Category Archives: Cooperation

[GW2] …And then we didn’t fight anymore

A while ago now I posted an article on matchmaking in MMOs in which I described how, much to my personal chagrin, my longtime partner and I are incompatible when it comes to our questing “mode”. This has always been something I eyed with resignation, since I’m the reason he started playing MMOs in the first place. How nice would it have been to explore and level up together peacefully? Well, in WoW we only ever managed this so often.

I’ve explained and no doubt unnerved a few of my readers with all the ways I believe cooperation in GW2 to be different, with a potential for much better than in MMOs past, recently on this blog. Alas, I have to inform you that I am not quite done yet and won’t be for a while when it comes to analyzing this particularly fascinating topic. Now that we’ve begun to immmerse ourselves in the real Tyria, this will be an aspect to revisit and re-examine, to see where expectations were adequate and where I set my hopes too high. I know that especially longterm things will probably look quite different from right now, now that everybody has just started off and quest and event areas are crowded with new folk. This very real issue applies to all MMOs I’ve ever played.

And then we didn’t fight anymore

Back on topic, one thing I did not dream of was for GW2’s questing experience to not only prove generally more enjoyable for myself, but more enjoyable for myself plus my partner! When the borked overflow mechanics actually allowed us to, we’ve given exploring together several shots over this last weekend. Lo and behold, not only did we not bicker the way we used to but enjoyed killing things together (oh, the romantic moments among gamers!). I could actually run off and gather that “peacebloom” (formerly known as warbloom…) without calling things to a halt. He did not wait impatiently or worse, keep pulling and killing himself while I trailed off somewhere else entirely (and yeah…I do that). There is no such coordination and focus needed to constantly do the one thing at the correct time; there are no roles and hence co-dependencies, so when one of us is off to gather or sell items, the other one simply continues to look after himself. Or in other words: if you die, it’s your own bloody fault, pal!

“Ohh, teh harmony!”

Looting too is no topic anymore: “do we choose group loot or FFA?”, “you still need to loot that corpse over there!” and “how many more do you need??” are non issues. These may seem trivial changes and petty issues to somebody else, but for me our past questing experiences together were constantly disrupted by things like that. Now, loot is something that just “happens” while you’re off exploring – just as leveling up is. As an explorer, I love for the focus to have shifted thus.

More recent, unexpected revelations

Another thing I sure did not expect to happen, is that I actually choose to switch to water spec with my Elementalist quite often to spare allies some healing during bigger and tougher events. I’ve declared quite publicly before how fed up I am with the healer role since WoW – and I still am. Only, in GW2 it’s not a role and more importantly: it’s not a role I’m expected to have. And that is probably precisely why I enjoy to include some healing in my greater rotation again – because I am not expected to! Nobody is taking it for granted and I will sure as hell not get a hard time for not healing anybody. I believe every or most GW2 classes have an area heal like that (for example Engineers have a healing turret) and while CDs are long and it’s nowhere near an all-powerful tool, it gives you a sense of support and versatility. It’s fun!

…See how I am reacting towards this lack of “pressure” or rather entitlement? Now don’t get me wrong – I know if you play a healer in WoW you should want to play a healer and can be expected to heal (demanded to too?), that’s natural. However, having played a holy priest for years myself, I got really fed up with the way my role was treated by many, especially public groups; the way blame was usually appointed and how it was just a given that priests are heal, buff and ress-machines. In GW2 healing is appreciated more for its sparseness instead of being “your job after all”. Or as the ever-insightful Tesh recently commented in my topic on individualism vs. collectivism:

“That which we are forced to do, we do grudgingly, and good memories stand out for their rarity. That which we choose to do, we do gladly, and bad memories stand out for their rarity.”

I have a feeling we’ll see a lot more of that over the coming weeks. I am excited to see what else will reveal itself over time as I level my character in GW2. At this point, technical aspects aside on which I fully agree with Klepsacovic, I got no reason for complaints.

Individualism vs. Collectivism. Or: Glorified MMO misconceptions

If there is one quality in particular that I believe to be imperative for social relationships and bonds, that is the aspect of free will. Free will may be all that separates partnership from a prison, friendship from tyranny and loving care from obligation. In this life, I choose who I want to be with and for how long, and I don’t want any of my more meaningful relationships to ever be about necessity. “Yes, I do like you, maybe I even love you – but I don’t need you. My life won’t unravel if you leave and I won’t die without you.” I’d like to think that the best relationships I’ve ever established are grounded like this and I look at them as something that makes my life better – makes it a little more than it already is. And that more is very much worth having.

Of course none of that sounds particularly romantic; as kids we believe in grand gestures of undying love, we dream of losing ourselves in someone else entirely, we need and long to be needed or “completed”. Then we grow up and come to realize, one way or another, that need is no healthy base for relationships and that giving up oneself means to truly be deserted. “I need you” sounds romantic – but that is all it usually is. Way down that fickle road of need wait co-dependence, disrespect, manipulation and maybe even abuse. I want the important relationships in my life to be about free will, not need and not necessity. That is one luxury I am grateful for.

The same conclusions can be applied to online relationships: a while ago I wrote an article on the invisibility feature in MMOs and why it’s not only wrong but detrimental to community building, to prevent players from going invisible when they choose. Quality interaction and cooperation in MMOs are no different from the real world in that they need to be based on free will. Not on pressure, dictation or necessity. The line between where enforced cooperation ends and genuine friendships blossom, can be a very fine and blurry one – as the great majority of all MMO players have come to experience at some point in their gaming careers. Likewise however, most of us have learned just how quick and absolute long established bonds and even vows of brotherhood and friendship will be forgotten, when guilds end or players leave the game until further notice. And so we ask ourselves how much of it was genuinely committed, friendly motivated interaction and how much was simply a glorified common venture, serving the mutual and temporary purpose of individuals?

Yet, should we even make such distinctions for MMO relationships? …Human interaction in general?

Collectivism vs. Individualism

The simplest definition of collectivism and individualism is that they’re socially, culturally, historically and what not else-ly influenced values, at opposing ends of the spectrum of human collaboration and cooperation. Personally, I disagree with that in so far that both collectivism and individualism actually have an essential thing common: in isolation they’re both equally bad.

Pure, ideological collectivism comes at the cost of identity; things like personal fulfillment, expression or even free choice are second to the “greater good”. Historical and everyday attempts at collectivism keep failing because in the end the rule of a few privileged people over the rest of the herd seems unavoidable. As long as our species is driven by greed, personal gain and power lust, anyway. So, for simplicities sake let’s say collectivism has its noble ends in theory, but fails horribly at performance.

