Should the MMO future be a slightly bigger part of the KS?


I understand the reasons behind the decision.
Agree with it.
But i too do this for the MMO.... and if that means I-Novae has to make IB first then by all means i will help it how i can.
I can wait.... just hope i will be alive when it happens :smile:

1 Like

I'm not suggesting that the MMO be a part of the kickstarter in that the funding from it goes to the MMO.

I mean that the eventual vision of an MMO as part of the history of Battlescape's development should be mentioned somewhere on the page, in text, as should the galaxy engine. Mainly the galaxy engine because that's one of the sweetest pieces of software I've ever seen.


Infinity: Battlescape is already a massively multiplayer online game.


It's becoming increasingly difficult to determine which games fall under the mmo category. :smile:

1 Like

For Infinity: Battlescape they are talking about one or two hundred players on a server. That's highly multiplayer but not sure that it qualifies as massively multiplayer. Normally what you'd think of as an MMO would allow for thousands of players online at any one time. Battlescape is more of a typical arena game that happens to support a large amount of players.


I think the word "massively" represents a number significantly larger than one or two hundred.


I don't think the number matters that much. I think the title MMO suggests that it's a game that is played in an open world with other people, with objectives that happen in the open world. It's also continuous.

So, MMO could really just be renamed Open World Multiplayer Game, OWMG. I think "massively" as an adjective also refers more to the type of interaction. That is, massively means that most of your interactions are with other players, and that you're always or almost always in a state of being in a multiplayer mode.

It's not hard to imagine some indie MMO that only has 100-200 players all on one server. Like, if WoW had 200 people playing total, it would still be classified as an MMO.


For an arena, that's already a pretty big number. Always locate: having 200 players on a server is not the same as 200 in an arena. There are other games that have a lot of players but mostly see them in instancied towns or havens.

I mostly agree with @Alkan2: the number is only one side of an MMO, interaction between them being another.


Massively is defined as more than 612. Next.

1 Like

Even if hundreds for a single Battlescape turns out to be wrong. 50 players on each... say... 20 battlescapes adds up to a 1000 players.

Here is the one thing that is entirely clear. Battlescape is not the MMORPG. The MMO part is still part of the scope. just not as persistent as other MMOGs.


I look forward to seeing what happens when everyone decides to converge on one battlescape simply because they can.


I kind of wish INovae would under-promise and over-deliver in this aspect of the game.

1 Like

We break the world record?

There should be a mechanic to hinder them of course. Remember the time vortex idea? The more people there were at a spot, the harder it gets to get there, maybe at the start it took 30 seconds. 50 people, 1 minute. 800 people, 39 minutes ... there are more ideas.

Make it a server config and we'll have broken the record once betas out. :stuck_out_tongue:


World of tanks is considered an mmo, I think battlescape qualifies


Can't we all just agree that the term MMO is used almost exclusively, for the sake of clarity and consistency in the industry, to refer to MMORPGs?

1 Like

That would be something to see. People configure their private servers and find that there isn't a defined limit on player connections. So they start experiments to see how many people they can get on their server. And they start publishing their numbers. People start calculating player counts per CPU cycles, per GB of RAM, per MB/s network throughput, and so on. Competition ensues. But you need lots of players to run such competitions. Or client emulators. Battlescape stress events follow.


An MMO should be defined by player concurrency, rather than base genre. There's a reason we call them Massively Multiplayer Online Whatevers, after all.

If a minimum of 100 players (that's my number, at least, feel free to toss in your own) can exist within, and interact through gameplay within, the same discrete instance (in this case defined as a server/shard or major division thereof, such as EVE's solar systems or matches in Planetside) of a game, then I would call that game an MMO. If you're only ever going to see 20 or 30 players at a time, or even 60 or 90, that's not an MMO, I don't care if a million people play it.

1 Like

I was trying to end the circular logic arguments.


Seems pretty linear to me.


You can't stop circular logic because you can't stop circular logic.