QUOTE (CanRay @ Aug 19 2011, 06:51 AM)

Seemed that way to the few games I tried, both of 4th and MMOs. Get mission from guy, go kill ten snow moose or whatever, come back for reward.
But, as you said, GM. But I've heard the same statement from other people who do play MMOs and have tried different GMs.
Well I can say I never had a quest that was "Go out, kill X of this, come back for reward". I can also say I've never played an MMO where powers didn't have some in combat recharge mechanic, or one where the amount of healing over the course of a day (or in an MMO throughout a raid) was limited. I also don't think there's any MMOs where tanks maintain aggro on their targets by penalizing the target for hitting others, but leaving the option available. Note: 4e's introduction of defenders and marks is the biggest complaint that I've seen, because people associate tanking with MMOs. But the 4e method of tanking leaves it up to the GM to weigh the cost vs benefit of just ignoring the mark, in no case is any creature ever forced to attack the guy in full plate to the exclusion of everyone else no matter how stupid that tactic seems or how poorly it is working. This is vastly different from any MMO.
In fact, there are roughly 2 similarities with MMOs I see in 4e D&D: 1) There is a pretty heavy emphasis on combat mechanics. In both instances, this does not mean this is what you must focus on. You can play for months in D&D without fighting one enemy, but most groups don't play that way. Similarly, you can run around in WoW as a level 1 roleplaying experiencing the world and trying to avoid these huge skull leveled creatures trying to kill you, but most don't.
2) There are clearly defined roles in the group, and everyone fills the role. I think this is the one that gets peoples goat more than anything (see also: The tanking thing mentioned above, which is related to this), but really, it is good game design. We don't consider Shadowrun an MMO because you have the street sammy, the hacker, and the mage, each filling their own role in the group. D&D3.5 had a big issue with this particular problem because there weren't defined roles, so it became casters do everything for everyone else, including front line melee combat in the rare event that option was actually useful, and everyone else was useless. Rather than continue that trend, 4e shored things up and narrowed down the options to have each class fill a role in the party. People missed their mage being able to do anything, and thus complained about D&D becoming more MMO-like, because suddenly they don't have tools to bypass adventures and dominate encounters singlehandedly. But I do want to point out, this does not make the game MMO-esque, a creative group still has plenty of options, you just no longer have one player with nigh infinite options, and another player with 1 option.
Now, I'm not saying 4e is perfect. The developers could have left a little more wiggle room all around with regards to options and customization without repeating the mistakes of their past, and I do prefer both 3.5 and Shadowrun to it. However I feel that calling it MMO-esque is a pretty big misnomer, and it is a pet peeve of mine.
QUOTE
To be fair, D&D 4e is a wargame, anyone saying otherwise is in denial. 90+% of your character are combat numbers, movement speed, special abilities with areas, special effectives, ect. Tactical grid based combat is essential to the system, and the non-combat mechanics are as shallow as a cat bowl. A good DM can make a very run and exciting game, and players can RP with the system, but the system is still a wargame.
I can RP while I play monopoly if I want.
I won't disagree with this. But there's a huge step from a wargame and an MMO. And that line only really gets crossed if you have an exceptionally lazy DM (who does the aformentioned go kill 10 buffalo, bring me back their wings for a reward style quests)