Extreme individualism is where things are going in our wealthy, western world; every man for himself, grab as much as you can. There is much room for greed and destructive exploitation, again of the few privileged – only this time it’s sanctified under a credo of freedom and pursuit of one’s own happiness. Meanwhile, the big, sparkly cities of man have become conglomerates of small islands, people living anonymously side by side, often feeling quite alone.
Individualism is very much a sign of material wealth though – it is a luxury. Human beings tend to stick together and pursue common goals when they’re all equally fucked. You know, when disaster strikes, sharing and compromise suddenly sound like a good idea!

…Where am I going with this? We need to be critical of social labels and so-called values, on all ends of the spectrum. The ideal society is probably one that can balance both polarities and in MMOs too, a balance must be struck between how social interaction and cooperation are “engineered”. Well, past games have only shown us a glimpse of the beginning!

WoW & Before: When necessity breeds cooperation

The glorified days of WoW, and yes I have done it myself, are the days when players could not advance particularly well without grouping up with others – be it strangers or friends. That’s when encounters were hard (unbalanced, restrictive) and soloing was only one, much smaller part of the game than today. It’s also where MMO veterans usually draw their fondest memories from: when quests and encounters were so damn hard that you and your buddies relied on each other’s every move, when punishment was quick on the ball and victory was so much the greater for it. Oh yes, I remember that too….and romanticism has its part therein.

Back in vanilla WoW, we didn’t just group up because of some notion of social altruism, curiosity or friendliness; at first, we grouped up because we needed each other in rather existential ways. We grouped up in order to survive or to progress faster, to access better loot or more content. There’s a common purpose of many individuals come together and each of them wants something – and that isn’t even a bad thing. What it certainly is not though, is some chapter in a romantic novel on social bonding and making friends for life. In fact, the classic MMO standard is the most incentivized realization of cooperation I can think of:

Group up or be punished in any conceivable way
Group up because target XY will only become available by doing so
Group up with players X and Y because of their role / class
Group up or…..be damned

Lots of “…or ELSE!” going on there! Grouping up is completely engineered by game design, by things like overall content difficulty, pacing or setup requirements. Does that mean I didn’t make friends on the way? I did, but I don’t think that was the game’s achievement. Lasting relationships are optional; they’re what players create and follow at a later stage. Grouping requirements in MMOs do not automatically exceed the purpose of simply killing stuff together. First and foremost grouping up is a self-serving, necessary act. The way most guilds and guild mates go (QED), cooperation is in fact not an awful lot more than that and maybe that’s just something to accept.

What all the oldschool MMOs (an no, I don’t count in WoW these days, but there is still the strict group setup) did in terms of cooperation, is pragmatic, social engineering at its best. Add to this, that within groups and potentially between groups, there would always be a certain degree of competition: for role spots, for spawns, for loot. Generally lots of “against each other” going on, rather than “together”.

In many ways enforced grouping like that shares aspects of social collectivism: people cooperate because they’re forced to – because they’re all equally bad off on their own. That’s no glorious and ideal state of social interaction though; it’s primal and primitive – and maybe that’s why many players take so naturally to this classic model at first. Food for thought?

GW2: Just the next evolutionary step

Much has been said about GW2’s grouping mechanics lately and if you’ve read my take, you know what I think about both the public events and cooperation in general. I also stated frequently that I find social criticism on features like FFA ressing in GW2 quite ridiculous; whether ressing comes with an EXP reward or not is a tiny, trivial thing compared to the way MMOs traditionally base their entire gameplay on incentivized cooperation.

So, what does GW2 do differently? I don’t claim it’s the big revolution, but it’s a step in the right direction – away from basic need to more balanced and well-rounded concepts of cooperation maybe. Of course you need to address the issue of engineered cooperation as an MMO developer; either that, or you better create very restricted content and unforgiving requirements (ye, those are popular). If you don’t, if you grant players a certain degree of self-sufficiency, freedom and independence, you gotta think of ways to motivate them not to solo all the time.

From my personal point of view and based on my beta experiences, I consider GW2’s grouping mechanics more open, free and more positively incentivized; instead of threatening players with what they’ll have less of, the game suggests that there is nothing to lose and often a little extra to gain from joining an ongoing group, helping another player or sharing an event (aka bonus vs. malus system). There is no loot or role competition and without formulaic grouping procedures, interaction happens more naturally and spontaneously. Rather than thinking of your small circle as questing partners, the entire server is your questing partner!

That is very much also the philosophy ANet have revealed for their multi-guild system. I personally don’t shed a tear over seeing classic appointment gaming go. I like the idea of cooperating effortlessly and without the pressure of agendas. These days, I group up for the purpose of meeting friends and then doing something together, rather than having a target-focused night of grind ahead (or failing to even have that because of teh holy trinity). “Monday is Onyxia, Thursday is Black Wing Lair” – it’s okay when playing together is all about encounters, progression and loot. Raid guilds especially are born out of the necessity to achieve all that; they’re not first and foremost about a wish to be social, although that can be added. That’s fine if it suits your playstyle.

It is just a little ironic when GW2 gets criticized for its more open, flexible approach when socially speaking, it’s years ahead of the classic MMO formula of necessity-born cooperation and glorified, artificial communities with a lifespan relative to endgame content.

Individual Collectivism

I don’t know about you, but I feel that grouping up despite being self-sufficient is a better, more transparent way of doing things. It is certainly a dang lot more enjoyable to me these days, to play without the tiring bonds of obligation in order to progress. I enjoy the random and voluntary encounters in GW2 and that my choice to interact or not is about a potential for ‘more’, rather than the ever-threatening ‘less’. Maybe we could speak of a collective individualism for GW2; a balance between being your own person but also joining up (loosely) for the sake of increased enjoyment and reaching some loftier goals. What’s wrong with giving players a real choice? And why should this choice not also come with some bonuses and rewards, like for everything else in MMOs?

There’s no doubt in my mind about the improved quality of relationships formed this way, either. No, I do not want to need you, sorry! I’d like to think that as human beings we can reach a higher state of mind than this: that cooperation DOES still happen without existential commitment or the promise of punishment. I don’t expect my online relationships to mirror the real world, but then again – why should we be stuck at this stage? I still have a little more confidence in online communities than that. Shockingly!

