Slashdot Mirror
On Reaction-Based Massively Multiplayer Gaming
Thanks to GamerDad for its editorial discussing why massively multiplayer games that require player dexterity are so much more intriguing. The author explains that "...the reason I don't play a lot of the conventional massive player games is because there's no skill involved in them", and goes on to detail: "In most of the MMORPGs, battles have almost predetermined conclusions based on the level and abilities of those player avatars involved in the fight and the creatures they're fighting against." He concludes by recommending his current skill-based MMOG of choice: "That's where PlanetSide has struck a chord with me. It takes the player interaction I enjoy in these games and combines it with a skill-based game." Do players want "the ability to use their brains and their hands to succeed" in MMORPGs, not just progress based on the "amount of time they played the game"?
It makes sense that people who don't have as much time on their hands like to play games based on skill. But then, there are those who will always prefer the games tha you play them for hour after hour after hour, since they have nothing better to do with their time. That's kind of my opinion on some card games. I hate games based solely on luck and chance. And ones that are purely strategy, well, they're all right. But the games that combine luck with strategy...those are the best. Games just need to have a nice balance if they want to be appealing to more than one type of gamer.
... I played it and found out the game was tedious, the patches terrible, the player base filled with morons, bugs and exploits aplenty, very high monthly fee and the released game felt like a beta.
To add insult to injury, they come out with their first paid expansion while endlessly balancing and rebalancing the game, forcing people to pony up more money for a beta.
No freaking thanks.
I remember a game I used to play on Sony Station, which looks like it was the predecessor to this game. I can't remember its name...
It used to be free, and when they started charging for it I got out of there (and so did a lot of other people). It certainly wasn't worth paying for, and this game doesn't look like its worth $12/month. Thats steep! I can buy Neverwinter Nights and only pay one fee, equivalent to half a year with this game. Sick.
It's not just what you do, it's in what order, with what timing, etc. Eg, on Arctic, a thief or two could take down a seriously stronger fighter type by constantly fleeing as soon as they were engaged, then sneaking back in and backstabbing... that took dexterity and quickness of mind to type all the commands (or aliases) fast enough... but there also the fighter type, if he was quick-minded enough, could easily have bashed the thief and screwed him completely... Each class has its own strong points that you have to learn to exploit. That could be considered player skill/dexterity.
Daniel
Carpe Diem
I agree wholeheartedly about all the stupid MMOs that require no skill whatsoever. I have been saying it for years. Who the hell is stupid enough to pay for a program where you click on a picture, it dissapears and then a number goes up. Rinse and Repeat. Oh yeah, it's a chat room too.
Of course, planetside, while much better than games like Everquest and Asheron's call, is still crap. Why? Planetside has two large armies that are fighting against each other for land and power. But neither side ever wins. Neither side ever can win. The game is in permanent stalemate. Without goals or purpose the fps game is meaningless. It's just a ton of people running around fragging each other. Because there are no goals or victory condition the game is pointless.
This is why I have found solace in Puzzle Pirates. It's completely skill based, puzzle game skill. Not only that, but there are clear goals. Getting lots of poe to get shops to get poe to get boats to get rum to get canonballs to destroy the boats of other crews. The economics are extremely complex and if managed improperly crews and flags can go bankrupt inside a week.
The thing that makes puzzle pirates so awesome is that there is a "7th puzzle" the social puzzle. Stinky fanboys can't succeed at puzzle pirates no matter how good their puzzling skills. Crews are closely knit social groups, and if you have no social skill none of the larger flags/crews will take you in. There are plenty of nice normal people who are good at the puzzles that nobody has any reason to let you in if you're an asshole. I set up a teamspeak server for our flag and now I talk in real time to my pirate friends every night I decide to play. The pirate theme is awesome too.
Oh yeah, puzzle pirates is cheaper than just about every other MMO there is. And there's a free trial too.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
It's a fact that RPG is solely based on leveling up and slapping on the right equipment on your characters. You don't need fast reflex or quick hand-eye coordination. All you need is patience and be motivated to keep playing.
I know I'll get modded down big time for this... but the only major reason why RPG is still an existing genre is because they are the only genre that can guarantee 80+hrs of original gameplay.
I have a number of relatives and friends that can play RPGs all day long. None of them can handle a fps for example, they simply get destroyed. Vice versa I have never seen anyone who mastered a fps... and can't handle an RPG. I don't call it a coincidence.
