Enough with the (solo) quest hubs

Enough with the (solo) quest hubs

A Companion Piece to “Of Augury and Speculation”

Musing on Massively Multiplayer Games

Note: This is the companion piece to my 30-Jan, MMORPG.com article. There is a second companion piece to this series located at, “what have we lost to solo play?”

In a recent post, I queried “what have we lost to solo play?”  My premise in that article was that building our game worlds around solo-based quest hubs has trivialized the MMO worlds and led us to a series of parallel solo-play games.  Feedback from the article has been quite strong, my thanks to everyone who read the article and an extra dose of thanks to those who commented (good and bad).

Detractors for the column assumed I wanted to see games return to camping, most likely due to my references to Everquest.  That, though, is a mistaken assumption.  I rarely camped in EQ (my group did nightly dungeon circuits, not sit in one room sessions) and I would rather not change one limited premise (quest hubs) for another (camping).  The second mistaken assumption regarding my last post was that I didn’t want to see soloing in MMO’s.

That’s also an error, soloing is a necessary thing in the modern MMO.  There is a place for soloing, sometimes we can’t find a group, sometimes we won’t be on long enough to participate in a group, and sometimes we just want some alone time.  I get it.  Soloing is important – but soloing should not be the dominant and encouraged playstyle in a multiplayer game.  On top of that, soloing should not be the only path for advancement and no, being able to group up to steamroll trivial quests is not a reasonable alternative.  Everquest II offers a good tale of the best and worst of game expansion design.

In Echoes of Faydwer, the players had solo quest hubs as an advancement path across the entire game world.  There were also, though, solid dungeons that took you across the same level range.  On top of that you had a number of raid quality targets as well.  Whether you liked to solo, group, or multi-group, EoF had a path for you.  Win-win-win.  Then came Ruins of Kunark and a new direction.  Now, you really needed to finish the solo story line to get the faction to take advantage of the game.  Rather than three spheres, RoK was built on the more typical WoW model.  First you solo to the end, then you find a group, then when you tap out grouping you go multi-group.   Realistically, no one is happy in that model.  Group players chafe at being forced to play through the solo grind.  Soloists are left feeling like they only get to complete Act 1 of a three Act play because the good stuff starts when they end.  Raiders simply find a way to bypass the content so they can get to the game they want to play.  Lose, lose, lose.

There are things we can do to build better worlds for our MMO’s.  Things which cultivate solo, group and multi-group game play equally.  Some of these things are already out there, but are not yet MMO staples.  As I work through this column, you will see references to great ideas already out there in MMO’s.  Sometimes I will simply offer an existing feature, but oft times I will extend on an existing feature.  In a few cases, I will offer ideas that I have yet to see placed in an MMO.  I am also interested in what you think – I can’t possibly have run the gamut of all the ways to promote varied game play.  Step up to the comments and place your ideas out there for us to all see and discuss.

My goal in this series is to offer game design ideas that promote social, emergent game play.  In using the term emergent, I emphasize direction and narrative which arises as you play, not paths that are pre-ordained.  Additionally, I reference the definition of emergent that refers to “arising casually or unexpectedly.”  I recognize that players will create a golden path, or ideal set of steps, through the game world (I’m guilty of this myself).  It’s fine to offer one, but you don’t want to go so far that your game world turns into a series of treadmills, with players running one mill until a meter fills and then hopping to the next mill.

Things we can do about solo quest hubs

In this section, I want to examine alternatives to solo-quest hubs as the dominant core to world design.  To summarize my points from my last column, designing your world in this manner leads to watered down encounters and reinforces the static nature of the world.  Playing repetitive content where your actions produce little or no discernible results is the primary ingredient to perception of grind.

Lair monsters circumvented by technology

Only in a massively multiplayer game would the deadliest, most dangerous of monsters be thwarted by technology easily circumvented by a squirrel

Solo instances – I am not opposed to soloing, but I do believe we are building our worlds backwards.  Our game worlds are sanitized and generally safe, with all the dangerous stuff tucked nicely behind instance walls or in fenced in lairs.  I think that should be reversed.  The game world should be deadly and dangerous (with the players having escape options) and the safer, solo stuff should be placed in instances.  There are clearly things a hero can do alone – build content for that.  This could be the mission builder idea of Anarchy Online, the story instances of Star Wars: the Old Republic, or player generated missions such as those found in Star Trek Online or the forthcoming Neverwinter (or all of the above).  Put the player into solo instances as a regular option for game play.  The content can be better tuned and the player can be given elements of choice and conclusion in the process.

