---

Comments:

---

'Word..' by darrenl
Submitted on 2007-07-21 10:24:00 CST
here here good sir.

Agency...holding my opinions until I sort out fact from hype, but I'm hopeful.

Aion, yeah, there's another piece of Asian MMO crap that I won't play. (heh...bet that comes back to bite me in the ass)


'Are you ready to give up what it'd take to get graphics like that?' by Scott
Submitted on 2007-07-21 16:09:10 CST
The american market demands several things that put a lot of demand on the server side of MMO's, and make it ni impossible currently to support graphics and features like that in a MMO.

W-A-S-D movement, freeform movement puts a lot of demand on servers vs point based movement like left-click movement in Korean MMO's or space sims like Eve-Online. The american market generally hates the lack and control with click based movement, it feels very artificial. Because of it were limited more on how much stress a server can take monitoring tens or hundreds of players in the same area vs Eve or Korean MMO's which can often handle twice as many.

The graphics are usually limited by the client side being able to store and render thousands upon thousands on different variations of clothing or armor, especially in an MMO which could have an area with over a hundred different players running around in it. This is why Korean MMO's typically forgo any sort of customization with only a small set of different looks per race/class combo, compared to the multitude but still limited customization see in MMO's like World of Warcraft (which still feels limited when everybody ends up wearing the same raid armor set).

If you were will to go with a 3D FPS style MMO with central meeting areas ala Diablo Assassin's creed style graphics might be doable on small servers.

But overall I think we're in for a long wait of at least 4 years or more, we need the latest gen of graphics cards to stabalize across the playerbase, and for server technology to get even faster with better clustering or virtualization techologies to scale with load dynamicly.

I am looking forward to games like the Agency as well but I agree it sounds more like hype than actual gameplay facts. I think it'll look like the new team fortress 2 with cartoony graphics, the majority of the game will be instanced missions, and overall you'll feel more cutoff from the MMO aspect of the game as there really won't be a large playing area to play in.


'punch-drunk' by Brent
Submitted on 2007-07-21 16:40:29 CST
Care to fill us in on why this idea is "American"?

Also, I should clarify: this post is part of an ongoing gripe I have not with graphics but with movement. There are several MMOs in existence and on the horizon that don't even allow a character to jump and meanwhile we have scenes like those shown in Assassins Creed (and remember my Tomb Raider Legend comments a few weeks ago?) that are built on vertical worlds and action utilizing that feature.

The MMO engine devs need to ask themselves the question: why are we stuck to the ground all the time?

This significant limitation becomes even more appalling with you consider the fact that if a single studio explored this kind of gameplay in an MMO it would instantly make MMO dev tools such as the Hero Engine and the Icarus Platform old hat. Scary idea for those companies eh?


'At least they're all different' by scytale2
Submitted on 2007-07-22 05:33:48 CST
Assassin' Creed - is this an MMO?
Definitely appears to be worth looking at.

The Agency
Whatever the guy says this is NOT a "living world" - he is in a fantasy world himself to think/say this. Some new stuff, but once again a huge focus on combat.

Age of Conan
Agree Darren that these kinds of Cut scenes make a huge difference to the immersion of games, so it is a shame that very few seem to eb done. Using NWN2's method, cut scenes are nowhere near as tricky to do too. I hope I am around in October for this one.

Aion
Actually, this looks rather better than any Korean MMO I have seen and much more like an enhanced WoW, so maybe they are onto something. Advice to the devs, though - get rid of those huge floating numbers and maybe Western people 18+ will take you seriously.




'But will the market even adopt it?' by Scott
Submitted on 2007-07-23 12:40:34 CST
My point is mainly that it's rooted in technical and market driven issues.

For the reasons outlined above and many more that'd you'd have to give up certain features in an MMO in order to gain those features of Tomb Raider style movement, I don't think the majority of the MMO players want that, nor are developers going to tackle it for a smaller market. The exception to this will likely be games like The Agency, I think this game will cater more to that style but you'll be giving up a lot of what you consider to be a true MMO.

The assumption being you're asking for a EQ2, WoW style game with freeform action and movement?

This is something that I think will be limited to FPS, Action/Adventure MMO's with small 5-10 person instanced levels, and we won't see anything like it for MMORPG's till at least the next generation after the 2007-2008 releases in 3-4 years.