P.S. This post is a contribution to Stubborn’s ongoing examination of a greater topic.

Apocalypse now: The future of social gaming

It’s national day today where I live, which means fireworks, bonfires and barbecuing – if only it wasn’t around 35 degrees Celsius outside, so I guess we won’t get much of that until way late into the night. Exactly 721 years ago, according to legend, did the three founding factions (today cantons) of this country get together and swear a sacred oath to stick together and join forces against their ever-warring neighbours. A confederation was born that has maintained much of its sovereignty up to this day, and has since served as direct rolemodel to other nations, the United States of America among them. Or in much less solemn words – 721 years ago a couple of swashbucklers shared beers on a meadow and decided it was time to kick some ass together and cooperate. Time for a new era, time for change. How romantic.

The blogosphere has been abuzz with topics of change lately (again), and much doomsaying has gone around about the future of pretty much anything: the MMO genre, online gaming, social games and cooperation. Some wonder if this MMO era is finally over, while many others ask what GW2 and MoP can still do for the genre? It’s a complex question, one that at its core encompasses a much greater issue and development currently touching the entire online and gaming market. If Facebook games are in decline that doesn’t mean MMOs are doomed, but it means that everyone is currently affected from the same intangible shift, maybe towards a next generation of social games, online games, multiplayer games. Somewhere there is a common denominator beyond just overfed customers, classic concepts beaten to death and cows milked into oblivion.

In this context I feel compelled to promote one article that stands apart and that I’ve just come across (also because just retweeting it isn’t enough). Tadgh Kelly, probably known for writing on Gamasutra or WGA, recently went to elaborate on the downfall of Zynga but didn’t stop there; in what’s one of the most well-argued and insightful articles I’ve read on the subject, he analyzes the future of social gaming, what motivates players to cooperate and the next generation of social games that may be at our doorstep. He takes a look at the past and beyond that considers other media who have gone through a similar process and progress. It’s must-read material if you’re in any way interested in social mechanics and online, multiplayer games and crosses paths with many MMO-relevant issues. Really, you don’t wanna miss that one!

To tease you with just a few paragraphs –

“Social games do not bring people together. Most players in fact play them in a largely single-player fashion, making contact purely for reasons of necessity like trading, earning Energy and so on. Many have tried large multiplayer designs, and failed because the players were just not there. “

“Players play to achieve, to do, to build, to create, to explore, to destroy and to win. They need the game to provide them with a fascinating system which enables them to do all of those things, and usually for the game to also provide an absorbing fiction. This is as true for The Sims as for Skyrim. […]….You build to have something better to win with.”

“Aside from being free to play, the answer is advancement. Social contact in the context of games provides real value to players when it substantively helps them to win without tying that up in synchronous loops. In other words, to be worth it the contact needs to get me where I’m going, but without obliging me to turn up to do likewise. […] So play Journey. Play Realm of the Mad God. Get into a multiplayer server on Minecraft. Notice how they are about cooperation toward advancement? Notice the lack of obligation? Study that.”

“For G2 to be about true value, the game graph also has to be valuable. Connecting interested strangers produces much more game interaction than limiting it to just friends (such as Monstermind, which doubled its engagement rate in a day by connecting strangers). Players don’t really care about whether they are playing with their friends. They care about playing with others who can help them, and if that happens to be a friend then so much the better.”

“If Yahoo was “Search, Generation One” then Google was “Search, Generation Two”. The first generation was the one which became cluttered with all manner of complicated ambitions, poor performance and a whole load of “conventional wisdom” which often proved contradictory. Generation Two, on other hand, realised what mattered and delivered just that. A similar shift is what will make “Social Games, Generation Two” real.”

Of course, Tadgh doesn’t just drop the big, vague words such as “depth” to contemplate for the reader, but tackles what exactly constituted depth in the past, where contradictions lie and how future games may outgrow the formula – and really need to throw some of the classic tropes overboard. Needless to add how much of this resonates with me personally, namely that we shouldn’t cling to old formulas especially when they make no sense, or why I believe that more open, free-for-all and automated forms of cooperation are the way to go for future MMOs. Not because they’re meaningless but because they create opportunities for more without detriment to more casual cooperation.

In any case, it’s interesting times. While I agree the traditional AAA+ MMO is a dying breed already for financial reasons, I am not too worried about the future of (massive) multiplayer online gaming; it will continue to prosper, there will be variety and there will always be cooperation among players in some shape or form. The quality of community and cooperation has never been about server sizes and subscription numbers, either. There’s plenty more ahead, maybe in a different way, but I will always find games to play and enjoy myself with together with others. And that is all that counts.

[GW2] Tired of Trinity Whining. Or: As if!

So, the third and final GW2 beta weekend has ended and we could all be talking about how wonderfully achieved a race the Asura are, how Metrica Province or Rata Sum rock as zones or alternatively, how the Sylvari despite many initial misgivings, succeed at being a little more than just another translation of elf. I know – I was shocked too.

….Or we could do none of that. Instead, we could go on and whine about the missing roles and damned trinity in Guild Wars 2. Yeah we could keep bringing that up, again and again and again, like an obnoxious guest asking for burgers in an Italian restaurant. Some days I honestly feel with game designers and it’s not like I haven’t been an ardent critic of MMOs myself over the years. Three public betas past, I keep reading the same ignorant moping and fallacies by a vocal crowd of circus clowns on ANet’s official forums. The fact that many of them are drawing comparisons to WoW of all games, makes the whole thing all the more amusing, complete eyeroll that it is otherwise!

So, just for shits and giggles and because I feel like whining about whiners today, let’s have a look at some of the most missing-the-point, lalala-pink-pokémon-glasses and I-just-like-to-complain-about-something arguments! Here’s what the broken pro-trinity record has to say about GW2’s gameplay, roughly summarized:

a) No holy trinity means there is no cooperation anymore! *GASP*
b) No holy trinity means people do not coordinate / communicate in groups!
c) No holy trinity means zerg-mode and needing no strategy!
d) No holy trinity means there can’t be difficult combat!

There’s variations of the above, but it’s what whiners basically claim while glorifying WoW and prophesying the doom of GW2…already. Of course the holy trinity in itself has no direct bearing on any of the criticized points, however to realize that one needs to have a hard look at WoW – which is what I will do since people insist on bringing it up as role model. Note too, the big majority of whiny commenters refer to overall combat/cooperation in GW2, meaning questing and the FFA dynamic events. Precious few can currently claim group play experience beyond that or more in-depth knowledge about coordination in dungeons (especially exploration mode) or organized PvP. Here’s my reply to the popular arguments, since “wait and see?” didn’t really go far these previous betas –

As IF!