I was pretty much set to say MMOs can't be skill based, but reading the article, I can see some room for it.
Specifically in a traditional dungeon based MMO I'd propose something to the extent of each player can choose to be in active mode, or passive mode. The key being giving players choice.
Players in active mode would essentially gain the opportunity to be 10-20% more effective, but would run the risk of being 10-20% less effective, based on how well they interacted with a skill based interface.
Players in passive mode would be baseline.
This would present a really nice mix. It wouldn't alienate the passive players. It would give the skilled players a chance to be better through application of skill. PVP could require the active mode (no passive PVPing). High level encounters would demand people be in active mode, to better their chance of defeating the difficult encounters.
It's a neat idea, I'd like to see something like that. It would require a lot of interface work though to make it intuitive.
---
I support spreading santorum
the dumbing down of RPG's like has happened in the strategy world. Real Time Strategy games have overall dumbed down the level of games so as to increase the market share of them. Even calling Everquest a RPG is a stretch but at least it isn't a twitch game where very little thought is needed in order to do well. RPG's are about long term choices you make and involve many, many hours of advancement and choices. Even the 24 hours or so to beat Knights of the Old Republic is a quick RPG.
-- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
One of the reasons this 4 year old game is still popular is that the combat system rewards (but doesn't necessarily require) manual skill.
Actually, AC seems to have the best in-game physics (you can actually dodge missiles) and landscape (you can run to pretty much any part of the world you can see, and you can see far from the top of a mountain). Too bad about the graphics...
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
"In most of the MMORPGs, battles have almost predetermined conclusions based on the level and abilities of those player avatars involved in the fight and the creatures they're fighting against."
Ok, he has an understanding of MMORPG game mechanics, but how is that insightful?
I, too, would enjoy a more action-oriented online experience. No matter how beautiful the game world, there's something about standing in a group huddling around a monster until it falls over that just lacks excitement. I couldn't play Everquest or Asheron's Call for more than a week because of their static battle systems, and although Final Fantasy XI looks amazing, I fear that I'll quickly grow tired of it as well. On the other hand, Ultima Online, which despite its problems had a more active attack system, held my attention for more than a year. I don't know why the writer lumps it in with AC or EQ, because its attack system is more active-- while your character would auto-attack if hit, its battle system was much closer to that of Diablo.
I agree that MMORPGs appeal to a huge audience because they're not skill based, but I wonder if the lack of action MMOGs has to do with latency and synching the actions of a large number of players. I'm sure the reasons are much more complex than this "pc gamers are reflex challenged" argument presented in the article.
There isn't much difference between a game in which one mouse click corresponds to one attack, or one where you hit a button and watch your character swing (or cast) for a while. You're still hitting an attack button at regular intervals, but in the first case you are required to develop a bit of strategy when playing. A game that let you not only attack, but parry, dodge, turn and run, etc, would be a great step up.
I've also heard enough about PlanetSide to keep me from thinking it's a any kind of solution to the problem of dull online games. Unless I'm wrong, the forthcoming Lineage 2 will be action oriented, so that's one to look at. I don't think MMORPGs need to be "twitch" in the FPS sense, but they do need to be more engaging.
--- "Yeah, I'm a bit stressed out. I have a research paper due tomorrow and it has to be +5, Insightful."
From the average quake players perspective I can see how one might think a game like everquest or daoc requires no "skill", but you are wrong. Your personal definition of skill is skewed if you think that hand-eye coordination is the only kind of skill there is. The cleric has to watch the health of all the people in his group, then heal them accordingly, it is not always a slow process where you have plenty of time to react, sometimes it is a split second to react and most of the people playing mmorpgs would not react fast enough.. that is the difference between a "good" player and a average joe. If there was no room for a "good" player vs a bad one then I would agree that mmorpgs take no skill. But if someone can go beyond average, and even beyond good to where they are renowned as the best cleric on the server, then how can you possibly say there is no skill involved? This is not even taking into concideration the strategy needed to take a large raid force into an area and clear it out, anyone who had done a fear raid back in the day knows what I am talking about. Only very coordinated groups could "break" and hold fear.
While I haven't played Planeside, from what I've heard, it sounds terrible. I'd much rather have to come up with a strategy for 60 people to kill an "unkillable" monster, than run around by myself fragging people. While the low-level game of Everquest might not necessarily involve much skill, it's completely ignorant to say that's the case for the entire game. There's no question what we did was more involving than shooting someone in the head over and over in an FPS.