I think the push towards features like Flying mounts finally getting MMORPG players off the ground helped break that technical limit and prove players want more, to feel more epic, and free to move about.

Dev's are barely getting past the stale EQ/WoW stand still and hit hotkey's to fight for action, so we've still got quite a ways to go till we can expect to do summersaults and leap over obstacles to our objectives, complete puzzles, or get the upper hand in a fight as we dodge about.

Even if we do get it, again it needs to be functional and not a superfluous visual effect.

Will the market adopt it? It's not like everyone enjoys the high adventure action/puzzle games either, so perhaps at some level maybe it is better left to niche games like The Agency?


'Well....' by darrenl
Submitted on 2007-07-23 12:52:47 CST
Frist...WASD movement as well as verticle movement have nothing to so with server loads.

Most of the implementations that Brent was asking for are very easy to implement given the power of most dev tools these days.

You can easily have Tomb Raider like movement and it still be an MMO. There would be no need to sacrifice "traditional" MMO features to add those ones. The basis which you base the trade-off you suggest is a bit weak.


'Explain yourself' by Brent
Submitted on 2007-07-23 13:06:21 CST
Scott, you have some explaining to do:

"My point is mainly that it's rooted in technical and market driven issues."

How? Who said so? What is? You need to clarify what it is that is being driven by technical and market issues. If 'it' is defined as 'MMOGs that have character action more akin to Tomb Raider, Assassins Creed and Prince of Persia' then I couldn't disagree more. The technical details of a more 'vertically-challenged' MMO are no different from the flat planes we're traveling in today's MMOs. When I say 'technical' I mean from an engineering standpoint because I do recognize that from an artist and animation standpoint it requires more work. If you believe there are additional engine-based challenges associated with the kind of MMO I'm trying to get you all to envision, please detail them here and I'll follow up by explaining how they aren't actually true. (/wink)

"you'd have to give up certain features in an MMO in order to gain those features of Tomb Raider style movement"

Like what?

"I don't think the majority of the MMO players want that, nor are developers going to tackle it for a smaller market."

Wow, this is one misguided statement. Show a WoW player Assassins Creed and ask them if they wish they could move like that in Azeroth. I bet 1 in 100 says no. And FYI, devs would love to push the envelope in this way instead of building the same boring engine over and over.

"This is something that I think will be limited to FPS, Action/Adventure MMO's with small 5-10 person instanced levels, and we won't see anything like it for MMORPG's till at least the next generation after the 2007-2008 releases in 3-4 years."

Again, tell me why. You claim we "won't see anything like it" and you're probably right because I don't know of anyone working on something of the sort, however I think your (unspoken) reasons are supposedly based on some perceived technical limitation or market push-back.

I think the push towards features like Flying mounts finally getting MMORPG players off the ground helped break that technical limit and prove players want more, to feel more epic, and free to move about.

"we've still got quite a ways to go till we can expect to do summersaults [sic] and leap over obstacles to our objectives"

Other types of games have been doing this for years. The tech is there and yet Vanguard insisted on releasing with animations comparable to its 9 year old predecessor.


'Lucy has some Explainin' to do' by Scott
Submitted on 2007-07-23 14:29:00 CST
It'd probably help if we clarified exactly what type of an MMO were talking about here? Again, I'm assuming a true EQ/WoW MMORPG, WASD movement, customizable characters up to the WoW level, with support for up to 100-150 players in viewable range having their data synced without adverse effects.

darrenl, "Frist...WASD movement as well as verticle movement have nothing to so with server loads."

WASD and vertical can have a significant impact on MMO performance, doubly so for games that need to support large scale PvP or Raid encounters. Do you really think that the developers of all the Korean MMO's, or games like Eve-Online, Shadowbane, Guildwars, etc pick mouse click based movement because players prefer it? Hardly. It gives a significant advantage of calculating player movement and syncing them with all the other players in the area - an advantage that can be nearly twice as effective in allowing hundreds of more players on the screen at a time vs WASD.

It is becoming less of an issue these days with superior engine development and coding that companies like Blizzard pioneers squeezing every ounce of performance out of their networking and servers, but it still puts a limit on large groups of players in a single area and the amount of unique data being passed.

