We Fly Spitfires – MMORPG Blog

“Greetings whelps. I am Optamus The Cleric, divine healer. I am the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the ending, what was, what is and what shall be… the almighty. I shall heal you all and forever you shall be grateful.”

Optamus sits down and begin to reads his bible.

Ah. Those were the days. I’ve never roleplayed in real life but about 8 years ago I decided to give it a shot and roleplay a Cleric in Everquest. I was stunned at not only how fun it was but also how well received I was. People absolutely adored it. As you can probably guess from above, I had a human Cleric called Optamus – a complicated character who was a religious zealot, incredibly arrogant, self-absorbed and narcissistic. And he was funny.

I discovered that roleplaying was like walking a tight-rope. I couldn’t just charge into a group and start insulting people because I would get immediately kicked (that only ever happened to me once), I had to slowly build and introduce my character. Fortunately in Everquest groups used to last for hours so that was never a problem. I also had to stick entirely to Norrath references and let other people enjoy making fun of me. I knew a few players who tried to roleplay ‘evil’ characters by just being, well, plain nasty. The extent of my insults were stuff like ‘whelp’ or, my favourite, ‘one-legged kobold’. I also used to invite people to tease me by coming out with statements like “I’m so beautiful I was once memorised for hours by my own reflection” and screaming like a whimp when a mob got aggro on me. It was tough, but it was fun and I’d say that 99% of all players I met soon caught on to my character and played along, highly enjoying it (I used to get private tells from group members commenting on how much fun they were having – I never roleplayed in /tell chat so I used to have a good conversation about it with them).

But now, in the modern MMO, things have changed. When was the last time you saw something truly roleplaying in any game? I’ve never seen anyone roleplay in WoW or EQ2 and, even when I played on a very active AoC RP server, I still only encountered about two roleplayers. Today it’s all about progression and being the best at the game. A friend of mine used the expression ‘ruleplaying’ and that’s exactly what’s happened to MMOs.

When was the last time you picked a piece a gear because of the way it looked or how it might enhance your RP persona? Players today don’t play a ‘role’ in their MMO, they play a ‘rule’. They want to be the best, the highest DPS, the best tank, the best healer. Raiding is all about metrics and performance, not about actual being a character embarking on a huge challenge to slay a mythical beast. It’s about getting through the content as fast as you can and scoring #1 on the DPS calculator at the end of the raid.

I know that many MMOs have special RP servers but they don’t seem much better than normal servers (or at least the ones I’ve tried). It’s not just about following a naming convention for your character, it’s about actually having a character and not being obsessed by metrics but rather about fulfilling a role. I’d easily bet that even the top raiders on RP servers still use DPS calculators and upgrade their gear to what’s better rather than what might suit their character. And don’t you think it’s kinda sad that games from the genre ‘Massively Multiplayer Roleplaying Game” have to have special servers just for the roleplaying portion?

Due to my mid-level crisis, I’ve been trying out a lot of alts recently – I’ve now got a level 22 Shaman and a low level Mage. After leveling up a Priest, I’ve found both classes easier in comparison although certain situations still present difficulties and I’m not immortal by any means. Killing mobs and completing quests still poses risks and challenges and there’s still a considerable amount of downtime.

However, the other day I decide to jump back onto my level 66 Warrior for a bit and I was absolutely amazed at how quick and painless everything was. I could fight and drop mobs continually without any breaks and I could easily wander into a group of mobs and take them down without any fear whatsoever. It blew my mind – I had forgotten how pain-free life was. No wonder I found leveling up a low level Priest difficult.

Shouldn’t things be the other way round though? Shouldn’t the low levels be quick and painless with a care-free feeling instead of a struggle? Maybe it’s the classes I’m picking but low levels seem to be a grind with constant periods of downtime to recharge health and mana whilst high levels seem to be continual slaughter without any worries.

The most ironic thing I’ve found is that gaining a level when you’re 25 takes exactly the same amount of time as when you’re 58. In fact, it probably takes longer. This certainly has something to do with the fact that the quests in Outland are denser and more evenly staggered (it drives me nuts doing 5 quests in Azeroth and then having to find another zone to go to because the rest there are too high) but also definitely has something to do with the fact that classes just get plain more powerful and easier at higher levels.