Mercenaries – This idea made its first appearance in Guild Wars, but variants of it exist currently in Star Wars: the Old Republic, Final Fantasy XI, Everquest and Pirate 101.  Similarly, Lord of the Rings Online does something a bit like this with Skirmishes which are instanced content.  You should need a friend to play in the harsh world, but that friend could be sitting in your backpack.  Build classes around roles, but for solo play offer complementary role NPC’s.  Provide some scripting/macro type options similar to that used in Dragon Age: Origins.  Build your outdoor world under the assumption that small groups are the norm, but use mercs as an option for the solo player to get some stuff done in that world while reinforcing development of their role skills.

Research or Concentration – One of the biggest reasons we started down the quest hub path is the fear of being left behind.  “I couldn’t xp as often as my group,” or “I’m not always available when they play” quickly leads to “give me solo options.”  Eve solves this problem handily with off-line leveling and that’s a mechanic that could make headway in an MMO.  Provide a research/concentration path.  Whenever your player is offline or engaged in non-adventuring adventuring (diplomacy for instance), a practice skill can be pressed forward.  When that research objective is completed (time based), the player gets an XP reward to their adventuring experience.

Good Bye Static Quest Hub World, Hello Believable World

Here’s a dirty little secret, a static world isn’t a horrible thing.  I live in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the United States, but I was born and grew up in a very small town.  In that town, jobs are performed by the same people for decades.  When they retire or die, those jobs are assumed by their children or relatives.  If it is true that small towns recycle people in an advanced economy it is likely even more true in a pre-industrial fantasy world or even a rural sci-fi outer rim environment.  There is a reason for the timeless French saying, “plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose,” (the more things change the more they stay the same).

One problem with our current quest design is that too many quests are built around the things that should change, not the things that should not. When we complete a world-changing event and nothing changes, it reinforces the artificial nature of that world.  Similarly when we complete a non-changing event and the world then changes in that we can’t repeat what is logically repeatable; it also reinforces our perception of the artificial.  My point here is embrace the static – if something in a world is logically relatively static, let it be.  If something is not, don’t turn it into a treadmill event.

A related problem is the isolated nature of our game worlds.  In our real world, very few people live in isolation.  Most are involved and interdependent on others.  Humans are social animals and not just because we clump together in villages and towns.  Interaction between world elements is a good way to make the game world feel more realistic and it opens the door to types of tasks and activities naturally suited to solo play.

Logical static quests with dynamic solo moments  - That trapper out in the woods who needs five bear hides, what’s he going to do with them?  Bundle them up, haul them to a trade hub and exchange them.  After that?  He’s going to do it all over again.  That’s a good static, repeatable quest.  Actually there are two static, repeatable quests if you also haul off the goods.  Three if the merchant who takes the delivery has a return package.  Having the same trapper only take five and then never talk to you again?  That’s artificial.  Don’t make that a one-off quest, make it an emergent event.  Help him out on whatever step as often as you wish.  Invoke some diminishing returns if it is repeated too often in a set time window.  Heck, if you really want to have fun with this, tie in the diminishing returns to how often this quest has been completed in total (not just by the player).

Captured by Vampires?  Pass

Look, I can see you are captives of these vampires. This guy beside me suggests that things will go badly for you. Sadly, I have already saved my quota of civilians today. I’ll check back in eighteen hours, mkay? Call me, maybe?

Stop with the sociopathic design elements – So, we were playing Wizard 101 with our little girl. We ran into a fairly typical quest: rescue five fairies.  After a few minutes, she came to understand what to look for to identify a trapped fairy.  We rescued our five fairies, turned in the quest and got the rewards.  Sounds familiar, right?  After turning in our rewards, our daughter promptly went to save the next trapped fairy she saw.  When she could no longer save the fairies, it confused the heck out of her.  And it should – that’s totally illogical and just a wee bit sociopathic to abandon those in need of help simply because a check-list event has been completed.

Look, if the local villains are routinely imprisoning the local town-folk, saving those town folk should be an always on quest.  On top of that, we shouldn’t need to find a quest starter to begin helping.  The very first one you find (and save) should trigger the event/quest.  It should be available as long as the tension between those two NPC factions exists (e.g. forever in a typical MMO).