Brent, "How? Who said so? What is? You need to clarify what it is that is being driven by technical and market issues. If 'it' is defined as 'MMOGs that have character action more akin to Tomb Raider, Assassins Creed and Prince of Persia' then I couldn't disagree more. The technical details of a more 'vertically-challenged' MMO are no different from the flat planes we're traveling in today's MMOs. When I say 'technical' I mean from an engineering standpoint because I do recognize that from an artist and animation standpoint it requires more work. If you believe there are additional engine-based challenges associated with the kind of MMO I'm trying to get you all to envision, please detail them here and I'll follow up by explaining how they aren't actually true."

The Art & Animation issue along is one yes, depending on the approach used to render the character and equipment (future weapons, armor, capes..) it could add a lot of additional time to the development schedule.

Another is the ongoing issue of level design and exploitation of levels. Even in an MMO like WoW we were constantly seeing exploitation of positioning primarily in vertical ledges or structures to beat bosses or prevent being attacked by guards when attacking other players. Adding an environment specifically designed to encourage that interaction is going to significantly complicated level and world design unless better systems are developed.

The more I think about it though, I do agree about it being less of an issue with the z-axis implementation.

Even if you drop and forgo potential technical issues, are the Market issues any less. Is the idea to make this new type of gameplay a standard feature for the entire market?

Two issues I see are #1 the developers and companies themselves are concerned with increased cost in dev time/implementation, and what I feel would be their dismissal of the market demand for it. True or not, for most dreaming of capturing a large WoW slice of the MMO market they want to cater to the lowest common denominator, and I feel they see that as the 'casual' gamer that's definitely not hardware in abilities or demands of their game, and likely wouldn't have the dexterity or inclination to play a game with such a system.

Yes, Developers do love to push the envelope thats what keeps their jobs interesting, but unless they're blessed withan independent company like Blizzard they often have to answer to taskmasters companies like Sony Online Entertainment that fund the project and call the shots.

We've already seen MMO's dumbed down A LOT, especially with WoW's success. As much as a minor feature it seems, I think even a small one like this does have a market impact. Whether it could be mainstream, or whether in would be segmented into a niche game is the question in my mind.

Brent, "Wow, this is one misguided statement. Show a WoW player Assassins Creed and ask them if they wish they could move like that in Azeroth. I bet 1 in 100 says no. And FYI, devs would love to push the envelope in this way instead of building the same boring engine over and over."

Well I'm not sure how fair it is to drop the name of the #1 most anticipated game and ask an average player if they'd want to look and move like that in their favorite MMO. ;) Of course they'll say yes without thinking of any potential impact on the rest of the game.

As an online gamer myself that's been playing from BBS's, to text MUDs, to current day.. I would welcome a change to more action oriented free form movement, but not if I have to sacrifice my experience and limit it to a smaller limited environment resembling more of a single player or small multiplayer game. Keep in mind, I enjoy PvP and free form action like the moves Lara can make, but I absolutely hate the puzzles in those games.

But I've also been part of and run a guild with over 200 members at its peak a good portion of those being the casual members, some guys, often wives, relatives, and a few people with disabilities or medical issues. There's a portion of that group that simply didn't even have the reaction time or dexterity to tackle WoW on anything but a "slow" setting with a controlled environment of their group moving and taking everything at a even pace (definitely no pvp). Even if it’s not a physical issue, it may be they simply don't want that challenge, and just want a easy & fun game.

Having them carefully time jumps, leaps, dodge obstacles, move objects, requiring all the dexterity and timing as possible while [x] other players waited on them to keep up would be very stressful.

If Tomb raider features are standard in a mass market game and are basically a requirement to pass various maps or instances for all members you have to admit that would exclude or not be accepted by a potion of the market.

So maybe I am wrong to say a majority wouldn't want it? However I still think it presents more of an obstacle to being accepted in a mainstream MMO.

Vanguard was a travesty, at least we can all agree on that. ;)

They aren't the first company and they won't be the last to take shortcuts in development in order to cut costs and release early.

Anyways, when I look at this as a whole my feeling is would be better left to a niche game unless Its implementation can be explained better, unless of course you think the target playerbase is being severely underestimated?

(need a bigger comment box!)


'Didn't CoH provide Flying, Climbing Walls etc?' by Kasil
Submitted on 2007-07-23 20:35:42 CST
I did not play all that long as the lack of loot kind of killed it for me but didn't CoH provide flying, climbing of walls and free form movement that Assassins Creed shows here?