First off, as IF people communicated or cooperated much during questing in WoW! Where have you been the past 8 years? You can’t be referring to the WoW I have played. Some well-known, honest facts:

95% of all WoW players either solo quests or take their friends/guildies along. You don’t need any type of “strategy” to beat quests together, joining up is more about the social factor. There aren’t even many elite outdoor quests anymore or bosses that would require a group to beat. People don’t need to communicate and there’s nothing to coordinate when everyone already knows what their role is. Oh, and people don’t coordinate, let alone communicate in most LFG 5man runs either – but then you knew that already.
If “actively creating the party”, which usually comes down to clicking an invite button and waiting for the other side to accept it, equals good communication among strangers…well, you’re an easy one to satisfy!
You can progress with ease in WoW pushing the same 3-4 buttons, just in case anyone feels like bringing this up against GW2. Not that the “amount of buttons” is a great or very telling argument for or against anything, really…
If “zerging” equals “rushing into combat without the need for communication or coordination”, then zerging is what’s constantly being done in WoW, during questing and even 5man runs. Just because tanks tank, healers heal and DPS deal damage, doesn’t mean people are actively cooperating (or need wait on the tank for example) – rather, I would call it playing side by side, each role knowing their motions. There are synergies and there’s timing, both exist in GW2 as well. The holy trinity sees to that; it creates a basic order so players won’t have to think about assigning jobs or tactics much (outside raids) themselves. That’s hardly active cooperation or communication though – it’s a script! In fact the opposite, a free and versatile setup, requires strangers to coordinate and talk more if at all!

But hey, I’ll give you that – due to the lack of pre-defined roles, the combat in GW2 feels more chaotic, certainly is for quests and events. But errr…so what? Already I cooperate more in GW2 than I ever did in WoW: thanks to the FFA, auto-join events I have joined and helped out more strangers than I ever did while questing in WoW. I’ve had a chat with a few who shared a quest spot with me and several whom I rezzed or rezzed me in return (fat chance on that in WoW). I don’t claim any of this was particularly coordinated or difficult (maybe the events aren’t supposed to be particularly difficult, anyone?), but at least it’s a change from the usual silent, solo routine I used to have in WoW. Plus, where more people group up there’s always an unpredictable element. It’s a little cynical to criticize auto-join grouping or lack of roles when the opposite did nothing at all to improve matters in the past. As for kill stealing, mob camping and loot rolling – needless to say I haven’t missed them one second! That’s when having less communication is actually a good thing (/ninja /doom /ragequit).

The real strategic and demanding encounters aren’t out there in quests or trivial group content – not in WoW and not in GW2. Quests and events are simply not very hard right now and things like cooperation and coordination live and grow under duress. I would claim that GW2 requires teamwork and strategy where it matters, just like WoW does too; in harder/heroic dungeon modes and in big scale raids or PvP/WvW. If you think it’s all a zerg there you are mistaken. You need strategy and communication to bring the trophy home, to win against opposing teams or survive tough encounters. Teamwork is very much alive even if it works differently in GW2. Plus, the game adds other tactical components, such as the whole dodge/positioning mechanics and making use of the environment. I’ve beat several tougher challenges myself only because of active movement and tactical positioning which is rather great considering I play a caster in GW2 (typical feet-of-stone classes in other MMOs).

Getting facts and questions straight

Now, this post is no attempt to discourage any well-founded critique in favor of the holy trinity (ya rly); in fact, there are a few very interesting questions one could ask about GW2 in this context. For example how different group mechanics will truly be in a well-organized party, during a difficult run that requires a lot of communication. Once players assign roles/tasks in order to succeed and hence end up specializing, would we have to admit to a “soft trinity” in GW2? And where are the differences then to let’s say WoW or Rift? I can see a few but it’s definitely a valid overall question. So would be the question about how well control mechanics are realized in the game and if they make for enough encounter variety, in lieu of things like classic threat and mitigation mechanics.

Then, there’s simply those players who love to tank or heal and I certainly empathize with that – after all I used to love to heal myself! If you miss the holy trinity on that note, I have neither reproach nor consolation to offer because GW2 is a different game. And just like the F2P vs. subscription horse can be kicked to death, what it really comes down to here is preferences and target audience.

If you were however, like the individuals I addressed further up, to move the holy trinity on a pedestal for all the wrong, uninformed reasons, drawing faulty comparisons and even faultier conclusions about GW’s and MMO combat in general, then you have me for a very impatient and frankly ill-tempered commenter these days. I am really sick and tired of half-assed, destructive discourse that is so easy to refute it’s an intellectual insult. My biggest, returning gripe is mixing up role restrictions with things like encounter difficulty or pacing. Or in other words: if role restrictions are the one thing that makes your fights “hard” (likely because you already can’t find the right group composition…/sarcasm) that is sad news indeed!

The holy trinity creates no more or less demanding encounters than a non-trinity model would; all it does is enable patterns and offer mechanics to utilize in (boss-)encounters. And it tells players what their role is right away (hence the often referred to “crutch”). You can like that or not, that’s your prerogative – but the trinity does absolutely not just magically create better, active cooperation, coordination or communication…or alternatively other random words that start with “C”. And where one player sees ordered combat thanks to the trinity, I see boring same-ish strategies and synchronized swimming! Preferences – pros and cons, ya feel me?

To close, and so I can return to more pleasant topics tomorrow (with pictures!), let’s say it once more with feeling: The holy trinity does not a cooperation make. The holy trinity does not a communication make. The holy trinity does not a coordination make. The holy trinity does not an encounter’s difficulty make. If ever in doubt – go play World of Warcraft. Thanks!

Are Rift players the better people?

There’s the Carneval of the Ascended world event currently going on in Rift and having re-subbed a couple of weeks ago, I did of course jump into the whole affair while trying to remember how to play my old character. Out of a whim one night (and desperation), I decided to use general chat to get some guidance, not expecting much in terms of help on boring noob questions.

I was shocked to be proven so utterly wrong. Not only did I receive a perfect answer within the minute, I received several more tells from different people. My rusty thank-you muscles were sore afterwards. Surely that was first time luck though, some rare cosmic constellation working in mysterious ways! I had to try again.

