MMO Hijinks (APB Edition)

(Image from GameHavoc)

There's a lot to be said about MMOs on and incoming to the market today. For that reason I'm starting a labelled series for my little monologues regarding them. There's no key unifying theme, no single line of thought or approach, but thoughts from one seem to bleed into the other, so grouping them together seems an apt idea.

Realtime Worlds is in a whole world of trouble. All Points Bulletin, their big flagship project released back in June, siphoned the life out of them to the point of 'administration' (a.k.a. bankruptcy). Some interesting reading is featured in an ex-developer's blog posts, composed of not one, not two, but three parts, with claims of a tying conclusion to follow. The scope of Luke Halliwell's musings well exceed what I had personally observed through the on-going development, testing and eventual releasing of All Points Bulletin.

A little upon my experiences with All Points Bulletin. I do freely admit that I had fallen prey to the hype and marketing of APB. Inherently that is not such a bad thing. To be thoroughly excited for a product is a non-issue if the product delivers upon expectations. Through beta testing, while marred by some significant issues (that are irrelevant at this stage), a lot of my hopes were decently fulfilled. I in fact would have purchased it if there was a server center in my region of the world. Unfortunately this was not the case.

Luke discusses a lot about the internal corporate issues that stifled APB development. A nutshell take is that the big business structure for what was a little company was an ill suited fit that contributed to inefficiency. This is all of course locked away from the prying consumer eye. The only issue with the developer that I have personally witnessed (and could possibly have encountered) is a seeming lack of connection between the community and the developers. I had personally emailed official RTW support on multiple occasions with mannered queries, but never obtained any response. Forums were well alive, but the forum community managers only really involved themselves deeply when the payment-model bombshell dropped on the community.

And how devastating that payment model was. While any reasonable and rational consumer would expect (and thus not mind) a pay-to-play model, the developers had built up beliefs for a buy-to-play approach. While in the strictest sense, it was 'possible' for a player to play the game without regular payment, any core content would needed to be earned through very successful player-market engagement. To call APB plausibly 'buy-to-play' in the long term is like calling EVE Online 'buy-to-play'. Possible but anything but definitive.

With the community up in arms about the nickel-and-dime payment for a game called 'buggy' and 'unfinished' by the critcs within the testing community, we all foresaw a rough landing. Launch day rolled by, and the community's lukewarm reception was what started this dangerous trek to where Realtime Worlds and All Points Bulletin stands now.

It's very disappointing. An ambitious game if there ever was one, dying faster than any of the other lackluster and derivative MMOs. What does this serve to tell the industry? That WoW-clones die, but not nearly as fast as something original and creative? That developers should stick to tried and trusted formulae than invent their own? These are what the many may see and assume on face-value, and are of course the wrong lessons to learn. APB's consumer support died because of a terrifying community mishap, and their ability to rectify it was muddled by a 'too much bureaucracy, too soon' within the developer. I'm not trying to defend APB to be a stellar game, for it is flawed on various degrees, but it held legitimate, good ideas. To die so soon, it shouldn't happen - at least not like this.

So we meet again.

Back from a terrible writing grave, it's Wiener, bringing you a little something today.

Having spent a lot of time on Star Craft II as of late, the competitive spirit runs deep in my veins. Skilled or proficient, I am not, but between the brooding nature of laddering and the many tournaments that have been on (Intel Extreme Masters in Cologne, MLG and right now GOMtv's TG-Intel StarCraft II Open), there's a lot of game to be played and to be watched.

Speaking of MLG and competitive gaming, the Razer Onza - a third party Xbox 360 controller, has been banned from competitive play by MLG.

While I'm not particularly interested in the direct ramifications for Razer's first foray into console peripherals, it does pose an interesting issue. How should unconventional technologies be treated in the competitive scene? It was the Onza's auto-fire capabilities that largely outlawed it from MLG play, but for the PC scene, keyboard macros, even mouse macros are analogous if not superior in function. Are these functions severe to the point that they are unsuitable for a competitive league?

The degree of customization and programming that can fit behind some of these macro buttons is quite impressive. While the cheaper, simpler versions on keyboards or mice can only manage a key press or two, most premium products offer a much more precise experience. They can offer programming for a timed sequence of any number button presses that is fully reproducible with each use of the macro. Some even allow for mouse movement, which can prove valuable for bread-and-butter motions like rocket-jumping. It becomes a science, allowing (near) inhuman execution of actions.

Some argue that such technology is widely available, and that choosing not to utilize it is merely a waste of what is considered the new standard. Others also say that it takes as much skill to prepare and code a macro. Yet others rationalize their macro use by only using recorded macros - that which they can physically perform, to eliminate the advantage of computer-perfect timing. Their opponents cry foul by stating that macros are the most obvious inequality between players, which is only too often rebutted by what would have been the rift of disadvantage during transitions between ball mice to optical mice, and later, optical mice to laser mice. All these arguments are thrown around heatedly in discussion of competitive play.

In the end, I cannot definitively say that these technologies should be made illegal in all competitive scenes. For an 'as-equal-as-possible' approach that console tournaments (e.g. MLG) uphold, third party products are perhaps very jarring. On the other hand, the PC competitive scene has, for a long time, allowed players to find what input devices are most suitable for them. It's unorthodox for a PC tournament to disallow personal choice of headphones, keyboards or mice.

However, that is not to say I approve of complex macros in competitive games. The programming behind it offloads the responsibility, and the actions required, for the player using them. A person reliant on perfectly coded macros to play a game properly, to win competitively, is a person who innately does not have the skill to play or win the game. You strip the player of his special equipment, and he cannot perform. A player who practices traditional, physical execution of all his moves can perform his best even without such equipment.

Personally, I don't think I'll ever make heavy use of macros. However, you'll never catch me off guard with a mouse that doesn't have a 'reload' key bound to its side. It's a fine line we walk, but my conscience rests easy. Even if it means I lose StarCraft II matches like no tomorrow.

Hail to the King

One thing I can and will say though...

Always Bet On Duke.

(Image from Shacknews)

See you on the other side of my little hiatus!

Series of Unforseen Circumstances

So, dear readers, you may have noticed a sharp decline in blog posts recently.

Let me explain myself. A whole host of wonderful games, and a not-so-wonderful, but still very engaging MMO beta has been draining time from my schedule. In addition, my extraneous work agenda has also been billowing like a smoke grenade set off in a paper bag. For that, I will promise a post by month's end. Perhaps a bit earlier, but don't hold your breath.

 - Wiener