Social Lore– Vanguard: Saga of Heroes gave us Diplomacy, which needs to make an recurring appearance in the MMO.  Diplomacy, for those unfamiliar, is a collectible card game characters play with NPC’s.  Rewards range from treasure, to new quest lines, to a conceptually interesting levers and switches meta game within each city hub (pitting one faction of a town against another).  Beyond being a good single player game, Social Lore opens the door to better quest writing.  Only in MMO world do people simply dump a few paragraphs of lore into general conversations and requests.  If that information was hidden behind a Diplomacy wall, quest text could get shorter and to the point (and make use of action oriented writing) while lore hounds could pry the secrets out of NPC’s via Diplomacy.  On a related note, multi-player or PVP Diplomacy, please?

Archeology Lore – The more common experience with lore has been the application of “search and click” or “jump puzzle” exploration objectives.  I’m not a big GW2 fan, but I will observe that it’s impossible to log off if I see a Vista. I must get to the top of that Vista, I must get the tome unlock.  I also really enjoyed the Datacrons in Star Wars: the Old Republic.  By the way, wouldn’t there logically be some people who would like you to return evidence of your discovery, in-world?  Wouldn’t it be likely that others might not want you to?  Couldn’t you build dynamic events (including solo instances) based on the things that happen after you found that hidden tome, text or lore object?

Incentivize good play – Right now our games focus on rewarding play time, not play quality.  Occasionally you hit a quest where a specific skill or gear requirement are in place, but usually there is no consideration of how well you play.  That’s a shame because the “time spent” progression model reinforces the feeling of grind while a “well-played” model reinforces learning to do better.  You do see a bit of reward based play in open participation events like those in Warhammer, RIFT and Guild Wars 2, but those scores are frequently based on one mechanic (DPS).  This is reasonably easily fixed if you simply stop using one scoreboard.  Have a heal rating, a tank rating, a dps rating and a support rating for these types of game events.  At the end of the event you get a grade on all four cards and you pull rewards from your highest card.  The point here is that during solo and emergent play, players are learning to play roles – and being rewarded for playing roles well.

So Is That It?

In this column, I addressed some of the solo game elements that should be present.  I have also argued for replacing the solo quest hub world with a networked, interdependent world.  Guild Wars 2 makes some good steps in this direction, but there is more that can be done.  Borrowing ideas like Diplomacy from Vanguard and zone control from Final Fantasy XI, there are ways to tie in solo gaming with the overarching world meta-game.  There are also a lot of things that can and should be done to make group and multi group game play more interesting and accessible.  I don’t mean dumbing down the content, I mean reinforcing and enabling the ability to get groups and identify preferable groups.  In the next post I’ll talk about an overhaul to group based dynamics.

Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Enough with the (solo) quest hubs

  1. kruunchkruunch says:

    Neat article and I agree wholeheartedly on many of the points presented here.

    I think what a lot of this breaks down to is what type of MMO are you trying to make? Who is your target demographic? Would you a build a house without a target buyer in mind? That would make that mansion in the ghetto pretty odd looking wouldn’t you agree?

    Most MMOs today aren’t “true” MMOs (at least to my definition of an MMO being a variable free form, long lasting persistent virtual world). They are console and/or LAN based games shoe-horned into the MMO model due to the expanding business model of the genre (i.e. the average MMO model makes more money than the average console title). To this point, my comments aren’t really directed to that crowd of developer.

    Verant/Sony had a goal of targeting the “avid” PvE gamer with EverQuest. They wanted the player that was going to spend hours a day, most days, playing their game. They wanted their game to be a hobby, not a 30 minute time sink. To that end, their content reflected that (sometimes maddeningly so).

    Conversely, ArenaNet developed Guild Wars (1) around the idea of a specific piece of persistent content (small group PvP). To this end, their content reflected that (easily digestible and made to get you into the action quickly).

    Both are considered MMOs (although the purists might disagree); both have been very profitable; both have withstood the test of time and spun off multiple expansions and sequel games.

    Both also approached their content and marketing very differently, targeting a specific demographic and in so doing, garnered great success within that demographic.

