Well, MMO still stands for massive multiplayer online. MMORPG is something different as you well know. A site using the terms correctly is hardly cause for concern.
 

I wasn't saying that WoT isn't a MMO. I was saying that in the MMO category it was competing against all MMORPGs, and apparently few people voted for the RPG MMOs.
 

that rewards tell nothing to me..people can also vote for tetris or farmville. People also voted the Avengers 8+ in imdb and I couldn't even watch that movie.

And who are those people that vote for?I never ever voted for something, I am busy playing my games in my little free time and the rest I am working and other real life stuff.

Although I will agree with you that more and more people play the MMO games as single player games. And I can see this by personal experience from friends and my server in the games I play, not because of these votes and awards :)
 

When have any serious role players not preferred off-line RPGs to MMOs? The on-line games are better than not playing but they never come close to a real game around the table.

And really, what's the discussion about on most MMORPGs? Combat and other non-RP items for the most part.
 

This award is primarily because of a devoted fan base - which I am part of. The company offered numerous incentive to vote and regularly posted links in their news items so people could vote directly. It was their primary focus for the last three months. The Russian and EURO players also outnumber the NA players by about 10x and they are ardent in their support of the game.
 

My theory is that players want story from their RPG, but MMOs have a hard time with that. It seems offline single player RPGs will always be capable of telling a better story. Most MMORPGs just have lots and lots of content. The places you go to all look very different, but it's the same basic gameplay everywhere. They just throw more content at players with a gear grind. Single player RPG quests do mostly fall into the same basic categories as MMORPG quests, but the story makes each area feel different enough to continue playing to the end.
 

Considering that single player RPGs have been around longer than MMORPGs --and also get console players that MMORPGs don't get-- it's not a surprise that the larger tendency is toward single player RPGs.

 

(Hmmph. That's what I get for accidentally bumping the mouse button on the laptop.)

Anyway, I also wanted to point out that single player RPGs have a single cost point to get full access to the game, whereas in MMORPGs that's still the exception rather than the rule. Yes, There's F2P, but F2P also carries with it various restrictions; a true single purchase MMORPG such as GW/GW2 is very rare indeed.
 

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

I really love World of Tanks, I've been a dedicated player for ages but haven't played much since I became a beta tester for World of Warplanes which is another fantastic game by this company. These are the perfect games for huge WW2 history buffs like myself, I can see why they have such a huge following.
 

I'd say it's about definition. I think of League of Legends cared one bit about winning best MMO, it could've done it by incetivizing users the way WoT has done.

Raph Koster has stated many times that MMORPGs have a persistent virtual world. Yes, there can be instanced portions. Yes, they will be sharded (exception, EVE). But for the most part, they will present the player with a "world".

WoT, LoL, Counter Strike, etc. are all in the category of multiplayer games. I just don't see how you can apply MASSIVE to the team fights. Yes, there are many people online but I cant see them unless we get matched in battle. And it's not like there's the Britain bank where everyone hangs around in the evening.