'Dreams... and realities' by Grimwell
Submitted on 2007-07-24 01:42:51 CST
Better graphics are expensive, and most people can't push them. EQII took hits for this when it launched - few could actually run the game on 'pretty' settings. It's not the only game that suffered from it. So there needs to be some balance unless you want to build a game for the narrow hardcore gamer market that has super cool machines.

Consoles absolve this to a degree, because they can push some very nice graphics, and now that they are connected, it's much easier to deliver the graphical oooo and people don't have to spend 2K on it.

On the point why WASD is more 'expensive' server side than point and click... and mind you I don't code graphics engines...

Let's look at how the server handles each.

When the client using WASD starts to move it tells the server, I'm going in this direction, on this path, and it has to update at all times for slight changes. If you want to do a serpentine with your characters (left and right around imaginary cones) the server has to have constant updates about your heading, facing, and all that jazz. It's a constant stream of data, and it has to be arbitrated for every person playing the game, and communicated to everyone who can see your character. That's a lot of data being crunched constantly.

Point and click differs because you click where you want to go and the client sends the server an 'I'd like to be here!' order. The server then decides on your path and off you go! You can even push the movement to the clients side entirely, and just update their target and end position on the server side and that's it. New clicks from the client become 'interrupt' commands to change that final destination, but you don't need a constant stream of checks for the movement.. the server just needs to know where you want to end up. Even with multiple characters on screen, the server needs to know where everyone is, and where they want to be. Everything else is done without further player input.

I'm sure I'm over simplifying things, but that's the jist of why I think Scott is making sense. WASD demands constant communication between the client and server because the client can change anything at any time.


'Am I missing something here?' by Akely
Submitted on 2007-07-24 04:55:30 CST
Are these not rendered CG stuff and ingame movies? Except for that lost one, which to me seems nothing new. (And has about the worst sound effects I've ever experienced, btw.) I sure would like AC to both look and play like that, but the constantly moving camera-to-player angles is usually an annoyance.

Game trailers have, IMO, as much likeness to the game as... hm... I can't think of another thing as misleading at the moment. Kind of defaltes my point, but what the heck!


'Look at Eq2's in game movie - its the same sort of thing.' by Dathmar
Submitted on 2007-07-24 08:52:45 CST
Everquest 2 has an in game movie as you start the game.
Its very similar to what we see above, really exciting but really does not reflect the game much at all.
The likeness (to me) its a bit like those kids toy adverts of the 80s where they made the toys look a lot more excisting then they really were.

As to the Aion in game footage - yes, as with most Korean MMOs - loads of Streetfigher combat sounds , Streetfigher type scrolling combat text and really cheesy music when you aren't in combat that annoys to distraction - can't see anything new here.
I'll probably avoid it as I haven't found one Korean MMO so far that is worth playing for more than about a week.





'Point and Click' by Brent
Submitted on 2007-07-24 11:52:46 CST
Grimwell, you're absolutely right about the network messaging savings of point and click verses WASD, but I'd like to note that Scott derailed the conversation from the whole UP and DOWN point that we were originally talking about... a feature that doesn't (or shouldn't if coded properly) have a huge impact on the tech of game engines. (See CoH as various people have mentioned.)

Interesting related story. Check the latest MogArmy.net podcast (#70 at about 41 minutes in). They talk about this too. Well, not the tech, but the fact that MMO development is really light years behind in so many ways. Oddly enough, the ways in which MMOs fall behind most dramatically are on the client side, not the server side (which is the part that most would assume is the excuse).

As a sort of summary, I know we can jump through technical details all day long, but the bottom line comes down to this (and I'm stealing this from Gary and Ryan): Take cutting edge MMO like Age of Conan. Watch the in-game videos for that. And then load the trailer for Mass Effect. Load the in-game videos for Aion (see above) and then load the Assassin's Creed videos. It's sad.


'There is little more irritating' by scytale2
Submitted on 2007-07-24 15:05:43 CST
...when you hear techies argue amongst themselves as to whether something is technically feasible or not.

What you rarely seem to hear is, how the techies are going to forego their own negativity and figure out how they are going to respond to what the public wants.

It's a bit like taking your car into a garage, when you know that it only has something minor wrong with it, but you know that when you speak to the garage, they'll give you a sharp intake of breath and say "That'll be expensive". All it is is a power trip, where the techies can't accept that they are in a service industry and not driving the car.