Neocron is very dexterity and skill based - especially the Player vs Player aspect.
Two basic points.
1) At high enough levels of complexity, MUDs and MMORPGs alike DO involve skill. Most typically, what people are asking for isn't skill, but specifically "twitch" skill.
2) You can go back 30 years and NEVER find a single twitch-skill based online persistent game that was as popular or more popular than the prevailing RPGs of the time. The basic reason is that people don't like to play in leagues where they cannot compete. RPG mechanics are essentially handicapping mechanics for people who lack the twitch ability--spend enough time, and you too can be a badass. This opens up the game to a wider audience (even as it arguably adds tedium).
You could try MAngband if you want to play an online dungeon hack and slash game that tests your reflexes. Fight the forces of Morgoth in realtime... in ASCII form! Available in source code and binary form for just about all platforms.
Well, seriously, Angband (a roguelike) is fun as heck when you're playing it in realtime, and that giant grey P is blazing across your screen. There's a certain element of "Quick! Get me my red coat... and my brown pants!" to running away from large packs of hounds/demons/summoners on sight, too.
The submitter is deceiving himself if he thinks the average MMOG doesn't require skill. They not only require rudimentary skills to be able to succeed at a basic level - something I have found after spending a few months away from EverQuest and returning to find that my skills have waned.... but they also require a high proficiency in order to succeed at many of the more complex encounters.
Planning out a strategy, managing and coordinating dozens of other people to put that strategy into effect, and properly participating in one's role within that larger strategy all require skill (and, judging from the behavior of a lot of people who play MMOGs, this level of skill is nontrivial). Having a great deal of skill can indeed make up for a lack of levels/advancement/gear, even in MMORPGs. And this doesn't even touch on the somewhat more subversive skills that people can make use of, like taking advantage of an in-game market economy or using social engineering to achieve one's goals.
A big factor in my favorite skill-based games is the duration of your minimum session. The tedious leveling process of most games lengthens that minimum session from your average "I've got a couple minutes to kill" into the "Whoops, is that the sun coming up" timespan. This really narrows down the number of ADD/ADHD people (ahem) who would be interested.
For example:
* Super Smash Bros. Melee - five minutes, and a match is over. I've seen fifteen in rare circumstances. Skills make the butt-kicking your opponent deserves in a revenge match much easier.
* Pacman, Galaga, Space Invaders, Breakout, etc - Classic, because you could just put a quarter in and play for a few minutes. No leveling, just gameplay. Skill could gain you some extra points or even more lives/whatever.
* Mario Bros, Donkey Kong - Good for a few quick minutes of fun. Quick reversals and timing make you "good."
* Outrun, Pole Position, etc - Drive for a few minutes, and it's done. Pure brain-numbing racing fun.
* UT, Counterstrike, Q3A - Play a few minutes of fragging and go. Although, having a good 3D card can sometimes provide the illusion of skill due to higher responsiveness and vision quality.
In summary:
A critical element of games is the length you have to play them before you can safely get up and leave. These games are usually skill-based, since a few minutes can't possibly give you any fancy EXP-based advantages.
Like *any* MMO, the real joy comes not really from the game, but the people you play with. A good group of people will always make a game that much more enjoable. The key to planetside is being in an "outfit"(re:guild), that suits your playstyle. There *are* outfits out there that focus heavily on teamwork and coordination on a scale that is quite litteraly not possible in any other MMO type. Of course, these kinds of outfits feel few and far between, but they are out there. And they sure make Planetside a blast to play. :)
I wouldn't say Planetside combines player interaction and skill-based action too well at all. People group together in that game because most early weapons are nearly useless, sure you got a big ol assault rifle and you can tear apart a stealth guy, but do you really think a stealth guy is gonna let himself get caught out in the middle of nowhere with his cloak off? Course not. The game also uses a "certificate" system, great except now everyone gravitates towards the "best" class with few people left for other classes, yet another reason to band together (Medic or Engineer anyone?).
The game FORCES players to group together by stripping them of individuality. Sure you have X weapon, but its so big you can't carry any extra weapons, no medipaks, and you used all your certificates to get it so you can't drive yourself around. Good luck trying to "lone wolf" that way.
