MMO that isn't WoW that ToJ is active in?

Well, on the forums here we have chapters listed for Aion, Guild Wars, and Warhammer Online. I don't know how active those are, but you can at least check them out. We also have forums for Star Wars: The Old Republic, but that won't be out until some time next year. I hope we will have an active chapter there when the game comes out, though! :)
 
Spirit of Elijah/Elisha in Guild Wars is active and ToJ. It's the best, but I'm just a little biased ;)
 
I just found out that friend of mine has the Guild Wars game and doesn't play it, so I guess I'll start with that one and go from there. (Hey, the price is right, lol)
 
lol. good for you. but yes, STC is right, GW is the bomb.(biased too). but still, GW is fun and will be a good hobby/timekiller/all around great game to play.
 
A Good Family Christian TOJ Guild in Everquest 2 :) don't forget us now :) EQ2 Forums

I wont hold Discraft against ya im a Innova man myself :)
 
Last edited:
Straight from the Guild Wars official FAQ:


Is Guild Wars an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game)?

Guild Wars has some similarities to existing MMORPGs, but it also has some key differences. Like existing MMOs, Guild Wars is played entirely online in a secure hosted environment. Thousands of players inhabit the same virtual world. Players can meet new friends in gathering places like towns and outposts where they form parties and go questing with them. Unlike many MMOs, when players form a party and embark upon a quest in Guild Wars, they get their own private copy of the area where the quest takes place. This design eliminates some of the frustrating gameplay elements commonly associated with MMOs, such as spawn camping, loot stealing, and standing in a queue in order to complete a quest.

Guild Wars takes place in a large virtual world made up of many different zones, and players can walk from one end of the world to the other. In Guild Wars much of the tedium of traveling through the world has been eliminated. Players can instantly return to any safe area (town or outpost) that they have previously visited just by clicking on it in the world overview map.

Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game). Guild Wars was designed from the ground up to create the best possible competitive role-playing experience. Success in Guild Wars is always the result of player skill, not time spent playing or the size of one's guild. As characters progress, they acquire a diverse set of skills and items, enabling them to use new strategies in combat. Players can do battle in open arenas or compete in guild-vs-guild warfare or the international tournament. Engaging in combat is always the player's choice, however; there is no player-killing in cooperative areas of the world.

Players in Guild Wars can play with or against players from around the world in the global tournaments and arenas. And while players are initially placed in a region based on their selected language (so that there is a greater likelihood that others will be speaking their language) they can join up in the always-available International District to form parties and to play with anyone from anywhere in the world.


I disliked GW a lot due to the constant instanced environments, and having trouble finding my friends because even main communication areas are instanced to a point...If too many people are in the area, people are moved to a new instance of the area, and therefore you cannot see your friends sometimes unless you group with them then enter an instance zone... Didn't feel anything like an MMO to me... Reminded me of older, just online games...like from Consoles...you have a virtual lobby to group up in, and then you go in your own little world to play...just like MW2 really...or any other basic console or PC game with an online feature...

Now, don't get me wrong, GWs is a good game, just not good at all for an MMO...

Luvdiscgolf said:
Are there any MMOs other than Wow that have an active ToJ or at least CGA group playing?
Click to expand...

I say no to Warhammer, because many people just got accentually charged up $500 for their monthly sub...

I second both EQ2 and Aion...
 
Last edited:
XionTawa said:
I say no to Warhammer, because many people just got accentually charged up $500 for their monthly sub...
Click to expand...

...Which was paid back, including overdraft fees, two weeks of increased exp, and promo-only items for those affected (like a refer 3 people mount). Time cards weren't affected and it was a bug with the merchants (which was fixed after a few hours), not Mythic doing it on purpose.

Just sayin'. :p
 
XionTawa said:
I disliked GW a lot due to the constant instanced environments, and having trouble finding my friends because even main communication areas are instanced to a point...If too many people are in the area, people are moved to a new instance of the area, and therefore you cannot see your friends sometimes unless you group with them then enter an instance zone... Didn't feel anything like an MMO to me... Reminded me of older, just online games...like from Consoles...you have a virtual lobby to group up in, and then you go in your own little world to play...just like MW2 really...or any other basic console or PC game with an online feature...