    Most MMOs today fall in between those two, trying to be (or at least marketing as) all things to all people. One blockbuster MMO has succeeded way beyond the point of the reasonably expected (World of Warcraft) while most others have failed in expectation and in some cases, downright financial ruin, mostly due to being something that they weren’t designed to be … an MMO. And this was specifically reflected in their content design-by-formula.

    I do not like instanced content. I don’t think it works in an MMO on a conceptual level (not providing to a living-breathing world) and is a programmer’s cheat and a developer’s shortcut to a constant complaint (soandso ruined my soandso). Instancing also prevents the largest aspect of dynamically random content you can have in a video game … other players.

    I do not like quest hubs. There are few things that provide less immersion for me than a small village full of people with punctuation over their heads.

    To that end, when did the race of beings that have mastered the atom, escaped the constraints of their home planet and dabbled in the very fabric that makes up the universe become so vapid as to require sparkling paths, blinking dots on maps and glowing doorways to accomplish the most menial tasks within a game such as figuring out what to do next?

    Content shouldn’t need to hit you over the head. Exploration, curiosity and a certain amount of common sense within a “virtual world” should get you through the day (and give you the pleasurable experience of a feeling of accomplishment, instead of the grinding repetitive syndrome of the treadmill).

    Hide the numbers. People will complain. If the game is good, they will get over it. Part of the allure of a fantasy world (a big part) is the *mystery* of it. If you always show what’s under the hood, you lose a large chunk of that. Learning about the world should be part of the enjoyment of it, not a nuisance to get past as quickly as possible. Anyone who has met Ambassador Dvinn knows from whence I speak.

    Finally, while the mechanics of designing content will eventually boil down to numbers and formula for the developer, I think many developers (unintentionally) lose the forest for the trees.

    • DomV says:

      You should look at an IQ Score Distribution chart sometimes. Businesses want to milk the market as much as they can. They will include the not-so-smart-not-so-patient crown if it means making more money. Your suggestions are anti-business. Blizzard did a great job succeeding to include a broad audience. MMO developers who don’t follow their example marketing wise are destined to go F2P. If they are creative enough, they won’t have to clone WOW at all and still capture they same audience. Know-it-all gamers who think they know the industry inside-and-out think it’s impossible to do what Blizzard did. If I was a developer, I’d be insulted. Those gamer’s doubts is a reflection of their own limits. My advise is to keep it to yourself because it reflects the limits of your own imagination. Imagination is more important than Knowledge. Guess who said that? Someone smarter than you (“you” in general terms).

  2. Bentwick says:


    Another good piece, I like taking the solo portion of a mmo into the instanced portion of the game, I actually like camping in EQ, because I was busy studying for exams and did not have time to focus on the game more than a few minutes at a time so camping allowed me to clear an area and then study and do it over again every 10-15 minutes.

  3. Mjollnir says:

    Good article, thanks Ryahl.

    I, too, dislike the quest hub. Although glowing, floating punctuation marks above heads is a little off-putting (and easily solved by the developers if only they’d choose a more aesthetic option!), it always saddens me a little to see the minimap markers and subsequent quest-pointer arrows which seem to have been implemented purely so that the player needn’t read and understand the nature or meaning of the quest text. This subsequently removes the need to work out where to go or what to do and strikes down what could be considered another pesky barrier between character generation and endgame activities (which so many swear are the be-all and end-all of MMORPGs; a sentiment I strongly disagree with). The option to turn all of this questing interface off via settings seems somewhat hollow (to me, it then feels like other players are playing a different game to you and detracts substantially from the shared experience). However, I can understand the reluctance of having to rely on online guides and/or watching the same inquiries streaming through the area’s chat channel. Neither solution is ideal.

    As one alternative, I suggest that a character need only experience one quest ‘chain’ at a time. I visualize this system as a piece of shattered safety glass; the intersections being the NPC quest-givers and the cracks being the path of the quest chain. The chain could interweave with other quest chains, crossing at NPCs , in order that players could play together if they desired when their goals aligned (same activity, different motivations and goals). Essentially though, an individual character is on one Quest and the decisions they make on that quest determine their path through the world and influence the perspective that they view the overall dynamic from. Once one chain is ended and that story told, the character could pick another. It would be helpful if the various quest content scaled to character level, or didn’t rely on level at all, to keep it engaging to veterans.