And so I did, several more times over the coming weeks. Nothing changed. I was never ignored and never met with uncivil tongue though I must have offered plenty of temptation. Moreover, sometimes players would send me tells after 5 minutes, making sure I had actually received an answer to my problem, while a quicker player was still briefing me on more than I originally dared ask for –

What is it with these friendly, helpful Rift players???

Sadly, I am a complete stranger to this level of support. I gave up in WoW years ago and other MMOs that will even feature beginner channels (such as AoC), were just as big a disappointment. I can only begin to speculate why Rift’s community is so different – is it the cosier size? The numerous WoW quitters? The fresh air in Telara?

….Or do I just happen to find myself on a freak server? Whatever it is, I am duly impressed. Maybe the stars do have something to do with it after all, though; Kleps just ran into an outrageous bunch of Robin Hoods recently, in WoW of all places. If that’s not supernatural, I don’t know what is!

GW2 shop: Panic much?

So there’s been information or rather a few sneak-peeks of GW2 in-game shop items swarming the internet lately and not surprisingly this has stirred some controversy on webforums and blogs antsy for the game. Which is interesting to remark at this point: just how fast players sometimes go from oh yay to oh nay! Considering the fifty or so features that excite me about this MMO, it would hardly be good perspective (or proportion) to get all doomsday about the cash shop revelations. GW2 is free-to-play and everyone knew there was going to be RMT of some sort. Turns out ArenaNet are actually trying to put their own twist on this, too.

But first things first. Which items can we actually see on those screenshots? How do they potentially affect gameplay?

I) Cosmetic items:
To no surprise you’ll be able to purchase special outfits, hats, dyes and more in the shop.
So far, so good.

II) Convenience / commodity items:
Things like instant repair tools, portals, resurrection stones, bigger bags or EXP boosts.
They exist in pretty much every FTP MMO I have ever played, from Allods to Age of Conan. I’ve tried very hard to find indication of any seriously significant and game-changing items here and failed.

Convenience items are usually that: convenience items, not exclusive items. You can usually get the same deal by grinding or professions. Or then, if you are actually a very good or frequent player, you won’t need them. Look at experience or reputation boosts for example, these are hardly news in any MMO – when I re-subbed to Rift I got my fair share and so do WoW players these days. Blizzard does almost everything to make leveling up faster (or instant…ahem). Also: how significant are experience boosts in an MMO that features side-kicking, anyway?

So if anything, all these items offer choice: to level the usual way or a tad faster, to visit an NPC or not, to travel or take a short-cut (which are there in abundance, anyway). They cater to different play-styles. They are nowhere near pay-to-win.

III) Lottery items
Loot bags and special keys to chests that can be dropped by mobs or found elsewhere on the world.

The first is the type of random chance “carneval ticket” that only a group of players usually fall for. It’s a way to burn real coin for sure, but the randomness of it guarantees that you’ll likely end up with many duplicates or silly, trade items (in my case with nothing). We don’t know that anything of significance can drop here (I find it unlikely) or if the items will be soul-bound. I could imagine it to be similar to archeology rewards in WoW maybe.

The keys might present a bigger attraction, depending again on how rare the boxes are and what they potentially contain (anything exclusive?). There’s again the randomness factor. It reminds me of lockboxes in WoW that only the rogues could open; to tell you the truth, I vendored mine most of the time without even checking. I put them up on the AH a few times for little gold, but nobody wanted them. Whether the mystic boxes in GW2 will be the same type of gimmick or more serious business is complete speculation at this point. However, the mark of all lottery systems is actually that REALLY good and useful items are also REALLY rare! A lottery doesn’t look for winners.

“Bad and good items”; The cooperative lookout

A while ago I wrote a lengthy article on why I don’t consider RMT systems in FTP MMOs any more or less fair than traditional subscriptions and I hold to that opinion. As long as in-game shops deal in items of no greater consequence, I do not consider them a deal-breaker.

A “bad” cash-shop item needs to severely impact on the balance of gameplay; it needs to affect the outcome or success of end-game, be it in PVE or PvP, in a way that makes purchase an almost mandatory feature in order for groups and players to stay competitive. Items are however not bad just because they prevent l33t players from feeling special, as is often an underlying issue in such debates (not all, but often enough). Besides, I imagine a “true dungeon drop” would still be told apart from a cash-shop item and offer a degree of satisfaction or “fame” to a player who might desire it.

So yes, just to pursue hypothetical thought, I wouldn’t even mind if the GW2 cash-shop offered equal (not better) or almost equal weapons / gear to a dungeon drop! Too extreme for you? As GW veterans know and are happy to point out, gear progression is not the same deal in Guild Wars as it is in WoW for example. Once you’ve obtained your dungeon tier items, there won’t be an endless curve of upgrades but only similar gear with different stat weighting. In PvP, gear even gets leveled to focus on performance and not gear differences between teams.

I love this focus on performance and how the overall theme of GW2 seems to be cooperation, rather than segments and segments of “players with better stats” at endgame. There are numerous ways in which ArenaNet push player cooperation rather than disparity or “distance” –

The side-kicking feature and dynamic leveling / quests, events
The missing role restrictions / enforced holy trinity
The connected home cities / starting areas

If a player bought his gear with real money for whatever reason, time or other, how would it harm cooperation or competitive outcome in GW2? I can’t think of any good reason to be worried. Even less so for stuff like convenience items or lottery boxes – and these are what we’re talking about for the moment! Not only are they not mandatory, but they really do not affect me as someone uninterested in most. Besides, items are not accomplishments in themselves, even if they usually go with reward (but they’re not in fact what makes a reward).

Seems to me the entire concept behind GW2 makes pay-to-win a very unlikely scenario. As long as there is no more and different information on the RMT items, it’s a little early to tell the color of the cash-shop’s underpants.

Where are the Orcs in Guild Wars 2?

Just in time with my private life going back to normal (adjusting took a little longer than expected but hey, new apartment is shiny!), the NDA of the GW2 closed beta was lifted and so I’ve spent the past few days catching up on all the juicy details on what’s no doubt the most anticipated MMO of 2012. I was somewhat disappointed at the material on youtube, but some of the written reviews were able to bring back the proverbial ants in my pants! Facing such a flood of informational tidbits, it’s hard to decide on what news were the most exciting – to me it is probably the confirmation of many anticipated features that bloggers have already been discussing or hoping for for months now.