The game also isn't that skill based. I played in the beta with a couple friend of mine and we discovered all sorts tricks more like standard MMORPGs rather than the game's MMOFPS gameplay. Some players would play as a stealth guy and have a friend fly them up into a tree and then camp there. When an enemy came near, he'd drop out of the tree and quickly kill him. Not very FPS-like is it?
Fights for bases also degrades into a traditional game of "seige". Since any competant defender will build all sorts of defenses inside, along with having actual players guarding it, entering any base without some SERIOUS preparations means suicide. So what do attackers do? Wait them out. Occasionally bombard the place to kill those careless enough to get caught outside the base. Same with the defenders, occasionally pop out to kill those who get too close, jump back in, heal/reload, repeat. Not exactly skill based is it?
My friend and I would participate in some of these... to an extent. Sometimes we'd take turns watching the game in case something important happened while the other went to eat/Alt-Tabbed out to surf the net/went to the bathroom/etc. Yeah, it was lame, but it worked. Too well for the style of gameplay we were expecting. Needless to say, we stopped playing after the beta ended.
Granted, I only played for the free week that they offered at one point, so I never did a whole lot. But if I had the money, I would have subscribed (I just can't see paying $50 and then a per-month fee... just a per-month fee and I'd be there). Why? Because it had variety.
One afternoon I'd be zooming along in my stealth ATV, single-handedly taking over enemy positions that were left undefended during a big battel elsewhere on the planet. The next night, I'd meet up with a squad that I randomly bumped into and joined so that we could do some scout-work in preperation for the next big fight. The day after, we'd all join up in a huge base fight and sweep through an entire continent.
And it was fun! No AO/E&B "Okay, do the same thing over and over until you level" crap... the other side would constantly be doing new things, and so would we. Any game that can give me the joy or strafing the enemy base in a transport bomber before jumping out, -and- sniping the enemy from a distance, -and- playing anti-aircraft defense in a jumping mini-mech, -and- parking my stealth ATV next to an enemy sniper, getting off, putting my gun to his head, and shooting him three-four times, slowly, while he looked around trying to find my invisible ass, is a fun game.
If I ever find myself in some money, I may just pick it and the expansion up and start playing again. Pity I'm so poor.
Even Planetside feels a bit plasticy when it comes to the whole 'dexterity' thing - because of the techniques it uses to counter lag, you never really avoid bullets, you just have to move into a position where you're not in another player's massive 'cone of fire'.
I'd always thought that a MMORPG that gives a player captain-level control over a giant ship (naval, space, whatever) would be a nice middle ground between the first-person MMORPGs and the MMORTS games - the fact that the ship is so massive and has so much inertia can make up for the lag - then the action really boils down to short-term tactics, which is what most FPS games come down to in the end anyway.
Anyway, thoughts like this are a dime a bzillion, so I'll just go shush now.
They say that skill is involved in high-level encounters. That's great and all, but what do you have to do to get to those high-level encounters in the first place? Hint: It has little to nothing to do with skill.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that if getting to the point of the game where actual skill is involved requires months of treadmilling, that's not a good thing. It also means that skill is only required in the small percentage of people who play the game for hours at a time, which makes the whole thing moot.
Rob
Yeah. My friend wanted to teach me this stupid game which was turn based. I told him it took no skill and he should play Quake instead. I think his name was Kasperov or something.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Now, ignoring the storyline, immersion, persistance, variety and other definite draws of the genre, there's a simple fact: most people suck at games. By definition, the majority of players suck, and usually lose in UT2K3 and BF42. I do, and I know many others who do. Even with hundreds (maybe thousands) of hours of FPS play under our belts, we still end up with 3 kills, 20 deaths on any given server. And I don't know about the rest of us losers, but playing with friends would make the situation much worse (I personally know a half-dozen highly-ranked CS players). And I still love these games, and continue to play them. They're fun, even when you're getting owned. But a man can only take so much 'PWNED OMGROFLWTFKEKEKEKEKE!!111!1!'.
And that is why we need RPGs: a refuge for the unskilled gamer. Those with naturally shitty hand-eye coordination and slow-ass reflexes. I've noticed nobody brings this up, so either I suck a lot more than I'd previously thought, or people are just too embarrased to come out and say something. Well, I hereby call out the crappy gamers of the world, we who couldn't kill an Imp with a BFG, to rise up in defense of the great equalizer genre! Success in gaming shoudn't be based on who has the fastest reflexes any more than success in life should be based on who has the strongest biceps.
Now I've noticed some people remarking about Planetside, having played it in Beta or after release. I've heard them ragging on PS (Planetside) and I am a mite tired of it.
Now I've been playing PS since European release in late May and I can tell you this game is changing. The performance (FPS wise) is so much better now. The memory leaks and most bugs are gone. The features and tweaks come every month and in fact the game is doing just fine (as most of the Leet geeks have gone back to their CS or UT caves to play). Intentional griefers are far between and becoming rarer. Sure there are still problems, but no worse than any other MMOG.
Planetside is in fact the first and only game to hold my interest for more than a few weeks and why? Because of the teamwork and teamplay. To really planetside is all about not going out thinking of kills, or being leet or getting loads of XP to increase your rank. PS is fun when you play with other people (Teamspeak is also quite useful here). I am apart of one of the top European Vanu Sovereignty Outfits (The Immortal Serial Killers aka ISK) and I have yet to find finer buddies in any game.
Finally the reason I got into PS in the first place is exactly for almost the same reason as the author notes, the game manages to balance rewarding players spending alot of time in, but also allows the newest character to wack the leetest uber killer from one of the two other empires.
theICEBear
-C328 with the Immortal Serial Killers on Werner (PS)
A person is smart, people are deeply stupid
Here's the story of one of my experences in UO (Pre-UO:Resistance), all the actions took place in about 1 minute:
I was traveling from Britain to Cove on my horse. Suddenly 2 hidden red character (murders) jumpped in front of me, one paralyzed me with a spell, the other one start casting a explosion, energy bolt combo on me. At the same time, I started bandaging before I got any injury, blew up a trapped pouch to get me out of paralyze and drink greater heal potion at the same time in order to not die from the spell combo and the other bad guys halberd that's aiming at my head.
Seeing I've freed myself, one guy start casting stone wall and the other guy tried to paralyze me again. I ran behind a tower so their spells won't reach me, and I hid myself using my hiding skill. One of them start casting reveal and the other one threw a purple potion (bomb) at the place where I was hidden. Just as the spell is about to finish casting and the bomb almost exploded, I armed myself with a deadly poisoned dagger and took off.
The bone heads followed me and took the full blast of the bomb, I turned around and poked one guy with my dagger. I disarmed the dagger and casted greater heal, without applying it to me, I armed the dagger again, the other guy hit me with his halberd and I wacked him with my dagger and applyed heal so I'm at full health.
At this time, they're both scared (because of the deadly poison's fast effect)and start running and tried to cure the poison. Of course I won't let them do this so I chased one of them until he's poisoned to death. (the other guy ran off leving his friend to die)
Well, as you might be able to imagine, I had a lot of decision to make, and so did the bandits. I had to react fast enough to counter them. I had to know what to do and when to do it in order to have an edge.
By the way, my character's skill wasn't at the top at all, that wasn't even my pvp character but my newly created thief. It's not the character's skill that won me the fight, but my own.
I've had this kind of fights almost every day, most required much more skill than this one. So don't tell me MMORPG doesn't require skill or dexterity of the player. :P
Games shouldn't be solely about comparing relative skill wankerdom. They are games. They are meant for fun and enjoyment. Different people enjoy different things. If I want a challenge and apply skill, I am an engineer for 12 hours of my day. If I want to be able to sit back, relax and get pulled into a story in my free time, I play an RPG. And even in MMORPGs, I tend to derive great enjoyment from running around and exploring. I don't *care* if FPS players are more "skilled" as gamers, because gaming is *not* real life. I have played FPS's with friends, and I really don't enjoy them. They are not relaxing, I end up getting even more tense which defeats the point of leisure time for me. Also, I find them very jarring on my hands and wrists compared to other games (due to severe arthritis since I was 18). Different people enjoy different things, and it really bothers me when people impugn others' ideas of fun. Would you believe some people enjoy gardening? Or stamp collecting? Like, dude, how on earth can you demonstrate skill and 0wnz people when not behind a keyboard? I just think the overall topic is pointless. People should play the games they enjoy not to compare digital wankers but to have fun. And if fun is proving that you are "more skilled" than brainless RPGers, so be it. But leave the rest of us to our fun, please, without looking down on us.
How awesome is that. I'm signature number 2.
How could I say to men: "Speak louder, shout! For I am deaf!"? -Ludwig van Beethoven
You're correct that PS doesn't have location-based damage but I think thats more down to concerns over lag-related and server-load issues than anything else. Although weapons have a 'cone of fire' this just means that some weapons are more accurate (have a tighter CoF) than others or that a crouching soldier who fires in bursts will have a tighter CoF than a running and jumping soldier who is firing full-auto. There's still a lot of skill involved, although some weapons require more skill than others.
;-)
As for XP counting for a lot in PS; it counts a lot less than it does in most MMOGs... you don't get any more hit points or get any faster or more accurate or anything of the kind through XP. The two things you gain from XP are access to a broader range of equipment and the ability to use more cybernetic 'implants' (1 at level 6, 2 at level 12, 3 at level 18). A level 1 character can quite easily kill a level 20 (max level) character in Planetside, it just depends on the situation. If you're level 1 and you shoot a level 20 character with your tank then he's just as dead as anyone else. You could even just gun him down with the basic machine gun, you'd just have to find him when he's wounded, not paying attention or when numbers are on your side. Or you'd have to be *really* good.
As for commanders, planetside has two ranking systems; Battle Rank (the 'levels' I mentioned earlier) and Command Rank. You earn Command Rank by leading squads to victory rather than by killing people directly and with Command Rank comes the ability to place way-points for your squad-members, draw battle plans on the map and ultimatley call in orbital strikes on key enemy troops emplacements.
It sounds like Planetside might actually be the game you've been waiting for...
I'm a veteran Planetside player, its a game that has its flaws like any other but it has some amazing innovations in gameplay that could really move the MMOG genre along.
1) Starting characters can compete with, or cooperate with, characters of any level without being useless. What an amazing idea! Imagine if 'newbies' in other MMOGs were useful right away! (and not just so you can PK them and take their gold). PS doesn't load high-level characters down with unbeatable bonuses, they have access to more of the game's equipment but a few solid hits will kill them just as dead, this means that characters of all levels are useful on the battlefield. Net result: levelling up is worthwhile but being low-level isn't depressing and dull.
2) Both character level (time spent playing) and player skill have a part to play in success. Whether or not you think that selecting the right attack or casting the proper spell is skillful or not, hand-eye coordination can be added into the mix to make the game even more skill-based. In PS your character will have access to more toys as he levels up, making him overall more effective, but your skill is always key - from level 1 to level 20.
It seems to me that there's no reason that these two key features couldn't be included in future MMORPGs... allowing a more interactive experience for characters of all classes and levels and allowing players who are new to the game, or have less time to spend on it, to enjoy the game alongside the more experienced or obsessive gamers. It also breaks down the divide between casual and hardcore players and lets them play side by side.
For my money it seems that games like Anarchy Online or Starwars Galaxies are crying out to be played using a Planetside-like system and although it would need to be quite different for fantasy-themed games (all those melee weapons make FPS mechanics less useful) the core concepts of player skill and gameplay balance accross levels could still be included.
but not one that I respect. All the posts I've read imply that there is strategy and skill in playing your typical MMO, but they're actually talking about min/maxing. Min/maxing is the 'strategy' of gaining optimal value for your experience, knowing which skills to buy, what weapons to have, etc. The skill is knowing how the game functions and building the best possible character to match. The related skill is knowing how to 'game' the system. Figuring out how the AI works, managing the health and stats of your party, etc.
There's a final skill to these guys that ties the other two together: Deluding yourself into thinking that anything else is going on.
Perhaps the first person who figures out what it takes to kill the uber-monster and coordinates the players to do it is applying skill, but the ones who go with him? They might as well be AI party members.
I want those MMORPG's to be more than they are, I really do. I'm an old school pen and paper player, and the idea of having those amazing worlds displayed on my screen in full 3d wonder makes my heart leap with joy. But the gameplay is everything I disliked about pen and paper honed to a razor sharp edge. Everyone is a munchkin, the game IS about the leveling, and everyone talks in a modern game specific slang (uber, agro, mog), occasionally peppered with the odd "hail".
With Planetside, I feel like something new has been added to the table. The twitch component makes me feel like I'm doing something to earn my experience, regardless of the fact that the game itself is relatively shallow at this point.
Here's hoping the next batch will take the best of both worlds and make something truly extraordinary.