Now, don't get me wrong, GWs is a good game, just not good at all for an MMO...
Click to expand...

technical definitions are pointless when the vast majority of the community defines it as something else.
We say Canis lupus familiaris, you say Labrador Retriever.

You say it's not massively multiplayer because it is instanced and you don't like that. I say it's massively multiplayer, because unlike nearly all other MMOs it's not sharded(ie, multiple servers to choose from), thus I am not forced to choose between my friends and a good guild (like in WoW -My friends play Horde on Crushridge, Redeemed plays Alliance on Stonemaul). GW is a different flavor of the genre but still there like it or not -and I don't feel like getting into why ANet marketing chose to label it as a CRPG (suffice to say it's a nice piece of PR, if anyone actually reads the FAQs before playing...).

It's like saying DoW II isn't an RTS because you can't build bases.
 
Last edited:
Wait, you can't build bases in DoW2?! What a rip-off. :(

/flings Orky boyz into a barricade, Gork stomps some foolish CSMs
 
So much gaming to do, such little time...

I haven't managed much time at all to play, but what I've seen so far in GW is definitely different. I definitely need a few more game sessions to determine whether I really like it or not. Sometimes different is good. :)

Proverb - I've thrown some Innova discs in the past and still own a couple, but Discraft have always flown better for me. And most importantly, Discraft has the Buzz disc which I personally feel is one of the best discs ever made for disc golf! :) Everyone I know that has tried one has ended up with at least one in their bag, lol.
 
To be honest, I've hated Guild Wars with a passion. I kept rerolling for like, 2 years until I found the classes I liked, then the game went from a 3 to a 8. Ritualist and Assassin ftw!
 
Elader Arkon said:
technical definitions are pointless when the vast majority of the community defines it as something else.
We say Canis lupus familiaris, you say Labrador Retriever.

You say it's not massively multiplayer because it is instanced and you don't like that. I say it's massively multiplayer, because unlike nearly all other MMOs it's not sharded(ie, multiple servers to choose from), thus I am not forced to choose between my friends and a good guild (like in WoW -My friends play Horde on Crushridge, Redeemed plays Alliance on Stonemaul). GW is a different flavor of the genre but still there like it or not -and I don't feel like getting into why ANet marketing chose to label it as a CRPG (suffice to say it's a nice piece of PR, if anyone actually reads the FAQs before playing...).

It's like saying DoW II isn't an RTS because you can't build bases.
Click to expand...

The way to are describing MMOs would make almost every game for the 360 and PS3 that has online access an MMO...because it is the same setup... A "lobby" to get to instanced areas...that is the only time there is a "massive" amount of people...which is just like most regular console games...so I still am having issues seeing it as a MMORPG... The most multiplayer you can get from it is a party...is there 50 on 50 battles or can you take a group of 40 to 50 people in to take a boss...? That is Massive, not 5 or 6 people...I can get more than that is my Modern Warfare 2 Party, which is NOT an MMO... I played GW wars for a few months, and have played over 50 different MMORPGs, and GW lacks many of nice features most MMORPGs offer, and it seems the only thing holding people to GWs, and the only "feature" anyone every brags on the game about is the lack of monthly fees...which isn't really a feature, because most games that aren't MMO don't have a monthly fee...it just fits into it's genre...

I do not wish to dis the game, or call it bad, because I liked the game, but not as a MMORPG...if I compared it to MMORPGs, I would have to say the game stinks...
 
XionTawa said:
and GW lacks many of nice features most MMORPGs offer, and it seems the only thing holding people to GWs, and the only "feature" anyone every brags on the game about is the lack of monthly fees...which isn't really a feature, because most games that aren't MMO don't have a monthly fee...it just fits into it's genre...

I do not wish to dis the game, or call it bad, because I liked the game, but not as a MMORPG...if I compared it to MMORPGs, I would have to say the game stinks...
Click to expand...

