertising and that's my point.
Giant persistent galaxy with thousand of players that's online and people are saying its not MMOy enough. What a joke.

So you saw MMO and was like Oh must have, without actually doing more research to find out more about the game. I mean it is technically an MMO. Just because it does not conform to YOUR (a nobody whose opinions matters to absolutely no one but themselves) idea of what a MMO should be does not mean it is not one.

So you guys say that the game is in fact an MMO. You Drathmar go even further, trying to aggravate the person you're answering to by telling them nobody cares about their opinion.
How then do you explain FD's decision to stop advertising ED as an MMO? There are two explanations: Either it is actually an MMO, but they didn't want poor Ghostickles (remember, a person whose opinion interests nobody) to be mislead into thinking it is some different kind of MMO than it actually is. Or they backtracked because they realized, in its current state the game can't in all good faith be called an MMO. Either way it's a matter of public perception.

Yes, the definition of MMO is murky, and yes you could stretch it any way you want to fit almost any kind of game with an online component into it (somebody said, thinking they were smart, 'massive is relative'). Truth is, when you call your game an MMO, this gives people expectations. If you want a positive image, it is not in your best interest to go all smart-ass and reply 'lol we made an MMO technically'. And with FD having a rather spotty track record when it comes to video games after the Elite series and not being the biggest player out there, they couldn't afford, like Wargaming or Bungie, to play on words and act all smug and adopt a 'deal with it' attitude. That's why you see that effort now from FD to remove the notion that ED is an MMO, because it's obvious that a public fight about semantics wouldn't make them any good.

Please note that I'm not discussing here whether this game should be an MMO. This isn't the topic, so there is no need to tell me to 'go back to EVE'. People defending a company that isn't even trying to defend itself because it knows it's a lost battle, is baffling me. You guys are consummers, and you are actively trying to pretend that a company you're giving money to, didn't do anything wrong when said company is actually removing pieces of advertisement from its store page after the fact. I have no serious gripe with FD and I totally wish that Elite becomes better and better, but some people do have legitimate concerns.
And being a sycophant for the sake of sounding smart on the internet or of justifying your spending so much money on a game against the better advice of your wife, when some things aren't too pretty isn't how you help a company you like. If you show FD that whatever they do, right or wrong, you will support them against all reason, then they have no reason to improve.

This picture is from five minutes ago, 2015.

And I have been playing WoT since 2011. My opinion hasn't changed. And in the current state of affairs, I will sooner call World of Tanks an MMO than call ED one.
 
Last edited:
That does seem to be relatively simple - and would seem to include E: D.

Yay online chess and poker are officially MMOs!

And I have been playing WoT since 2011. My opinion hasn't changed. And in the current state of affairs, I will sooner call World of Tanks an MMO than call ED one.

WoT and War Thunder (I migrated from WoT to WT long ago) are both closer to MMOs than ED but none actually are MMOs.

I knew from reading about ED and watching youtube videos that this game is not an MMO and I knew what sort of gameplay to expect. I also know that a lot of devs/publishers like to call their games MMOs when they're not so I never trust them when they say it. I don't buy anything without researching first, including games. I never trust trailer videos, I never trust dev/publisher descriptions of their games, I never trust their labeling (like calling it MMO) and I sometimes don't even trust "official" reviews.
 
Last edited:
That does seem to be relatively simple - and would seem to include E: D.

32 is not "very large". Keyword: simultaneous. An mmo needs at least hundreds, if not thousands of concurrent players. A proper mmo like WoW has thousands of people running around azeroth in one shard. Another proper mmo like Planetside also supports up to 2000 simultaneous players per continent. Even the first planetside had a limit of 400. Contrast the next most "massive" fps and you're looking at 64, maybe 128 players, which isn't that massive.

Massive alone may be vague but the scale required in this instance is clear. Context is important.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom