I'm guessing most of you have at least read the apology letter that Jay Wilson wrote on the battlenet blog. If not here's the link.
Personally, I was quite appalled to hear about the entire matter. Not to mention I actually had to go to Kotaku itself to get the news (The Horrors! I had to go Kotaku!). I guess the main reason why I was so disturbed by the whole matter was that he was actually slagging the original creator of the Diablo series? The one person who actually helped create the franchise that gave him his current career.
Not only that, in the hearts of everybody who works in the Game industry, is the soul of a gamer. We're all the same people. Sure we might be competitive about what we make, but that doesn't stop us from appreciating the games themselves. I was part of the team that made AC: Revelations. That didn't stop me from gushing about Gears of War and Batman Arkham Asylum to the other guys in the studios as well even though they were competing games.
Dave Brevik just gave his honest opinion about Diablo 3 himself and I honestly felt that it was a very fair opinion. He had a different ideal about how the game was suppose to have been made and there are certainly some parts of Diablo 3 that I won't mind changing as well. (Unlike a certain 'impartial' writer I know). Jay wilson has certainly over-reacted over the matter.
Dear Mr. Wilson, I'm sorry but I think that you have done more damage to the entire Diablo franchise than what Nathan Grayson has done. There is certainly some history behind the entire diablo series. Why else would have so many of the original team left after Diablo 2 to make Hellgate: London, or any of the other hack and slash games out there? It's still not nice to hang your dirty laundry out for everyone to see.
While I certainly appreciate your apology and the fact that it was done so quickly as well since you have realize the folly of your mistake, the esteem that I held you with has dropped a little. It does make me wonder whether the Blizzard of today has still kept it's heart from the days when it was still known the small company 'Silicon and Synapse'.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Nathan Grayson's ineptitude...
I'm pretty sure everybody has at least gotten the warning from Blizzard about the Battlenet being hacked. If anything, it does at least show that Blizzard is actually pretty on the ball with regards to their security. within 5 days an announcement was made, measures were taken. Furthermore unlike Sony, at least they did not save important credit card/account info in plaintext form. Blizzard has released a FAQ as well with regards to questions regarding the hacking of their servers. I feel that this at least shows that they are pretty open with regards to this attempted account theft.
However... Rock Paper Shotgun's Nathan Grayson actually disagrees otherwise....
Look dude, if anything we know about the whole problem with the always online deal. We get it already, but seriously, do you really need to take out that tired old soapbox to stand on everytime Blizzard does something wrong? Where were your comments when Steam got hacked?
Clearly there are risks involved in a always connected network system. Perhaps if instead of writing extremely biased and flawed reviews you could perhaps read up a bit on security measures being taken in today's Information technology industry? I can't even believe that the BBC actually quoted your article in theirs when it's pretty damn clear that you've got an axe to grind.
Biased, terribly Biased. Really, I have no idea how you actually got a contributor position in the various gaming magazines, Online or in Print. If it wasn't for the fact that Rock Paper Shotgun features cool indie games sometimes I would have long removed it from my RSS feed. Truly an inept writer that does not deserve to even do reviews on games.
However... Rock Paper Shotgun's Nathan Grayson actually disagrees otherwise....
Look dude, if anything we know about the whole problem with the always online deal. We get it already, but seriously, do you really need to take out that tired old soapbox to stand on everytime Blizzard does something wrong? Where were your comments when Steam got hacked?
Clearly there are risks involved in a always connected network system. Perhaps if instead of writing extremely biased and flawed reviews you could perhaps read up a bit on security measures being taken in today's Information technology industry? I can't even believe that the BBC actually quoted your article in theirs when it's pretty damn clear that you've got an axe to grind.
Biased, terribly Biased. Really, I have no idea how you actually got a contributor position in the various gaming magazines, Online or in Print. If it wasn't for the fact that Rock Paper Shotgun features cool indie games sometimes I would have long removed it from my RSS feed. Truly an inept writer that does not deserve to even do reviews on games.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
M.A Stackpole hired to do a new WOW novel
http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/07/30/star-wars-battletech-scribe-michael-stackpole-to-write-new-wow-n/
Getting my favorite author to write a novel set in one of my favorite Universe?? I feel like Christmas has come early for me this year!
Between this piece of news, Khol Drake writing again, and Emprahsque stories done by Someone else on the /tg/ forums, I'm overdosing on Sheer awesomeness!
SQUEEEEEEE! Michael A Stackpole is writing a WOW novel! SQUEEEEEEEE!
Getting my favorite author to write a novel set in one of my favorite Universe?? I feel like Christmas has come early for me this year!
Between this piece of news, Khol Drake writing again, and Emprahsque stories done by Someone else on the /tg/ forums, I'm overdosing on Sheer awesomeness!