The thing is tho, is that the company doesn't claim it's an MMO. Actually, most GW players wouldn't call it an MMO because you are exactly right. It lacks the niche qualities of MMORPGs. But that's the exact niche Anet (the creators) wanted to break away from. There can only be so many repetitions of WoW before everyone gets bored and moves on. And, there's a huge player base out there that aren't appealed to an MMO setting, but rather want an RPG they can play with friends. That's the "feature" that keeps people into GW. Monthly fees have a significant portion. But I know plenty of players that would eagerly pay money monthly for GW and again plenty of players that would quit if they had to spend more money. But Anet calls Guild Wars as "a global online roleplaying game" and "Guild Wars has some similarities to existing MMORPGs, but it also has some key differences." "Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game)."

But to him their own. I can understand not liking GW. It's definitely a breach from the norm and GW definitely sucks compared to other MMOs because you can't have a party of 50. But then again, it wasn't built that way or advertised that way. If people are claiming GW is an MMO then they don't understand what GW is or what MMOs are. However, whenever a conversation about MMOs come up, GW has to be mentioned as an MMO alternative, or a similar cousin.
 
Then I would state that EVE is the only popular game which could be considered 'MMO'. Compared to 1300 people engaged in conflict at once, what is a little 50 vs 50? I'm pretty sure the answer isn't 'massively multiplayer'.
And what then of games like APB? 100,000 per world, but only 100 per district? It considers itself an MMO.

I personally like the wikipedia definition of what constitutes a Massively Multiplayer Online game where it compares MMOs to other games.
 
Elader Arkon said:
Then I would state that EVE is the only popular game which could be considered 'MMO'. Compared to 1300 people engaged in conflict at once, what is a little 50 vs 50? I'm pretty sure the answer isn't 'massively multiplayer'.
And what then of games like APB? 100,000 per world, but only 100 per district? It considers itself an MMO.

I personally like the wikipedia definition of what constitutes a Massively Multiplayer Online game where it compares MMOs to other games.
Click to expand...

"MMOGs host a large number of players in a single game world, and all of those players can interact with each other at any given time."

The only place I saw this in GWs was the "lobby" in which I barely saw anyone and could not even see my friends to claimed to be in the same area, because you are automatically placed in "invisible" servers (also known as "phased" servers), and if you aren't in the same server as your friends (which you cannot control), the only way to see them is in an instance being in a party...

The way you are explaining MMOs makes games like L4D/2, TF2, MW2, and Halo 3 all MMOs, because you go into a virtual environment with 1000s of others, make parties, and then enter instanced environments to play a majority of the game, is this not the exact same thing that happens in GWs?

Stc95 said:
The thing is tho, is that the company doesn't claim it's an MMO. Actually, most GW players wouldn't call it an MMO because you are exactly right. It lacks the niche qualities of MMORPGs. But that's the exact niche Anet (the creators) wanted to break away from. There can only be so many repetitions of WoW before everyone gets bored and moves on. And, there's a huge player base out there that aren't appealed to an MMO setting, but rather want an RPG they can play with friends. That's the "feature" that keeps people into GW. Monthly fees have a significant portion. But I know plenty of players that would eagerly pay money monthly for GW and again plenty of players that would quit if they had to spend more money. But Anet calls Guild Wars as "a global online roleplaying game" and "Guild Wars has some similarities to existing MMORPGs, but it also has some key differences." "Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game)."

But to him their own. I can understand not liking GW. It's definitely a breach from the norm and GW definitely sucks compared to other MMOs because you can't have a party of 50. But then again, it wasn't built that way or advertised that way. If people are claiming GW is an MMO then they don't understand what GW is or what MMOs are. However, whenever a conversation about MMOs come up, GW has to be mentioned as an MMO alternative, or a similar cousin.
Click to expand...

I agree :)
 
Last edited:
XionTawa said:
"MMOGs host a large number of players in a single game world, and all of those players can interact with each other at any given time."

The only place I saw this in GWs was the "lobby" in which I barely saw anyone and could not even see my friends to claimed to be in the same area, because you are automatically placed in "invisible" servers (also known as "phased" servers), and if you aren't in the same server as your friends (which you cannot control), the only way to see them is in an instance being in a party...

