I've spent a long time in the online gaming industry, playing games ranging from Warcraft all the way up to the present games such as Requiem. Hours of devotion have gone into several companies for volunteer work, and countless nights spent grinding away at the levels have been used. I've journeyed through hundreds of different online worlds, and interacted with thousands of others who shared my passion for the game. I've played games at 5 fps, just because they looked great and my crappy computer wasn't going to stop me. I've played legit to the top of the ranks, and I've played on some private servers just for fun. I've blogged about games for almost a year now, going on and off of the job and changing sites a handful of times. But throughout all my interactions in the industry, only a few games have really stood out at me. These game are the most revolutionary games that have brought the industry to a new milestone, raising the bar up again for the rest of the industry to follow along with. No, I am not talking about your typical 'revolutionary' games such as the World of Warcraft. I am talking about a handful of games that have exceeded in the industry by a large margin compare

    Ever since World of Warcraft hit the industry, we've seen a lot of new types of subscriptions in the online gaming industry. Some companies have decided to try and compete with World of Warcraft in the 'Pay to Play' model for online games, while others have avoided this model and gone to the more popular 'Free to Play' model. Some have even created a mixture, where users can either play for free or pay for more options, maps, skills, and other advantages. But out of all the models in the gaming industry, which one is the best for gamers?

    A lot of people have been discussing the cost of a game that is supposedly 'Free to Play', since the entire theory behind it is getting money off of a cash shop. Some games avoid having to provide completely unfair items in the cash shop to earn money by placing advertisements in-game and on their website, which brings in another source of income for the company. People say that the 'Free to Play' model, referred to as F2P from here-on, is actually more expensive than games that require you to pay a monthly fee.

    But is this actually true? Are F2P games really more expensive than P2P games? I will take a

    People like to find something and blame it for anything that goes wrong, or that goes badly. If you do bad in school, you blame it on the teacher. If you forget something, you blame your parent's for not reminding you. And lately it seems that MMOG enthusiasts are the exact same way, blaming WoW on failures in the industry including dropped project. Recently the Marvel MMOG project was even shut down because they didn't think it would be successful with the P2P model they originally wanted it to have because of World of Warcraft, saying it dominated the industry and provided little room for other games in that model type. Now everyone is moving on to F2P models, trying to revolutionize those with new innovations. But has the vast success of World of Warcraft actually hurt the industry, or has it actually been a blessing in disguise?


    First off, most people are mis-led by the numbers. Having a friend who compiles MMOG information and analyzes it to see which models are most successful, and which games are most popular, I understand the numbers that are actually being compared. First off, most people gasp in amazement when the

Lately, I have seen a lot of controversy over what is considered to be an MMOG. Now, I figured I would just throw in my two cents because I have experience with all types of games in the extremely large genre of MMOG. First off, I would like to point out what the acronym MMOG actually stands for, for the few people that don't know;

Massive(ly)
Multiplayer
Online
Game

You can also make the category more specific and turn it into MMORPG, MMOFPS, and a lot more. But they are all part of the MMOG group, as the common factor is the massively multiplayer online part, and of course the game part is implied. The part where people start to get confused is how is the acronym grouped? What I mean by this is that some people will say that a MMOG must be massive, multiplayer, online, and a game (Duh!).

Then there are people that think more specifically. That a MMOG must be massively multiplayer, multiplayer online, etc.

This is what it all comes down to. The acronym of massively multiplayer online games is a definite, but then there's the controversy over how to determine the reasoning behind the definitions.

Why does it even matter? Well, the whole point is really in the massively multiplayer part.