Maybe Blizzard want people to feel an increased sense of power as they level and the perception that they are stronger and can kill things faster. Ultimately it just all seems a little odd… like the level 1-60 game is just a prelude to the real action.

Blizzard have now announced that the dual talent specialisation will now be available to level 40 characters. Rejoice! A move that actually makes sense. I never understood why it should be restricted to level 80s only. Surely the whole point of it is to allow flexibility and encourage more diversity. So anyway, great news.

However, this change comes with a string in the tail. Yep, apparently the cost of learning this ability will be 1,000 gold. OK, that’s nothing to most players with high level mains and twinked alts but doesn’t it completely alienate all new players? It’s like Blizzard are trying to create a form of snobbery and elitism as 1,000 is utterly unrealistic for any new player to have gained by level 40. It’s obvious the system is intended for twinks only.

What exactly does Blizzard have against grouping? It seems like every move they do is designed to encourage people into a single, mindless direction of quest grinding all the way up until level 80. They finally offer something that might encourage more people to group together and yet they place some ridiculous cost on it to alienate new players.

Is it just me or does Blizzard really dislike the idea of grouping at low levels?

So a few days ago Everquest hit the big ol’ number 10. Ding! Grats! I’m exceptionally happy that it’s still going because I spent way too many hours of my youth playing it and, sadly enough, I still feel a strong connection to the game. Even looking at some of the screenshots now fills me with nostalgia and the desire to log… back… in…

Anyway, SOE made this little video to celebrate EQ’s 10th anniversary. /dance and be happy.

Star Wars: The Old Republic has been using the buzzwords ‘fourth pillar‘ a lot in their online videos  to describe how they are going to add a new era of storytelling to MMOs. I wasn’t aware MMOs had pillars but, well, apparently they do and, out of interest, BioWare describe the other pillars as exploration, combat and character customisation. Seems like some generalisations but, hey, lets roll with it.

So, this ‘fourth pillar’ – apart from being an abstract term like ‘2nd generation MMO’ and ’sandbox’ (which I loathe) – is apparently going to reinvigorate the MMO genre and give SW:TOR something new which it’s competitors never had: storytelling. This got me wondering a lot about a) what exactly do they mean by story and storytelling and b) how are they going to effectively implement it.

Well according to Wikipedia ’storytelling is the conveying of events in words, images, and sounds often by improvisation or embellishment’. Ok, got it, it’s about conveying a story or ‘telling’ a story, if you will. No surprises there. But don’t games like WoW, EQ2, AoC and LotRO already tell a story? Last time I checked they actually had very immersive worlds that told the stories of events and history. In fact, in LotRO you’re actually playing through an entire trilogy of books. How is SW:TOR going to be any different?

BioWare have said that “every one of your decisions is impactful [sic] to your end goal and character progression” and apparently “what’s really missing [in other MMOs] is context–why you’re doing all these missions, why you’re on this quest, why you’re out killing 10 wolves”. Doesn’t sound like they going to suddenly reinvent the genre or introduce some amazing new mechanics but it does like they’re focusing heavy on character choice and working hard to remove the redundant ‘kill 10 rats’ quests which are only there to allow people to quest grind. Looks like BioWare are going to make questing meaningful again and that could be really fun in itself.

AoC tried hard to introduce personal stories to each character and it worked quite well. I enjoyed the Tortage experience and the mix of group and solo gameplay and it’s a shame it wasn’t carried through to the rest of the game in more depth. I wonder if BioWare will try something similar by mixing single player quest lines into the MMO. Certainly when they talk about your characters decisions effecting the world around them, I can’t think of any other way of doing it.

Ultimately, I hate the term ‘fourth pillar’ but I quite like and admire what BioWare are trying to achieve. If anything, even if they succeed in getting rid of the random, pointless quests that now plague MMOs as nothing more than quick exp boosts then they will have contributed something to the genre.

Regardless, I’m looking forward to the release of SW:TOR. I’ve always had a fond spot for Star Wars and there’s no such thing as a bad SW game. Apart form SW: Galaxies. That sucked.

Anyone who knows me knows that I’m a bit of an altaholic – part of it is because I have a low attention span and part of it is because I want to sample a wide variety of what a game has to offer.

