How many people does it take to get the "mmo" feel?

#21 I do not mean to be a downer, I am simply wondering if this is true about the big MMO's (ex. WoW).


Do the actual servers (a single instance of a server) handle thousands? Or does each server only handle around 50 players each, and larger single zones like Capital Cities split into multiple zones (multiple servers handling different parts of the city)?

When I think about it, I think about a single server. If a single server only holds 50 people and they just use a cluster of servers to handle larger areas, isn't it the same as a MO? Just like several games in one?

If WoW only had 1 Shard, and 1 Zone, what would it be like?

#22 This has nothing to do with players actually interacting together:
www.wired.com/gamelife/2008/04/wow-china-tops/

I think the peak of player-player interaction was Eve with 50K.

#23 Also, don't think of the servers as machines. There are machines, but they are virtualized using a hypervisor and one machine might be running several copies of an OS like Windows or Linux. That way they can maximize the amount of processing power per machine. From there the machines are in groups/clouds. So if a machine starts to fail they can move the OS with all the running game servers within milliseconds to another server. This is how they keep things running without interruption in service. In addition a lot of these servers are rented like from Amazon.

The IT effort is (M)assive. :)

I think some of these games are becoming like services like Netflix or Amazon itself.

#24 I apologise if my statements may seem ignorant, i am fully aware of the technical implications of running there "seemingly continuous" worlds, wether it is running on a cloud type structure, uses transparent server to server handoff or a system of ingame "zones".

My point was that from a technical standpoint, instanciating dungeons seems to be the favored choice these days, with a minimal "shared world", instead of the zoning system which was used "almost" transparently on UO and not so subtly in Everquest, or a transparent handoff like the one used in EVE online.

It makes me wonder if it's because it's easier, and as a result the "mmo" experience is devolved (if i can say that) to small scale co op.

ex:"Instancing is cheaper to develop and less of a headache so we will make the game in such a way most of the content is designed for small co-op groups"

My opinion is the following:
If i want to play co op with a few friends, i fire up borderlands, i do not pay a monthly fee to a company to provide me what is essentially an experience i can have at home on pretty much every co op RPGs out there.

If i'm gonna pay a monthly fee, the game has to justify it's subscription model by having a larger scope than a matchmaking system for PvE/PvP arenas.

#25 @Kyrah,
With your assessment of size and experience being similar to MOs I agree. I think that is what RJAG was talking about. So maybe MMO providers are finding the large number of folks simultaneously isn't necessarily what people want, and maybe they don't want to pay for something that isn't bigger in scope.

#26 I don't think instancing is a cheapening of the old way, I think it's a response to Asheron's Call-style "wait in line behind 560 people to kill the contents of this dungeon" situations. Most of the systems out there now use instancing for small locales that have specific quest/mission targets (except for Guild Wars (1) that instanced everything outside of the city gates). SW:TOR seems to spawn off instances when the population of a zone reaches 450~500 players - but that's more to offset possible graphics-related slowdowns when large numbers of high-poly characters are on screen (along with any potential associated combat effects).

As far as having tons of people all in one place - I hate that IRL, no way am I playing a game for the same experience. To me that's like fishing - I don't fish in WoW because I don't like fishing IRL. Why would I play a game to do something that I don't like to do....?

#27 Mental note: Add "shoot fish in a barrel" feature for Richard.

#28 That is a must! I hate fish. And fishing. Especially fishing for fish.

Seriously, if you make your spawn times too short you can't kill a thing and walk out of "aggro" range in time for the respawn, and if you make it too long you literally have people standing in line to kill the quest objective. I've seen it - it's not pretty (refer to Asheron's Call 1).