Let me say once more that I love love love the cross-profession combos, they sound every bit as cool as I hoped they would! Then, there is confirmation that using terrain will indeed affect the outcome of combat (for example you can use a boulder nearby to your advantage). Questing is supposedly a lot less grindy and yes, less kill-ten-rats than ever. I just want to believe that for now. There’s the intriguing “downed” combat state that appears to be a lot more fun in practice than it sounded on paper. There’s the way equipped weapons affect your key abilities which will greatly add to tactical gameplay.

Most of all though, there are finally firsthand experiences on the cooperative aspect of Guild Wars 2; I was very happy to find reviewers confirm that every class could self-heal easily enough and that grouping up is a non-issue for any group setup. Some people still doubt that GW2 will manage without any holy trinity, but I actually do – and if there’s ever going to be more “dedicated” healing or tanking going on in a specific encounter, it will probably be a situation in which everyone must take turns or decides on a random player. It won’t be that classes are associated with fixed roles though.

All in all, awesome news on the combat front for someone like me. I believe that longterm Guild Wars 2 will rise and fall over its battle for me personally, on mid- and end-level / PvP. This is really where I need to see big changes, the way classes and groups can play together dynamically, cooperate and find different solutions to the same challenge. ArenaNet has promised us a lot in this department, they really need to improve, innovate and hit the ball home. I can’t help but think back to their instructional pages on combat from long ago, where they first lit the spark and also took a not-so-subtle yet brilliant dig at the most popular MMORPG to date, namely World of Warcraft –

(click to enlarge)

Now, we all know that there are no Orcs in Guild Wars 2; we also know which popular concerns of WoW are being presented in each comic frame – the lack of role flexibility and heavy gear focus, the holy trinity, the lack of “world” and impact therein. ArenaNet intends to do better on all accounts and make the Orcs a symbol of days past – something not to be found in their upcoming MMORPG.

And yet, it all sounds a little too good to be true. I can’t help but worry, the closer we get to open betas and the long overdue launch; so much waiting has gone before GW2, so many genre lovers’ eyes worldwide are fixed on this blockbuster title. All the high expectations – it’s filling me with dread. Who can possibly fulfill that many big wishes? As more and more information will be released over the coming, unbearable weeks and months, the ultimate question will grow: where will GW2 fall short? Where will it disappoint and fail to deliver on its promises?

Where will be the “Orcs” in Guild Wars 2?

I’m curious about the prime concerns currently out there among all the antsy veterans. I admit that the beta reviews did not dispel all my doubts and that there were a couple of things I found concerning among the clips and summaries I’ve come across. But more on that in a follow-up post on my current GW2 concerns. If you’re already down with your own, now’s the time to share them!

Precious Time-outs

Ironyca has published another fascinating chapter in her series on social interaction and dynamics in MMOs few days ago. If you haven’t come across her blog until now, I strongly recommend you step by sometime for some great and insightful reads.

One core argument against realID and in favor of invisible alts, is of course that social interaction cannot be forced on people the way Blizzard seem to think. Or as Ironyca puts it in her article: “I think this is social engineering gone wrong, the leash is too tight.” If you want people to form social bonds, you need to allow for that to happen naturally. Players need to be able to choose their own time of when to get closer or withdraw from one another. Good relationships are about free will.

Now, I am the first person to criticize MMOs that allow “too much” player self-sufficiency and soloplay; because there are plenty of examples in both real and virtual worlds of how cooperation fades as soon as individualism and independence increase. Human beings might be social creatures, or as the saying goes “no man is an island”, but I have always been a little skeptical of that (or rather, I see it the utilitarian way). Personally, I think there is a lot more truth in another phrase: “in times of need, we are all brothers”. The way western society has gone with increasing wealth and how it takes traumatic catastrophes to bring people closer together nowadays, is proof of that. Therefore, I want MMOs to enforce cooperation by means of need – need for grouping in order to advance.

Still, there is no way I’d ever support an MMO that disallows privacy: the privacy to roll another character, to break lose from an existing social bond or guild. It is not a developers business to dictate who you roll with or that you shouldn’t get some peace and space from others when you require it. Sometimes you need to unwind alone from the day – that’s what MMOs are there for, too. And it can be awkward getting haunted by guild tells, asking you to switch over because they’ve just lost a guy or nosing about. You should be able to decide when you want to engage in the cooperative part of the game and when you don’t. It doesn’t help your relationships if you are guilt-tripped into switching characters or pressured to tell somebody ‘No‘ – even if that’s something you have every right to do. Yet, sometimes we are just not up for questions, justifications and potential misunderstandings.

Why disappearing benefits relationships

Being able to withdraw from social circles isn’t only important because of free will and quality interaction though; there is a beneficial and invigorating aspect in taking time off – which is why it is such a shame that it should be such a difficult thing to admit and ask for.

A few years ago, a close friend of mine got married and became a father twice, soon after. We used to see each other almost weekly and our friendship has always been of a rare and precious nature. We are also geeks of an uncanny kind. It was something we cherished and missed dearly once he got sucked into family and work life so completely (plus I moved further away). It got very quiet between us for several years; not a good time for either. I respected the life-altering changes and new responsibilities on his side but at the same time I worried too, not simply for selfish reasons. From the little I still heard, he was often sick, increasingly worn out and weary. He had no place of his own, no space to recharge his batteries. I’m very sure that such thoughts alone made him feel guilty – after all he was a father now and provider of a family. He was the guild leader.

It took several years of just being there, waiting (nagging) ever so quietly in the background, hoping for his return. Making sure he always knew that door was still open. It also finally took one hefty argument on the phone, which I still recall perfectly, when my patience finally broke and I shouted at him (and my shouts are pretty frightening, I hear) that he needed to allow himself something of his own sometime. He had become a shadow of his former self (with a serious health condition developing).

And so gradually, things started to improve. We arranged for regular meet-ups again that would not be postponed or changed for anything. The time together, away from everyday life, became an established island that he would grant himself, a break-out from routine. He realized that it was something he needed – not just for himself, but for his family too. Getting away just for a day or two, having something for himself, infused him with energy that would in return benefit his loved ones. He’d get home fresh and inspired, longing to see his kids. He’d be a less tired, more attentive, happier dad and husband. More whole a person. He found his healthy balance and things have changed a great deal ever since, for which I am very thankful.

We need to allow ourselves these spaces; we need to allow ourselves to go invisible. Not just because we need to escape, but because it actually makes our most important relationships in life better, not worse. There’s nothing wrong in wanting to catch your breath for a while, to put things in perspective and return with a vengeance. Withdrawing does not always mean we want to get away from somebody, for good. All it means is that we need to withdraw for our own sake, for a while. It’s not a proof of broken relationships.