My decision to roll a Shaman was due to a bit of both of those things. I was getting tired of my Priest – although I love the character and like the idea of being a level 80 healer for instances and raids, it’s just too much of a damn grind. I feel like sub-par DPS with a ton of healing spells I never, ever use. I think Tobold once referred to the Priest as a bot class and that’s exactly what it feels like to me. With all of these other interesting and diverse classes available, the Priest just seems single minded, repetitive and lacking in power. At level 45 I can’t heal any better than a Shaman or Druid yet I’m utterly limited in the way I play. Hmm.

The Shaman is a breath of fresh air in comparison. Firstly, my low level experience is far easier compared to the Priest’s and the class is a lot more balanced. I rarely die and can kill things pretty quickly making life far less frustrating. Also, the class is much more fun and diverse. I can go pure healing, melee DPS or spell DPS and each offers a different style of play. They also get a lot of interesting spells like Ghost Wolf, Astral Recall and Resurrection, giving the class a bit of flavour. I didn’t feel like there was anything my Priest could do that another class couldn’t.

It’s also worth pointing out that at level 17 I have one healing spell. One. And it’s enough. My Priest had about four and I never used any of them. What’s the point in giving low level characters so many healing spells when they aren’t necessary and never used. Priests would be far better off getting Shadowform or another damange spell early on in the lives.

In the end, my whole experience with healers has left me really wondering as to the state of healing in WoW. Unlike games like EQ2, it seems like an unnecessary after-thought. Maybe it’s the entire focus on quest soloing that the game has but it seems like healing, or at least powerful healing, is quite redundant until level 80… meaning there isn’t much room for an aspiring Priest in the game.

So I saw the Watchmen film last night. Being a fan of the comic book (and having read it twice) and really enjoyed the trailers I was looking forward to the film. Ultimately, I thought it was pretty decent – good but not great.

First off, I have to say that most of the actors were excellent and perfectly cast. The Comedian, Nite Owl and Rorschach were utterly amazing and felt like the living embodiment of the comic book characters. I’m so glad Zach Snyder (the director) decided to go with unknowns because casting big name actors like Ben Affleck (*cough* Daredevil *cough*) just for the sake of it is always a huge mistake. Their costumes were also fantastic and, where modernised, blended in without notice to the overall style of the film.

The music was also something I thought was great and well judged. Being tone deaf, it’s not something I usually notice but from the moment the opening credits rolled, the score to Watchmen was highly enjoyable and fitting. And speaking of opening credits… wow. The music, the montage, the slow recap of the world’s history was truly engrossing.

So what didn’t I like about the film? Well, a minor thing to start with: Ozymandias. I just really didn’t like the actor. To me, he didn’t suit the role, didn’t fit the part and is it just me or did he appear to have a tiny little head mounted onto some gigantic muscle suit? I also really disliked the Nixon actor. The makeup was terrible and he just seemed to come across as some sort of comedy characteur that might have been funny in the ’80s but now just seemed lame and dated.

My biggest gripe with the film, however, was probably the fact it stuck too closely to the comic book. Ironic, I know. By being so perfect and so faithful, Zach Snyder almost managed to lose the uniqueness of the film. It was exactly like reading the comic again. Which is great… unless I’ve you’ve already read it a bunch of times. And it kinda begs the question, “why bother making a film version of it then anyway?”. I can see Alan Moore’s point. I think that’s the big difference between films like The Dark Knight and Iron Man – they are tellings of new stories with new perspectives and interpretations. Watchmen, however, is an exact copy (arguably imperfect in comparison) of something which already exists.

My final negative point isn’t really a problem with the film but the re-telling of it in general – I just don’t think the Cold War setting and threat of nuclear war works in today’s world. Whereas the comic book manages to remain timeless, the film seems kinda dated and bit old fashioned when it shows Nixon talking about the Russian and the threat of global nuclear war. Hard to describe and maybe it’s just me.

Overall, it’s a good film and you’ll definitely enjoy it regardless of whether you’ve read the comic of not and likely in a different way depending on that fact. One and a half thumbs up.

Oh, yeah, my girlfriend didn’t like the film much at all although she did find Dr. Manhattan’s blue penis amusing.