It's this type of tech-biased attitude which means we always end up with the same games, time and time again and techies pat themselves on the back for doing the same old job.

Also, one day people posting on this site are going to leap out of a small-minded view that we are not "playing games" here, we are spending leisure time. Saying that games do this and games do that will ultimately lead you into exactly the same place as you started. Exploring what the public want to spend their leisure time doing will create you new genres and make loads of cash for whomever makes the leap.


'moving around' by Sente
Submitted on 2007-07-24 18:19:16 CST
Isickler,

You are correct in that CoV/CoH provides an environment to move around freeform and ragdoll physics and it can certainly be taken advantage of in fights etc. Some zones are more flat when it comes to the content, while others make more use of the x-y-z and players' and mobs' movement abilities.


scytale2,

You have a good point there, it is too easy to not see the forest for all the trees. You can't ignore technical limitations though, so there will be compromises to be made.

Personally, I don't consider it a big deal or a problem that MMOG games might just not look as good as some other non-MMOG games. That is only one piece of the gaming experience.


'the bottom line' by Scott
Submitted on 2007-07-24 19:08:57 CST
I was hoping somebody would hit on the other points I raised, but for the sake of discussion any technical issues can be resolved one way or another.

It's not that companies haven't been trying at some level to innovate. There's already been several announced titles and I believe a few released utilizing the Unreal 3 Engine (Stargate, Bioware, Huxley, DC Comics Online, Fury, Warmonger, Vanguard Expansion, and several unannounced NC Soft and Sony titles.). That's all just using the Unreal 3 engine, not counting anything using any other engines that may be up to par.

Even with a solid FPS engine like Unreal 3 which should have given them a leg up to match the titles you listed above in effects and movement I have yet to see any games using it do so as a true MMO without sacrificing established norms of gameplay, graphics, or features.

Again, getting back to the core of your point being that you want to see the features from a game like Assassin's Creed made standard for a MMO, aren't you really asking that action/adventure gameplay to replace the current systems (or lack of) already in place?

If so, I think that goes back to my point of the demands that puts on players to engage in that genre or type of gameplay, and how many players really want or can play at that level in a mass market MMO.

Is there a way to expand the MMO genre to match the superior single player experience and still capture the lowest common denominator of MMO players? Should we bother? Should the publishers?

Perhaps this would make for a better roundtable discussion on a future podcast? Seems like there's a bit more to it than you'd think.


'Patronising' by scytale2
Submitted on 2007-07-24 19:19:09 CST
Scott - ignoring the whole aspect of trying to limit people by saying that actually they won't really want all this versatility, you are still sitting in the FPS or WoW box. Have you never felt unduly restricted in an MMO? Have you never wanted to climb a wall or swim in a river or cross a chasm by building a bridge?

Sure, if you consider that you are merely playing a game and it's fun, so why try to add other bits in if what we have does the job. But what if you have immersed yourself in another land? You have virtual friends, business, accolades and responsibilities in this land, yet some techie guy says that climbing a ladder would put too much strain on the server...


'The merging' by darrenl
Submitted on 2007-07-24 20:19:34 CST
...Scott, you're also missing the fact that genres are starting to merge at this point. We see FPS shooters with RPG elements. We see RTSs with RPG elements. Gotta think outside the box just a bit. Just because a feature set "belongs" to an adventure game, why can't we put good elements into an MMO? Where does it say we can't? Who says they have to replace anything? You seem to think that if you put a feature in, that you must take one out and I couldn't disagree more.


'Am I really the one being patronizing?' by Scott
Submitted on 2007-07-25 13:22:55 CST
Devil’s advocate here again, yes what we have now currently brings in several hundred billion dollars a year in revenue.

This industry, with over half of it basically owned by World of Warcraft is built upon patronizing MMO players. It's bread and butter is a monty haul style gameplay of no risk and great rewards. Over 9 million players across the globe sure seem to agree that they enjoy brain dead gameplay of time = reward, not skill.

Am I being harsh? In a game with no real penalties and over simplified grinding and level treadmills that prevent anyone from overachieving or standing out based on skill alone, you find yourself just one of many "heroes" who won the game with the most time /played.

