Sep 09 2008
POW = Persistent Online World
I absolutely despise the MMORPG acronym. It is virtually unpronounceable. It is too long. Perhaps worst of all, it does a poor job describing what a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game really is, or what is most distinctive about it. I started a discussion recently on a game developer mailing list in which I sought a replacement for MMORPG. My favorite response suggested POW for Persistent Online World (thanks, “cruise“). In this article I will break down the flaws (as I perceive them) in the term “MMORPG”, and then I will explain why POW - Persistent Online World - should supplant it.
Breaking Down the atrocity that is “MMORPG”
Massively - What exactly is massive? The number of players? The size of the world itself? The variety of gameplay options? The number of players is actually not that massive nowadays. POWs make such heavy use of sharding that a modern POW server rarely peaks over 2000-3000 players. Most popular MUDs 10 years ago could do at least 10-20% of that, and there were even a few that could crack one or two thousand. The world size itself is not that huge either, and the massiveness is generally an inconvenience rather than a feature. POWs rarely utilize their game world in an interesting way any more. As for gameplay variety, about all you get now is combat and maybe an Auction House. That’s it for gameplay. So “Massively” is a waste of a term. It is unclear what it refers to, and it gives attention to things that really are not that important in the grand scheme of things (other than a massive amount of gameplay features, but we all know that is not what Massively means currently).
Multiplayer - Gee, really? This is almost redudant now for anything that is online. Perhaps worse, modern POWs are barely multiplayer. The heavy quest based advancement results in thousands of people “soloing together.” Calling these games multiplayer is almost a joke.
Online - We finally have a part of MMORPG that is accurate, worthwhile, and informative. It comes as no surprise that POW shares this word.
RPG - Role Playing Game. Hahahahahahahaha. Role Playing… on a MMORPG… HAHAHAHAHA yeah right. There is about as much role playing on MMORPGs as there is cancer research. The continued abuse of the term “RPG” is cruel and unusual. Furthermore, the king of the MMORPG genre is barely even about character development anymore. Your gear is a thousand times more important than your actual character. It would be more accurate to call World of Warcraft a GPG = Gear Playing Game.
Pronunciation - Muh-More-Puh-Guh. That sounds lovely… not. It sounds like someone vomiting in their mouth and fighting desperately to keep it from spewing through their lips. Do we really expect this acronym to make ANY traction outside the insular walls of fandom? Do we expect people writing in major newspapers or magazines to use the term MMORPG? Do we expect people on tv to try and pronounce this word, or stumble through the equally lame Em-Em-Oh-Arr-Pee-Gee six syllable monstrosity? This terrible acronym alone probably costs the online gaming business hundreds if not thousands of main stream media stories.
Attempted Improvements - The most commonly attempted improvement is MMO. I have used it here on Muckbeast, I read it all over the internet, and I hear it in interviews. This is easier to say, but still sounds dull (Em-Em-Oh). If you break down this term it really just sounds ridiculous. Convert the following television interview:
Interviewer: So Bob, tell us about Gameco’s newest MMO.
Bob: Well Interviewer, we are very excited about FantasyLand. It is really going to be a revolutionary MMO. Fans of MMOs will really get into this new game.
Translation:
Interviewer: So Bob, tell us about Gameco’s newest Massively Multiplayer Online.
Bob: Well Interviewer, we are very excited about FantasyLand. It is really going to be a revolutionary Massively Multiplayer Online. Fans of Massively Multiplayer Onlines will really get into this new game.
Read that “aloud” in your mind. Sounds terrible, right? I’d almost prefer actual vomit in my mouth.
Why Persistent Online World, or POW?
First, it is a true acronym. The abbreviation actually forms a word, and the word itself is very action oriented. POW! Excitement. Fun. Right in your face… POW!
Second, all three letters very clearly describe critical aspects of what we currently refer to as MUDs, MMOs, MMORPGs, etc.
Persistent - If your MUD/MMORPG is not persistent, then all you have is Diablo. I love Diablo, but I don’t love it for the same reasons I would love a game like Threshold , Primordiax , Dark Age of Camelot, or even World of Warcraft.
Online - As I noted before, this one is kinda obvious but important. The word online also inherently implies multiplayer, or at least the option of playing or communicating with other people.
World - This is the real crux of it. MUDs and MMORPGs are supposed to simulate worlds. They are supposed to be more than just games. If they are just games then they don’t deserve to be called something special. They should just be Action, FPS, RTS, RPG, Adventure, or whatever.
POW really puts the focus where it should be - on the persistence, the online, and the world. So go out there and start spreading the word. Here is an example of how that conversation might go:
You: What games do we play?
Random Dude (RD): MMORPGs?
You: <POW right in the face> No! We play POWs! Persistent Online Worlds.
RD: <rubbing nose> Ow!!