SQUEEEEEEE! Michael A Stackpole is writing a WOW novel! SQUEEEEEEEE!
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Controls experienced by players and how it pertains to good games.
This post was actually inspired while thinking about Diablo 3 while I was hanging the clothes today. I've been busy working lately as a fry boy at a local snack shop. If you don't know what a fry boy is, it's not something to do with fishes let me tell you. I'm basically standing in front of the deep fryer for about 10 hours to cook deep fried snacks. It's a nice part time job I guess? Though the smell of fried food is so ingrained in my skin now that when I walk on the street, little kids ask their parents to buy McDonald cause they caught a whiff of me.
That said, onto the topic of the post. If you have been following recent game reviews of the latest games, it would probably have likely occured to you that quite a few of the triple a games this year have not received as a good a score as you think it would. For instance, ME3 had a terrible storyline conclusion that marred an otherwise good game. Diablo 3 was plagued by the infamous error 37 and latency issues. Other than those issues, there were comments made about gameplay and skills involved. A good example would be the face roll Tracer missile spam of Bounty hunters in TOR.
Personally I feel that the common thread between all of them is that players do not experience any control over these events. If a player cannot experience any control over these events, it severely mars their player experience. When I push a button to move in a game, i will be pretty pissed if it's not responsive at all.
This is pretty much the issue with Diablo 3 and the Fans Hatred for always online games. In Diablo 2, you didn't encounter much lag if you had a good enough computer to support the game. For the Case of Diablo 3, it's not so much the computer as it is the server connection to your home. This is something that is out of the players control. As such, when a character dies dued to lag, it often causes more frustration than normal cause it was out of the player control.
You could apply the same thing to the Mass effect 3 ending as well. The ending was totally out of the player control. It was just choosing between screwed 1 factor, or being screwed by a 3 factors. Players couldn't choose any other choices other than those being presented.
In my opinion, a good game will allow players to have responsive controls over their character responses. Players want to feel responsible for their own actions when they play a game. That's probably the same reason why table top RPGs still have such a large following still despite the numerous alternatives on the computer. A good DM will allow his players to have appropriate responses to their actions, and Players will feel responsible for their own character actions.
I guess that's why TSW is such a hit with people as well, cause controls are pretty smooth. If anything can be learnt from this years releases, it's that players want to be responsible for their actions in a game and to have responsive controls that they can use.
That said, onto the topic of the post. If you have been following recent game reviews of the latest games, it would probably have likely occured to you that quite a few of the triple a games this year have not received as a good a score as you think it would. For instance, ME3 had a terrible storyline conclusion that marred an otherwise good game. Diablo 3 was plagued by the infamous error 37 and latency issues. Other than those issues, there were comments made about gameplay and skills involved. A good example would be the face roll Tracer missile spam of Bounty hunters in TOR.
Personally I feel that the common thread between all of them is that players do not experience any control over these events. If a player cannot experience any control over these events, it severely mars their player experience. When I push a button to move in a game, i will be pretty pissed if it's not responsive at all.
This is pretty much the issue with Diablo 3 and the Fans Hatred for always online games. In Diablo 2, you didn't encounter much lag if you had a good enough computer to support the game. For the Case of Diablo 3, it's not so much the computer as it is the server connection to your home. This is something that is out of the players control. As such, when a character dies dued to lag, it often causes more frustration than normal cause it was out of the player control.
You could apply the same thing to the Mass effect 3 ending as well. The ending was totally out of the player control. It was just choosing between screwed 1 factor, or being screwed by a 3 factors. Players couldn't choose any other choices other than those being presented.
In my opinion, a good game will allow players to have responsive controls over their character responses. Players want to feel responsible for their own actions when they play a game. That's probably the same reason why table top RPGs still have such a large following still despite the numerous alternatives on the computer. A good DM will allow his players to have appropriate responses to their actions, and Players will feel responsible for their own character actions.
I guess that's why TSW is such a hit with people as well, cause controls are pretty smooth. If anything can be learnt from this years releases, it's that players want to be responsible for their actions in a game and to have responsive controls that they can use.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Anatomy of a Bug: uncleared resource nodes in SWTOR
I've been playing a lot of The Old republic lately. Well, enough such that I actually have filled out all my character slots on Dalborra Server XD
Given the extensive playtime, I've noticed several bugs actually in the game. Some of these bugs are not that game breaking. Where Game breaking refers to the disruption of the gaming experience of the player. There are several that totally ruin the entire game though, and it's bad enough to make people tear their hair out in frustration.