The way you are explaining MMOs makes games like L4D/2, TF2, MW2, and Halo 3 all MMOs, because you go into a virtual environment with 1000s of others, make parties, and then enter instanced environments to play a majority of the game, is this not the exact same thing that happens in GWs?
Click to expand...

First: Phasing is currently only used by Blizzard, all other games to my knowledge use instancing. Just fyi. Guild Wars uses traditional instancing mechanics.

Second: The difference between GW and L4D/2, TF2, MW2, etc. is an issue of scale. MMOGs create a universe where things happen regardless of a player's interaction. Examples of this would be the Alliance Battles in Factions, and the various events that happen in the major cities (and probably the whole War in Kryta, though I wouldn't know about that because I haven't logged in since it started). The FPS multiplayer content is limited in this regard because the events portrayed are extremely limited to small localized environments not intended to show the game universe as a whole.

Another aspect of comparison is character progression in regards to game world. GW and MMORPGs in general focus on progressing the character itself through events/story in order to tell a story. This is most often shown by a character levelling up, getting better gear, etc. (and in GW's case, Titles and armor obtainable only upon completion of the campaign) Players can have their own ideas of what they consider progression, things such as accumulation of wealth (evidenced most clearly in EVE, but still seen to some extent everywhere else) being the most common.

Social interaction is still something that sets GW apart from the FPS games you mentioned, as even though one person is in an instance you can still chat with them, whereas in the other games you cannot chat across servers without use of third party software.

Finally, the function of the game's economy also separates GW from the FPS Multiplayer games and lends it credence to MMO status. Items can be bought, traded, sold on an open market at fluctuating (sometimes wildly) rates. I think GW's economy is somewhat screwed up now, but so is Crushridge on WoW so w/e.

I haven't touched on the 'MMO Culture' that is just as prevalent in GW as other MMOs, but I hope you see my point.
 
Last edited:
Elader Arkon said:
First: Phasing is currently only used by Blizzard, all other games to my knowledge use instancing. Just fyi. Guild Wars uses traditional instancing mechanics.

Second: The difference between GW and L4D/2, TF2, MW2, etc. is an issue of scale. MMOGs create a universe where things happen regardless of a player's interaction. Examples of this would be the Alliance Battles in Factions, and the various events that happen in the major cities (and probably the whole War in Kryta, though I wouldn't know about that because I haven't logged in since it started). The FPS multiplayer content is limited in this regard because the events portrayed are extremely limited to small localized environments not intended to show the game universe as a whole.

Another aspect of comparison is character progression in regards to game world. GW and MMORPGs in general focus on progressing the character itself through events/story in order to tell a story. This is most often shown by a character levelling up, getting better gear, etc. (and in GW's case, Titles and armor obtainable only upon completion of the campaign) Players can have their own ideas of what they consider progression, things such as accumulation of wealth (evidenced most clearly in EVE, but still seen to some extent everywhere else) being the most common.

Social interaction is still something that sets GW apart from the FPS games you mentioned, as even though one person is in an instance you can still chat with them, whereas in the other games you cannot chat across servers without use of third party software.

Finally, the function of the game's economy also separates GW from the FPS Multiplayer games and lends it credence to MMO status. Items can be bought, traded, sold on an open market at fluctuating (sometimes wildly) rates. I think GW's economy is somewhat screwed up now, but so is Crushridge on WoW so w/e.

I haven't touched on the 'MMO Culture' that is just as prevalent in GW as other MMOs, but I hope you see my point.
Click to expand...

First Point: Phasing has been being used in online games for over 10 years by many different companies...and the reason I call GWs lobby phased, because sometimes you are in the same lobby as your friends and sometimes you aren't, but you are in the same area...

Second: What you said here makes much sense and really proved your point...

Third and Fourth: Actually playing on Xbox Live you get character progression (in MW2 you actually level up and get new gear) and you are always in contact with your friends via voice chat that is built into every game...and if you are in a different game you can still chat...

Final Point: I was unaware of an in-game market, I never came across it in my time playing... That fact that it would have complete working in game economy gives it another point towards the MMO genre...

I now slighty see your point, and do give it a bit more consideration of it being like an MMO...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top