Because it is designed to play with a lot of people online all at the same time. People are often confusing that an MMO has to have a persistent world where everyone connects to the same server. Even those games use many different servers and are really comprised of many smaller areas or “worlds”. This use of MMO, the way SD is using it, has been pervasive for a very very long time.
Reddogtv Interviews Ed on Extraction!
Attackmack
(Attackmack)
#22
By that definition, every game that features multiplayer is an MMO…
Its just stupid to call an ordinary game “MMO” just because you choose not to feature singleplayer. I know the term has been misused for various games for years, and Its annoying everytime.
There is NOTHING massivly about this game. It will be a great online shooter, but its not massiv, never will be.
Seanza
(Seanza)
#23
Yeah, I don’t understand that either. Saw Alastair mention it in the other video too.
Smooth
(Smooth)
#24
While it sounds a little confusing (I still think of WoW & EVE when I hear it) it does seem to be correct by the industry definition of MMO. Either way it doesn’t really matter, does it? 
Hyperg
(Hyperg)
#25
[QUOTE=Smooth;467242]While it sounds a little confusing (I still think of WoW & EVE when I hear it) it does seem to be correct by the industry definition of MMO. Either way it doesn’t really matter, does it?
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mmo+shooter[/QUOTE]
Actually it does matter, because when you bring the MMO tag to the table, your game will not be judged by the industry definition standard, but by the player mass perception. I can point you to hundreds of topics from FireFall’s forums, where there’s an ongoing debate about where to fit FF as a genre, even though they (Red5) are adamant about their “first and foremost shooter, then a massive experience” description.
Furthermore, “MMO” has been used alongside “RPG” for so many years lately, that a lot of players can’t even make a difference between the scope of the player experience and combat mechanics. FF’s forums are filled with complaints about how hard the game is, because they’re used to sit in front of a boar and killing it after swinging their sword above its head for 4 seconds, whereas overcoming your enemies in FF needs a pretty different set of skills.
With Extraction being just a pvp experience, it will be somewhat shieleded from some misconceptions about the genre (persistent world, etc), but even so, do expect raised eyebrows at the sight of a list of servers which get you to a 5v5 game. Hardly massive 
Mustang
(Mustang)
#26
Just call it online multiplayer FPS with matchmaking and drop the whole MMO thing, simples.
S0und1
(S0und_)
#27
But from the customer POV: MMO-FPS = PlanetSide X. I never considered CS, COD, RTCW as MMO game. Also i agree with Hyperg, advertising Xt as MMO-FPS does more harm then good, because the end of the day our perception matters.
rookie1
(rookie1)
#28
Yep ! SD need to be very carefull with these little things…Many wolfes will jump on the occasion to Blast them
Erkin31
(Erkin31)
#29
Reminds me the marketing campaign of Brink, with an emphasis on the solo.
Some players waited for a solo campaign like in a Crysis, and some professional testers have reviewed only the solo.
Ashog
(Ashog)
#33
Why not sticking to the old good term Online Objective-based multiplayer FPS, mentioned by Paul and Ed many times over the years already?
I was also surprised with MMO term as it is associated with RPG for me for historical reasons. i wouldn’t go as far as mentioning matchmaking tho.
Protekt1
(Protekt1)
#34
[QUOTE=Attackmack;467240]By that definition, every game that features multiplayer is an MMO…
Its just stupid to call an ordinary game “MMO” just because you choose not to feature singleplayer. I know the term has been misused for various games for years, and Its annoying everytime.
There is NOTHING massivly about this game. It will be a great online shooter, but its not massiv, never will be.[/QUOTE]
It hasn’t actually been misused in this instance. People just assumed since the term was used to describe games like WoW that every MMO must have some kinda open persistent world. When you are talking about a MMORPG that is most likely true, that the game happens to feature some kinda persistent world. I think every MMORPG features that so it is probably safe to assume a MMORPG has some persistent world to it. Then you have MMORPG-FPS or MMOFPS-RPGs like Firefall which happen to have a level of persistent worlds as well.
When people start an argument “by that definition…” they aren’t really arguing that the definition is wrong they are arguing application of the definition leads to a wrong result. I’ll just modify what you said slightly and say it isn’t every multiplayer that is a MMO, it is every multiplayer that is online that can be defined as a MMO.
Hyperg
(Hyperg)
#35
World persistency doesn’t drive the “massive” quality of the online experience. It’s the other way around, a “logical” result of the situation where the vast majority of players involved in such a game need a dynamic environment to interact to. Even modern shooters employing destructible environments satisfy that aspect, if only temporary. There’s really not much to debate about the term massive tbh, it’s just about the numbers really. FireFall has nothing massive about their PvP, it’s a matchmaking system for 5v5 games.
When you start worrying about bandwidth consumption and player clustering and skin texture diversity, because those 100+ enemies stream slowly in front of you, we can talk about a massive multiplayer game, be it with swords and bows or guns and rocket launchers. Slapping this tag onto a 5v5 matchmaking service just puts the product in a weird light, regardless of the scope of the service and amount of datacenters provided.
Or dunno, let’s just use MMO for the amount of servers that CounterStrike has and invent a new term for games like PlanetSide. Huge Multiplayer online?
ailmanki
(ailmanki)
#37
If you look at RAD soldiers, you might notice that is basically the same princip of game. You have some mercs, you have a map, you have a goal to complete.
I guess from a developer viewpoint, it would be best to have millions of players wanting to play your game. Though RAD soldiers can only be played by two at one time, and EXT by 16?. MMO - Massively multiplayer online, for that to happen the matchmaking and everything else needs to surpass Facebook.
Attackmack
(Attackmack)
#38
[QUOTE=Protekt1;467362]It hasn’t actually been misused in this instance. People just assumed since the term was used to describe games like WoW that every MMO must have some kinda open persistent world. When you are talking about a MMORPG that is most likely true, that the game happens to feature some kinda persistent world. I think every MMORPG features that so it is probably safe to assume a MMORPG has some persistent world to it. Then you have MMORPG-FPS or MMOFPS-RPGs like Firefall which happen to have a level of persistent worlds as well.
When people start an argument “by that definition…” they aren’t really arguing that the definition is wrong they are arguing application of the definition leads to a wrong result. I’ll just modify what you said slightly and say it isn’t every multiplayer that is a MMO, it is every multiplayer that is online that can be defined as a MMO.[/QUOTE]
“Every multiplayer that is online” as opposed to what? Multiplayer that are splitscreen and/or LAN only?
The common, and up to a few years ago ONLY, definition of MMOs was online games that featured huge number of players at the same time in the same gameworld/server. Then some devs started naming their games MMOs on the basis that they where only played online. Its a misuse of the term MMO as it has come to be known.
DB features small number of players on fairly small maps. Whats massiv? The number of total players spread on all servers might be, but that doesnt define the players experience of the game as massive.
Planetside is massive. I would even argue that PR:BF2 could be defined as massive.
DB is not, in any definition, massive and I bet that if they start marketing this as an MMOFPS, there will be a ****load of critique from reviewers and players when its released to the public. It wont benefit the game in any way.