Perhaps the simplest and most common bug is the uncleared resource node. While gathering resources in SWTOR, players will often come upon a node that will show up on their minimap, will flash into a light blue colour when you hover a cursor over it, but will not be able to interact with the node itself.
What has happened to the resource node is that it has not been harvested properly. There are many possible reasons for that. One is that the player ran out of range of his companion while the companion was harvesting the node. Or the player could have been disrupted by combat while in the process of harvesting. The end result is the same, only the player who actually tapped the node, may go back to harvest the resource from the node. While the solution to the bug seems simple, there are actually further complications to it.
One is that while the node has been tapped, it does not despawn after an appropriate time duration. I have personally seen the a slicing node that spawns outside the coruscant cantina not despawned for 2 days. The node only returned to it's original configuration after a server reset. Now while this doesn't seem to be a major problem at a first look, it could be problematic if say a griefer wanted to take advantage of it.
Suppose that a particular malevolent player decides to tap every single Scavenging node in say Ilum. He taps the node, but does not take the contents in the resource node. Since the node does not despawned till a full server reset, the nodes will be unavailable to the entire player base. This could cause a sudden jump in prices of level 6 metals and level 6 metal compounds since the supply of the metals has suddenly decreased.
Now suppose that there was an organized gang of players who decided to restrict the entire level 6 metals market by tapping every single node on Corellia, Ilum, Voss and Belsavis. Such an action will possibly crash the entire market for metals, or drive the prices through the roof. While a hypothetical scenario, it could well be possible in the hands of an organized raid of players.
Furthermore, tapped resource nodes will also clutter the terrain in the game. This would put a minor strain on the server architecture as well since the servers need to remember that a node exists at such a co-ordinate with such a value of resource in it. Perhaps the game is built in such a way such that if a particular world has 'X' number of resource nodes at a given time, the server will not spawn anymore nodes. Then it won't cause that much of a strain, but it will exaggerate the previous issue, since it makes the tapping of resource nodes easier.
A really simple solution to this problem is to actually just put a despawn timer/trigger on the resource node itself. If nobody comes to harvest the node, let the node despawn in a set amount of time instead of continuing to exist in the game. WOW actually has something similar in place already. Mining nodes that have been tapped but not harvested fully will despawn after about 10mins or so. Something similar could actually be done for TOR.
Next time on Anatomy of a bug: Invisible walls that spring up from nowhere!
Given the extensive playtime, I've noticed several bugs actually in the game. Some of these bugs are not that game breaking. Where Game breaking refers to the disruption of the gaming experience of the player. There are several that totally ruin the entire game though, and it's bad enough to make people tear their hair out in frustration.
Perhaps the simplest and most common bug is the uncleared resource node. While gathering resources in SWTOR, players will often come upon a node that will show up on their minimap, will flash into a light blue colour when you hover a cursor over it, but will not be able to interact with the node itself.
What has happened to the resource node is that it has not been harvested properly. There are many possible reasons for that. One is that the player ran out of range of his companion while the companion was harvesting the node. Or the player could have been disrupted by combat while in the process of harvesting. The end result is the same, only the player who actually tapped the node, may go back to harvest the resource from the node. While the solution to the bug seems simple, there are actually further complications to it.
One is that while the node has been tapped, it does not despawn after an appropriate time duration. I have personally seen the a slicing node that spawns outside the coruscant cantina not despawned for 2 days. The node only returned to it's original configuration after a server reset. Now while this doesn't seem to be a major problem at a first look, it could be problematic if say a griefer wanted to take advantage of it.
Suppose that a particular malevolent player decides to tap every single Scavenging node in say Ilum. He taps the node, but does not take the contents in the resource node. Since the node does not despawned till a full server reset, the nodes will be unavailable to the entire player base. This could cause a sudden jump in prices of level 6 metals and level 6 metal compounds since the supply of the metals has suddenly decreased.
Now suppose that there was an organized gang of players who decided to restrict the entire level 6 metals market by tapping every single node on Corellia, Ilum, Voss and Belsavis. Such an action will possibly crash the entire market for metals, or drive the prices through the roof. While a hypothetical scenario, it could well be possible in the hands of an organized raid of players.
Furthermore, tapped resource nodes will also clutter the terrain in the game. This would put a minor strain on the server architecture as well since the servers need to remember that a node exists at such a co-ordinate with such a value of resource in it. Perhaps the game is built in such a way such that if a particular world has 'X' number of resource nodes at a given time, the server will not spawn anymore nodes. Then it won't cause that much of a strain, but it will exaggerate the previous issue, since it makes the tapping of resource nodes easier.
A really simple solution to this problem is to actually just put a despawn timer/trigger on the resource node itself. If nobody comes to harvest the node, let the node despawn in a set amount of time instead of continuing to exist in the game. WOW actually has something similar in place already. Mining nodes that have been tapped but not harvested fully will despawn after about 10mins or so. Something similar could actually be done for TOR.