    And replace the staple ‘kill x thingys’, ‘get x wotsits’ quests with journal achievements that flag up as soon as you meet the first target on that given achievement. Combine these with NPCs that material rewards can be collected from as you attain milestones of the final achievement and you have the steadfast, non-sociopathic design as you outlined in your article. These long-term achievements provide a loose encouragement to gain experience in a multitude of ways, should the player desire. Also, a significant portion of the MMORPG player-base can’t leave any box un-ticked, so this provides content than can both be completed solo, or quicker with like minded groups of players, once all of the Quests and Battles are done.

    Really though, I think developers have become incredibly lazy with the trending “!” style of quest play. There are plenty of ways of masking the time-investment to higher levels. I for one would like to see more player-driven incentives; the trapper mentioned in your article need not be an NPC. The core market establishment in most MMOs now is the fanciful Auction House. Removing this unlikely (but highly convenient) mechanism from a game and replacing it with an Adventurer’s Guild that administrates player-requests is one option. Probably a little better than having a room-full of a thousand player shops…

    Anyway, that’s just a few quick ideas from my corner of the MMO world that haven’t been analysed too deeply, so take them with a grain of salt. Also, apologies if any of this is repeating things that already exist in MMOs; I’ve only a half-dozen or so under my belt!

  4. Graill says:

    Good read and great use of spell check. The piece still smacks of a raider wanting different MMO mechanics Than those currently available, though dont we all? The problem isnt the question of whether a person likes to solo or group, that should be a non issue in every aspect in an MMO. Just like the words hardcore and casual need to go the way of the DoDo bird because they make people that use them appear foolish and of low iq.

    What we need are living words created by competent devs, none of those around right now, if there are they are hiding or being pushed under someone elses talentless thumb. With the devs telling we gamers how and what we will play it doesnt take much to figure out that group play is cheaper for the devs in every aspect, and that gamers have been weened over the last two decades to think the way the devs do, this needs to stop.

    Gamers should have choice in every regard in an MMO, after all, as a customer first and gamer second the devs get paid by us and thus the customer is always right, this should be the devs watchphrase, but it is not. Devs state they own the game, they own the content, they will make the world the way they want and we as customers and gamers will play as they see fit. Wrong.

    Until gamers can stop thinking of instant gratification and take the time to starve some of these companies into being regulated for quality and zero defect ISO we will get more of the same crap we always have which is 1 or two months in and then quit because the hype went the way of the DoDo or game mechanics were changed without telling customers before release to allow cash to be made, as one tiny example.

    Devs need to realize the bottom line is fun, not the black text on the billing cycle and investor relations reports. No company should be allowed to make an MMO unless specific mechanics are met and can be funded, another reason for outside oversight and outside regulation. Make the gaming companies feel harsh penalties and fines to match the oh so unreasonable COC, TOS, or Eulas they put out to try and protect themselves from the customer.

    Fun, this includes but is not limited to, a living world in which all events do not cycle, common sense will drive this forward and i do not give ideas away for free. All dungeons, instances will be scalable for 1 or 100 folks with dungeons have dozens of endings including many that are not combat related, a wonder the devs remain so ignorant of this. The economy, as much as one can call it in an MMO must be regulated and based on finite resources for solo and groups, again, common sense rules here.

    There are many many more game mechanics for MMOs that i could list that would make the fight between solo and group play just go away but devs are increasingly ignorant and lazy to the facts of what gamers/customers want verse what the devs will do to make a buck….

    Make a buck, at all costs, is what the end argument always boils down to and the easiest laziest most economical way to do it, shove groups through, not single people. Not that there should or should not be solo or group play, after all, money is money in any demographic.

    It will take the collective will of gamers to make the devs change, a dream to be sure, and the devs smile as they know it will never happen.

  5. TTred says:

    Overall, you present a feature rich dream-mmo that I consistently find developers ignoring. Thanks for the great read and I look forward to the point where we can thoroughly discuss the content of FFXIV: ARR and see how it compares to these desired features.

  6. RaveniaDarkfae says:

    i blame the new generation if mmo gamers who started and only played WoW. To me WoW does not seem, feel, or act like an mmo should. It open the mmo world up too much to where non gamers are playing mmorpg, and lack any understanding of the genre (aka soloist). When an mmorpg is filled with soloist, it makes forming groups that much harder. I started with ff11, this to me at least was the last real mmo. The game was never about yourself (the player) it was about the community. After WoW launched, (and a good bit of that playerbase found there way into ff11) i found it harder to find or form parties for leveling ot content. PPl wanted to solo it all. As for lack of time, I started ff11 in 2004, i had to share a ps2 with my brother as well as my account. I was on it at most 4 hours a day. I still got parties, i still got stuff done. I personaly do not play mmorpg solo. I feel it defeats the purpose of calling it a multiplayer game. I’m force to though due to the soloist out numbering groupers.