You: Not “Ow!”, I said POW! <punches RD in the face again>
@Shalkis:
There may be 2000 to 3000 players online, but that is never a good thing. The more players online currently, the worse the gameplay, due to having lag issues, multiple players attempting to access the same content, general noise in chats, and other miscellaneously getting in each other’s way. To take WoW, there has been a maximum of 80 players all involved in actually playing with each other at once, in Alterac Valley. And they turned that from being strategic to racing to finish before the other side does. Which technically is “multiplayer”, but is more like you’re posting times and comparing.
You’re absolutely bang on about what is classified as an “RPG” nowadays, but I’ll point out that when dialogue options are intelligently implemented you can still mostly talk your way through things if you choose appropriate responses. For example, Mass Effect for 360 specifically colors dialogue options that will provoke certain responses… I think it would have been interesting if they’d gone a step further to make some options available and as you skill up your conversational skills the options that will lead to “nice” or “naughty” consequences get highlighted to help guide you through, with maybe a few more options getting added in. There are ways to make it a real RPG, even with stats existing.
I totally LMAO for your last comment - I totally empathize on respawning. The things the game keeps as persistent are totally underwhelming, and it doesn’t even remember that I just killed something long enough for me to get through the area. Especially in an instance, where one would think it could remember that I’d killed these things, as it is an instance saved to me and my group. It’s not even a good game mechanic, as it drives groups to break up when the respawns pop up, even if they’ve already cleared to another area, as they’ll have to repeat everything over as things respawn in sequence.
@Cambios
I think Rithlyn has a point with “Prisoner of War”, which is baggage that comes with the acronym, but I still think you’re absolutely right with how unwieldy the word is. Ideally, an MMORPG that really had in it what those letters stand for would be awesome, and maybe it’s good for encouraging designers to strive towards that. Still sounds like you have a stutter when you say it, though. : (
There needs to be something better, most of the games out there are really only MOGs, Multi-player Online Games.
Meh, if it were me I’d campaign to go back to MUD. That’s got everything right there.
But then again I am sort of biased in that respect.
@Shalkiss
Hmm… I was kinda unclear there, my bad. What I was trying to say is that in Mass Effect the ability to talk yourself through a situation generally REQUIRED a dialogue skill in order for the dialogue option to show up. There were a few times, such as dealing with the Consort or if you’d picked up Wrex’s armor, where you could still talk yourself toward the desired result without having to have a particular conversation skill. I think that’s what I was trying to say.
I love your points on perception, intelligence, and charisma having a direct effect on conversation. They did that in Fallout and Fallout 2, and I’m really hoping they’ve kept it in Fallout 3, it made dialogue much more interesting, and created a more realistic feeling way to get through a conversation, and still let you insult someone if you wanted to… you just had a much wittier insult if you were smarter. In comparison, the little conversation mini-game from Oblivion was a decent idea, though it felt much less organic than Fallout’s method.
@Cambios
I definitely agree with you on the 2000 players soloing, there should be more opportunity for interaction. I remember dismounting to help another player having a problem with respawns as they’re trying to take down a quest monster, or having another player drop a single good heal on me when I was in a hairy situation. That really built a community among players going through the same content.
On the other hand, I really like having the option of instances, to limit interaction with people I really wish hadn’t bought the game. Open air “dungeons” are a great idea, as long as you’ve got a way to hang out with just your buddies to go do something. There’s nothing quite as aggravating as getting ambushed or otherwise thwarted by another player in the middle of a complicated encounter.
As previous posters have pointed it out, MMORPG very clearly describes the genre. But it’s too long , so MMO has become the short term for it. SOAP once meant simple object access protocol, but today it just means SOAP. to me it’s the same with MMO, nobody cares what the acronym really stands for.
So i don’t see the need to create a new artificial word for something, that’s already there.
MUD. That’s all we need, and for no more than the points you made earlier; it fits, it’s a word, and it IS one of the gaming roots. MUD is great…or maybe MUDORPG_W/BGS.
And you guys saying that RP shouldn’t be used for these games are way out of line. I’ll have you know that I dress up as whichever character I’m playing, whenever I’m playing. Even in Text based MUDs I wear a black jumpsuit adorned with random white blocks of text (some in color!).
The only way I can see getting MMORPG or MMO replaced is if a new, highly anticipated (or not, but ends up successful anyway) game comes out and markets itself as something else. Once success is established, other companies will follow suit, as we’ve already seen.
I thought the “new” term was MMOG (Massively Multiplayer Online Game)?
POW sounds silly, everybody knows it stands for Prisoner of War. MUD sounds silly too - dirt.
and i think it’s a waste of time trying to come up with acronyms. they arent really important.
i play online games: WoW, Starcraft, Dota and W3, CS, Quake, and browser games.
i think Blizzard’s “world” will become synonimous to “mmorpg” just like “shooter” is to “fps”.