This is something we need to learn claim for ourselves without guilt, and learn to tell others if required. It’s also why realID or no secret alts in MMOs are frankly bogus, creating issues for no good reason.

A good weekend to all of you out there – the visible and invisible! I am off to disappear myself for the next few days, as I am finally leaving these shores and transferring my existence some 150 kilometers down southwest. It just so happens that my aforementioned friend is going to be my “neighbor” two days from now! I will be back as soon as internet is up and running again. Toodles!

On difficulty in WoW and social control in MMOs

The following article is a follow-up to this topic by Klepsacovic. For full context, please head there first (including comments). I would like to second his clarifications on using (relative and problematic) terms such as ‘good/top’ or ‘bad/sub-par’ players for the second half of this argument. No player is always just good or bad and good players always benefit from the presence of someone a little weaker.

Difficulty in WoW for the average player, lvls 1-80

On social control in MMORPGs

Admittedly, I have omitted one more lesson of WoW’s current “difficulty syllabus” in the above picture: heroics. If we look at the stark discrepancy between WoW’s leveling game from 1-84 vs. the huge step-up of entering a serious raiding scene, we must give credit to the implemented bridge between the two. In theory, WoW players are supposed to stick to this schedule:

5-man dungeons and heroics are the “gate-keeper” to raiding; or at least that’s how it’s intended. At the very latest, this is when a new player is introduced to cooperative group-play. Here he is pushed to learning his class and role, here he is questioned, here he is geared up for the challenges ahead. Here he understands the importance of strategy and communication before class is dismissed.…If only!

No matter how Blizzard have tried to hard-tune their raid-entry dungeons in Cataclysm, heroics do not fulfill their assigned role as necessary stepping stone between noobland and the unforgiving reality of many raid encounters. Getting into a raid is relatively easy, but many are ill prepared for the individual challenge and pressure that awaits. For guilds and recruitment this means a big crowd of potential candidates with the barest pre-selection.

For one thing, there are too many ways in which players can avoid challenging and maybe stressful/frustrating 5-man runs (for example by gearing up in other ways). More importantly though: in an MMO with cross-server LFG no reliable means of player selection or preparation exist. The purpose of the training phase is undermined in a game of anonymity. Here’s why:

Let’s have another look at yes – vanilla WoW. Back then, we had 5-mans too at lvl 60 and hard ones they were (hello Stratholme 1.0 & Co.). We didn’t have heroics, normal modes were bad enough. Gear was important and there were no ways around acquiring your starter raid-gear (8-piece sets on random drop!) from in there. Then, there were also attunements and resistance gear which kept sending you back in frequently, not just for yourself but those you were trying to help out.For the MC raidguild looking at a potential, ready-looking candidate at the time, this meant the following: not only had this person leveled from 1-60, he had also jumped all hoops in order to gain entry and had made it through all essential lvl 60 dungeons (many times) to gather his gear sets. More so, he had succeeded in finding/organizing and finishing runs with groups of your own server continuously. If you hadn’t heard of said player in negative terms up to that point, if he wasn’t on any spoken or unspoken blacklist by that time, there was a pretty good chance that this was your guy! Even if not quite that – at the very least, there was full confirmation of this player being incredibly motivated and experienced enough to raid.

There are no similar pre-raiding hoops in today’s WoW and heroic gear tells us very little about a player. Maybe he is a complete fail who only ever made it by jumping from one LFG group to the next while being an anonymous ass, ninja-looter, rage-quitter. Who knows – you certainly don’t! Who can say how somebody behaves in a cross-server group? Who can judge how well a player truly performed in order to gain his gear? Even if he let himself carry (or cooked his dinner during runs), he certainly didn’t need worry about not being re-invited to a next group (as tank/healer within the next 5 minutes). No social pressure – no social control.

We need the concept of social control for functional communities. We need the dynamic of reputation. We need small enough server communities for social interaction to become meaningful and transparent. We need consequences. The last thing we need is anything cross-server or bigger. Guilds and smaller groups don’t benefit from quantity, they benefit from quality.And so does the individual player, by the way; black sheep aside, it’s not exactly fun to be the “weak link” in a raid guild. It’s not a nice awakening to realize you are ill prepared. It’s disappointing and stressful to end up in a place too early. In a game of unforgiving raid mechanics (which is the situation I base this argument on), you want and need proper hoops early.

How I became a different person
I used to be the raider who loved vanilla raids for being 40man; the scale, the epic kills and also the hilarious chaos (and challenge to order the same). I loved being part of a mixed crowd and running raidguilds that had colorful characters in them. I liked having merry minstrels and jokers along for the ride, to share good moments and laughs on our way.I liked being able to afford “clowns” in our raids.I was never a l33t player and I don’t consider myself “hardcore”, despite having always been a core member and healing coordinator in dedicated top guilds. Fame, loot and kills are all nice and dandy, but I want to share them with good folks and have fun together. I want both, the close-knit team and serious raids. If this means I need to cut back on the first and heroic kills in order to have that – fine in my books (as long as I still experience most of the content). I don’t seek the affirmation that comes from being nummero uno on a ladder, nice as it may be. I frankly also never wanted more than three raid nights.The guilds I ended up in (founded in vanilla & early TBC), were therefore more or less always composed the same way:

20% top players & figureheads / 60% average & good players (wide spectrum) / 20% players you’d carry more frequently, but who’d in return bring other qualities and talents to the table. I’m fine with such a guild and for myself, ideally I want all three groups present.

You need the top players; you need them to pull and push the group. You need them to be your guides, guild leaders, coordinators and analysts. You need them too because very often, they’re simply the consistent show-ups with the most time available (which is why they make great guides or leaders).
You need the solid good players who are dedicated but down to earth; You need them for a healthy, balanced guild culture that is neither too casual, nor too hardcore. You need them to be the pendulum that swings in between. They are your main executive force.
You need the sub-par players; You need them for social qualities, for wisdom and humor that may be indispensable and unique. You need them so your top players get their occasional extra challenge and feel needed. You also need them because somebody always needs to be the weakest link – it’s better to know yours than to constantly look for a new one.

I don’t wish to be in a guild where every person is exactly like me (despite a healthy narcissism, that’s just boring). Nor do I mind slower learners or players who simply fail at the odd mechanic, and those who might fall behind a little due irregular playtime – as long as you can compensate for them somehow during specific encounters. (Assuming of course that they’re otherwise awesome).