You talk about games merging? We've had merged genre MMO's launch and fall flat. Neocron was a sci-fi FPS MMO with a interesting Bladerunner style theme. Planetside, a FPS MMO. We have several more niche FPS action MMO's coming out this year too and I'm afraid they'll miss the mark too with only a few hundred thousand subscribers.

True, I don't think we have any real open ended game with full freedom of movement and truly engaging environments, but as long as publishers can serve the cheap McDonalds MMO gaming experience with tens of millions served and walk away with billions in the bank, how much attention or risk do you think they'll take to break the norm that they've profited so well from?

Again, you may ask for it, but are the 9+ million MMO gamers currently grinding away or raiding for the 100th time to get their latest epic set piece truly asking for a new level of gameplay? Or are they perfectly happy with their current situation of no risk, and just an time invested to get the next reward. Talk is cheap, will players put the money where their mouth is in subscription fees to embrace skill based MMO's over stale EQ/WoW grind fests where rewards come cheap & easy?

How happy will they be when they find out they aren't the badass heroes they thought they were when the true gaming savants wipe the floor with them or the content since they aren't held back by the decade old MMO game mechanics? Will they still keep paying that subscription?

That is why I truly feel a game that actually puts some real expectations or demands on MMO players will be relegated to a smaller niche game catering specifically to the players that want it until this industry and its players wake up out of their self induced coma.

I want to make it clear, I'm not proud of this line of thinking, I don't think it’s for the best, but I do think it’s here to stay until the MMO gamers truly demand something different with their subscription fees by unsubscribing from WoW, EQ, EQ2, Vanguard (The last 2 people holding out in there) and buying alternative MMO's that offer the unique gameplay with real risk & reward, and gameplay features that require real dexterity and skill such as being discussed here.


'WoW' by scytale2
Submitted on 2007-07-25 19:43:27 CST
You can't criticise WoW players for playing the one game out there which is fun to play.

I can also tell you that at least half of them would drop it like a shot, if they found another MMO that:
a) Their friends would move to
b) Gave them more to do and was equally fun

Most WoW-players I know realise that the game is limited. It's just that there's nothing better out there, bar Vanguard, which has its own problems.

Too many people talk of WoW as the Holy Grail, because they simply can't get past the money it is making. Money corrupts thinking and that's that.


'nothing is free' by Moorgard
Submitted on 2007-07-26 00:39:17 CST
I agree that an MMO that looks and plays like Assassin's Creed would be awesome. I also agree that it's unrealistic to expect something like that for a while.

Scott has a lot of good points in what he says, but to me it all comes down to choices. The things achieved in a game like Assassin's Creed are possible because it gives up a lot of the features we MMO fans take for granted. Want a world as big as Azeroth with the detail of Creed? That's gonna take a while to make. Will Creed have all the social tools, such as the guild UI and personal housing, that EQ2 does? I'm going to guess not.

The cost of MMOs needing to do so much processing on the server instead of the client cannot be underestimated. Why don't more MMOs do kickass physics? Because if a landslide or an explosion is going to impact gameplay, it has to be calculated on the server--and physics on the server is ex-pen-sive. Sure, you can do non-gameplay impacting physics on the client, but most players will hunger for the real deal.

In game design, nothing is free. It's easy enough to say "Game A does this and Game B does that, so I want you to make a Game C that does both," but it simply isn't that easy. Making a regular old EQ-style MMO is hard enough; having to integrate entirely different styles of gameplay on top of that is a tall order.

This isn't making excuses. It's just how it is.

The genre is innovating, but devs have to choose which fronts to innovate upon. Age of Conan has made different choices than Warhammer Online, and Hellgate London will make different choices still. Sometimes it seems the innovation comes frustratingly slowly, but keep in mind that MMOs are handcuffed in some of the same ways today that they were back in 1997.

But don't worry. We'll get there.


'huh?' by darrenl
Submitted on 2007-07-26 07:23:10 CST
Moorgard...what features is a game like Battlefield 2 giving up on the RTS and RPG side of things? It's a multiplayer game, has stellar graphics, physics, and tracks stats like an RPG and at it's core is a shooter.

Don't think it's base as a shooter gave up much being online or integrating persistent player profiles.

I'm sorta convinced that a trade-off does exist, but we're seeing genres being mixed all the time these days with features being integrated very smoothly...and this would include online play.



To post comments, please login.