Next time on Anatomy of a bug: Invisible walls that spring up from nowhere!
Friday, May 25, 2012
Thoughts on Diablo 3 Elective mode
I was scanning through my Google reader when I came across Mr. Rohan's post on the failure of elective mode and decided to express my views here instead of clogging up his posts comments with it XD
To be honest, the true hardcore players I doubt would actually whine about having to make choices. At the end of the day, a computer game is based around numbers. Everything can be calculated, Procs can be determined and rotations can be maximized for true effectiveness at a given task. Once you know the formulas, and can calculate what you want to do, then isn't there no choice in the matter of skill selection? You would be able to determine the right answer for a given situation. For example, if you want your Barbarian to survive long in a pack of enemies, intuitively you would perhaps choose some self healing skill, a skill that reduces damage taken or perhaps a set of skills that would allow you to chain stun a set of mobs.
What however is killing the game, is pseudo power gamers who think that their way is the most effective method and that there are no choices. It's actually quite telling about how hardcore these players are when they don't even have proper spreadsheets or formulas listed out. Sure it's actually easy to think of skill combination that would help you do great dps or have greatly increased survivability, but is it the only way? These voices are perhaps the loudest on the forums and moan about the fact that elective mode actually reduces the number of choices they have.
In truth it really doesn't matter. Like what Marius said in the comments on that post, using the correct skill combination that meshes with your play style could perhaps create more effective builds or even more entertaining builds.
Though I must admit that Mr. Rohan has a point regarding the restriction of tools. Restricting the number of tools that a player has access to will greatly increase the creativity of the player in handling problems. This actually has been discussed a bit on the Team Liquid forums as well on the optimization of Resource nodes in Starcraft 2.
Personally I think that elective mode actually helps you be more expressive of how you want to play your character. Want to play a Pure Melee Wizard with increased survivability? You can with the right skill selection. Or what about a Ninja Demon hunter that hurls Chakrams and lays traps to kill enemies? I honestly think that without Elective mode, you can't play those classes effectively.
If anything, recall at the start of Starcraft 2 and how PvP games were. Or rather, Protoss versus anything to be honest. Every single match up was dealt with a simple 4 gate timing push. This eventually changed to a more varied strategy setup over time. There are not a few different strats for Protoss players. Diablo 3 is barely even 2 weeks old. I feel that it's too early to say that there are really no choices in play style or skills.
To be honest, the true hardcore players I doubt would actually whine about having to make choices. At the end of the day, a computer game is based around numbers. Everything can be calculated, Procs can be determined and rotations can be maximized for true effectiveness at a given task. Once you know the formulas, and can calculate what you want to do, then isn't there no choice in the matter of skill selection? You would be able to determine the right answer for a given situation. For example, if you want your Barbarian to survive long in a pack of enemies, intuitively you would perhaps choose some self healing skill, a skill that reduces damage taken or perhaps a set of skills that would allow you to chain stun a set of mobs.
What however is killing the game, is pseudo power gamers who think that their way is the most effective method and that there are no choices. It's actually quite telling about how hardcore these players are when they don't even have proper spreadsheets or formulas listed out. Sure it's actually easy to think of skill combination that would help you do great dps or have greatly increased survivability, but is it the only way? These voices are perhaps the loudest on the forums and moan about the fact that elective mode actually reduces the number of choices they have.
In truth it really doesn't matter. Like what Marius said in the comments on that post, using the correct skill combination that meshes with your play style could perhaps create more effective builds or even more entertaining builds.
Though I must admit that Mr. Rohan has a point regarding the restriction of tools. Restricting the number of tools that a player has access to will greatly increase the creativity of the player in handling problems. This actually has been discussed a bit on the Team Liquid forums as well on the optimization of Resource nodes in Starcraft 2.
Personally I think that elective mode actually helps you be more expressive of how you want to play your character. Want to play a Pure Melee Wizard with increased survivability? You can with the right skill selection. Or what about a Ninja Demon hunter that hurls Chakrams and lays traps to kill enemies? I honestly think that without Elective mode, you can't play those classes effectively.
If anything, recall at the start of Starcraft 2 and how PvP games were. Or rather, Protoss versus anything to be honest. Every single match up was dealt with a simple 4 gate timing push. This eventually changed to a more varied strategy setup over time. There are not a few different strats for Protoss players. Diablo 3 is barely even 2 weeks old. I feel that it's too early to say that there are really no choices in play style or skills.
Butcher One Shots
An absolutely brilliant idea from HardFlaccid to kill Butcher :) Hope you guys enjoy XD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)