Only, this gradually stopped being the case in WoW after the 40man era. Encounters became highly technical, focused on individual performance and unforgiving in ways that wouldn’t let us make up for lower bracket players – there was suddenly a hard line that wasn’t summary. We could only stand by and watch with increasing frustration as they went through the motions, again and again. We became helpless spectators of our guildmates’ ordeals, despite all guidance given. Worse: they started to become the “enemy”. If 100+ wipes into a boss, the same few people are still stuck at beginner mistakes, it’s human to start feeling resentful.I never wanted to become that other person or find myself in that well-known dilemma of so, so many raidguilds out there. But if I am pushed into the corner of choosing between keeping the bad player and not seeing larger parts of the game’s content in time (which was my motivation to play WoW at all) – then yes, I want the bad players out! I even want established people out who I used to appreciate and tried to support for as long as possible (my guilds have always tried longer than many would). I will make the unhappy choice if forced to; I won’t see an entire raidguild fall apart because the other 80% (and especially top 20%) will start looking elsewhere some time into the stagnation. Hesitating forever is not an option. If you’ve tried all you feel you could and if you intend to stick to the established raiding pace, you must make the choice as a leading team.

It’s no wonder so many good leaderships crack under the pressure of this decision; it sucks beyond comparison (add the issue of recruitment). It will always be one of the big sores for me when looking back on an otherwise great raiding run in WoW. It cured me of being too judgmental about how some guild leaders will act, too (“wear my shoes and see”).Sometimes raidguids change their original philosophy because they are catching the “success bug”; it’s a dangerous place to find yourself in, the upwards spiral of success that many fall for, becoming something else, someone else, forgetting how they started off and with whom. I fully acknowledge this problem. But what we experienced like so many others from the 25man era on, was not of our making; it’s nothing you choose, only what you roll with as good as you can.

To this day, I am deeply resentful; resentful of Blizzard, of the game’s later raid designs that presented my own guild with such a reality. I resent them for putting the focus on the weaker players, without any chance for the rest to step in and make a difference. I resent them for cornering us – for making us choose like this, again and again as the game took its course. Most of all, I resent them for making me that different person. A person with less and less tolerance for team diversity.

What is fairness?

Addendum

Much in this argument is relative, depending on your own personal approach to an MMO like WoW. Maybe you’re the type of raider who wants to be in zero-tolerance guilds and who has always managed to keep clear of such problems. Maybe you’re not even interested in raids. However, for a big number of “mid-bracket raiders” that form the majority in WoW’s endgame and who are in constant competition for recruits, the missing pre-selection mechanisms and highly unforgiving raid mechanics on individual level, are presenting a real struggle and dilemma. There is also the added pressure of the ever-looming next content patch.

The game did not start off like this; raid teams had more leeway, partly due to the nature of bigger 40man raids, partly due to different encounter design. And while many asked for a more even share of responsibility and target focus after WoW 1.0., I don’t believe that Cataclysm raiders benefit from today’s very different situation – no matter what player group they belong to in their own guild. It’s the broken overall streamlining of difficulty combined with a lack of social control that impact negatively on everybody. They present today’s raidguilds with greater struggles than ever, logistically as much as socially and emotionally.

The curious case of SWTOR and LFG

Imagine yourself the type of player who loathes the dungeon finder for many reasons; most of which can probably be summed up by “single-most detrimental feature to social interaction in MMOs” or “what really sent WoW’s community downhill”. Imagine yourself the player who would rather wait for the proper group (and go do other things), who’d rather start his own groups by taking initiative in zone/general chats, who’d rather re-think his role choice (in an MMO that enforces a trinity), look for a guild or form one himself, before seeing this type of feature implemented in his favorite MMO. If you’re not that type of player: imagine it anyway. Imagine yourself as someone like me.

In no conceivable MMO-future could I picture myself among those who actively ask for LFG; that would just be utterly bizarre. Unthinkable. Outrageous.

Or wouldn’t it?

Oh, teh irony…!

For several weeks now, I have kept an eye on my co-bloggers currently immersed* in the worlds of SWTOR, commenting among other things on the absence of LFG in the game. The thing that increasingly made me raise an eyebrow was the number of players calling it a grave oversight while blogging from the “MMO veteran corner”. Certainly not to be expected – what’s going on there?

The answer is frankly making my heart bleed. For most discussions, the bottom line is this paraphrased (also see one very recent example for this dynamic at Rohan’s):

“SWTOR being the type of solo-centric / solo-friendly MMO that it is, those players who usually look to group up frequently are left with not enough opportunities to do so. On a server where the majority of players are content to solo (alternatively stick to micro-groups) or use NPC companions, the traditional MMO player is faced with a gaping silence. The same crowd who used to condemn LFG is starting to require it.”

Now, I don’t know how the situation is on every server. Nor do I claim to know how much of that felt lack of opportunity is actual lack of own initiative. Still, I can clearly see a problem for grouping-friendly players in an MMO that does not enforce cooperation; I think it can be expected too that with much lower overall numbers, finding suitable players for grouping during the same playtime as your own, is taking a big hit no matter how great your initiative (which can be expected to some degree if we still assume a player of a more oldschool persuasion). Especially in a game that still clings to certain group setup.

…With that, the remaining players are left with the wish (or rather: resignation) for LFG, lest they not miss so much of the group content and dungeon runs while leveling up. How deeply cynical is that? How completely upside down!

And once more, we must recognize how the old, non-chalant claim of “just play the game the way you like” or “it doesn’t affect you, just ignore it” is utter humbug. HUMBUG folks!

A couple of post scripta

P.S.: This is in no way a jab at anyone who enjoys soloing in SWTOR; Bioware obviously intended the game to work this way and at least some are having fun. Whoever is not, can only do the obvious thing and stop paying (and write rants on it).
P.S.(2): LFG still sucks. An MMO that makes types like me wish for LFG must therefore suck even more. Sodom and Gomorrah!
P.S.(*): Raph Koster actually says that immersion is for dreamers (ha-ha). I guess he’s enjoying SWTOR then! /sarcasm off
P.S.(3): I wasn’t looking to bash SWTOR in this article. But I guess it happened anyway.
P.S.(4): I will continue to bash MMOs I am not playing (and those I am playing) on this page and there’s nothing you can do about it. Objectivity is all about erm…distance. ^^
P.S.(5): Yeah, sarcasm wasn’t really /off there. I lie. Sometimes.