  7. RaveniaDarkfae says:

    Also as a reply to the possible “well join a linkshell and make friends to group with.” this is shockingly harder then people understand. Here is why, when something can be solo’ed people will say go solo it. There is no point or reason to group. (i group up to play with others not that i need help) MMORpg (as per the ganre) is much more fun when playing as a community (which died once wow was launched). Like once ff11 revamped and took out level cap fights. I was told to leech to cap and solo it. I tried to explain that i found that dull and no fun. I was mostly told that (and i remember this clear as day years after it happen) “i’m level 99 it is not worth my time to join you on that mission”. mmorpg players became so jaded after wows launch. ff11 was known for its epic community in 2004-2008. Getting help was fast and easy, most LS members where always open to hang out. Which isn’t social interaction a big reason mmorpg are built the matter they are? mmorpg were at one point, the net version

  8. RaveniaDarkfae says:

    version of table top rpg where the makers os the mmo are the DM and the community are the players who rally for a common goal. Now a days ppl see mmo as large updated worlds that just happen to be online and just happen to have other players in it. And are used as a means to an end. Pretty much ppl no longer play mmo as a community. Its about what they want on their time. Which also is leading to the free to play crap.

  9. tupo says:

    “You should look at an IQ Score Distribution chart sometimes. Businesses want to milk the market as much as they can.”

    How is that problem fixed in real-life? Grouping.

  10. RaveniaDarkfae says:

    If you want to see the worst of the worst when it comes to soloist in mmorog, play dcuo on the ps3. They literally lable quest as solo content, and have solo only end game content. Most group activities are infact done solo. Like Alerts, high levels play them for feats/gear style options. And steam roll it leaving level intended players to fend for themselves. And skrew over level tended players by taking the loot. Only way to do these events is to que up either wit a full group, or suck up a Pug.
    I miss the old ways of ff11, joining a linkshell was easy. doing content as a group was fun due to pre planing and training (no longer happens ppl rely on voice chat to bark orders during the run.)
    (back to dcuo)
    Heck i did an alert with a guy once who was on voice chat soloing an alert. Talking to his game like we was npc…. It was very annoying and distracting. I typed in the chat box he was being disruptive and flat out wasn’t paying attention i had to send ps3 messages to get his attention.

  11. Tombstone-X says:

    I disagree with your logic. I agree they’re is many things in a MMO that can be “Group” a.k.a. “Massively Multiplayer” content. Let’s face it average MMO player is from 25-40 years of age and work for a living. Players that logs in for about 2-5 hours a night doesn’t have time to search for a “Leveling Party”! Not every achievement in game of personally progression need to be “Massively Multiplayer” experience. This way of thinking is a sinking ship and cause players to seek games that doesn’t forsaking them for having a life outside the game.

    As long they’re reason to have group content they will be a Massively Multiplayer experience. They can have dungeons, Dynamic group events (Rifts, Fates, etc), Raids, PvP, and World Bosses. All these are perfect reasons to do group content. Don’t take my word for it Take World of Warcraft, Rift, and Guild Wars 2 word for it. all highly successful games. Tell me WHY go back to that died 12 years ago for a Reason?

    • Ryahl says:

      The thing is, though, your argument boils down to a point I concede in the third paragraph. There are plenty of valid reasons to include soloing in an MMO. There are few valid reasons to build your world as a set of bread-crumb induced solo quest hubs.

      To whit, your example of GW2 is a good example. You have ‘hubs’ in the sense of heart markers and events, but you don’t have the typical MMO quest hub model. You don’t breadcrumb from one area to the next in a predefined linear design. While I think their world design would benefit from a bit tougher design, that’s very much in the direction I’m leading to in this post. And, as you note, it is a successful game.

    • Valkayree says:

      I agree. Should people just be left out simply because they can’t keep on the grind? If I wanted the grind, I would go to South Korea and play Starcraft.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Anti-Spam Quiz: