Tobold's Blog
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
 
An orc by any other name would smell as sweet

In the open Sunday thread Nils asked "Would you like to speculate on the nature of Blizzards new MMO?". The correct answer to that is "No, I don't like speculating.", but I'm afraid that wouldn't make for a very good blog post. So here are my thoughts on the next Blizzard MMO:

A friend of mine is in the Starcraft 2 beta (no NDA), and finds it is solid, graphically much improved, and plays exactly like Starcraft 1. I watched several Diablo 3 gameplay videos, and I think Diablo 3 is solid, graphically much improved, and will play exactly like Diable 2. So my prediction about the next Blizzard MMO is that it will be solid, graphically much improved, and will play exactly like World of Warcraft. And I'm not excited about the idea.

That is not to say that the next Blizzard MMO will be WoW 2, and have orcs and elves and wizards in a fantasy world. But as the bard said, "What's in a name? That which we call an orc by any other name would smell as sweet." The next Blizzard MMO could well be Steampunk or any other genre. And it wouldn't be beyond the means of Blizzard to create a completely new brand, not based on any existing intellectual property. But I fully expect to have to create a character by choosing a race and a class in that game, and pop into the world as level 1 in front of an NPC with a glowing symbol floating over his head, which indicates that I should click on him to be told to go and kill 10 foozles.

Sadly at this point there are some people among my readers who think "But what Tobold just listed is the definition of a MMORPG". No, it isn't. Having a MMORPG based on classes and levels and quests is not the only possible way, otherwise you'd need to label a huge number of games like Ultima Online, A Tale in the Desert, or Puzzle Pirates as being "not a MMORPG". The class/level/quest model of MMORPGs is just the historically most successful way to create a MMORPG, which is why it is widely copied.

What I would wish is that Blizzard would create a radical new vision of a MMORPG, which combines Blizzard's attention to detail and ability to create huge amounts of content with the will to differentiate the new game from World of Warcraft in terms of gameplay. Unfortunately there is nothing in the history of Blizzard which would indicate that they are able to do that. They are the masters of perfecting existing ideas, not of coming up with new ones. I fully expect the next Blizzard MMORPG to be a great game, and I already bet that it will get more than 1 million subscribers. But I'm afraid they will get there by playing it safe, and producing a solid, graphically improved game with more or less the same gameplay as World of Warcraft.
Comments:
What's missing is that Blizzard *sometimes* polishes others' ideas, like the numerous official improvements to WoW taken from competing games or user mods. What could stop them from taking a successful open world game (say, EVE, which would be the best choice) and working on making the concept mainstream-popular (as opposed to niche).
 
I think the Bobby Kotick Factor is important. On the one hand I think he is much more likely to authorise a safe bet sequel that milks the franchise like a cash cow than a genuinely innovative new game. On the other hand I cannot see him allowing Blizzard the freedom they used to have to polish the game "until it is done".
 
Don't lose hope yet, Tobold. As you said, they're masters of perfecting ideas - and there have been lots of ideas floating around in the MMORPG-space over the last five years, it's just that rarely someone has the courage to try to form them into anything else but "WoW with gimmick X". Maybe it will be like WoW: solid, graphically much improved, and finding just the right approach to push the genre evolution one step forward. Maybe. Time will tell.
 
For once I must disagree with you completely Tobold. I don`t think Blizard is interested in selling a box with subscribers hanging on for less than the trial period and then going back to wow or something else. I think they need to step up to the plate and produce something completely new. Wow with another theme, some tweeks and maby some eyecandy is not going to cut it. They need to get people to be cought in the game for a longer period than a few months without getting the feeling of, hmm isn`t this just another wow. And with a completely different new mmorpg they can keep their monster money train running for a long time. Going after short cash would be sad and really stupid for a company of Blizards proportion.
 
Yea that sounds about right. Blizzard is also now flying under the evil overlords of the industry Acti-NO-Vision . Even if Blizzard now got somewhat free reign, i doubt that will last, and Activision is clearly out to pull an EA with "churning out the same old crap every year" .

So i won't be surprised at all if this "philosophy" filters through to Blizzard. At least we will get -quality- , but i would not expect a genre changing game. Just like Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 is not going to re-define RPGs or RTS games.
 
I don't really care to speculate either, but if they do go for something completely different (ie. a shooter) then there's a good chance that a lot of current players won't like it. But it might still be worth it if they can pull in a new crowd.
 
Yeah, Blizzard is known to pick a genre and polish it to perfection. They're great at it. But they haven't created a single new IP in a decade...

You have to ask yourself, is an updated WoW with new graphics and a game which takes the best ideas from all the mmorpgs released in the last decade a bad idea? I'd sign for that immediately.

What I do expect to see is user generated content. One thing is obvious in WoW: the developers can't create content fast enough. Allow ten million players to generate content and add a good shifting system and you're set. It's important to be able to filter out the good content. A website with a voting system would do that.
 
Two words: Starcraft MMORPG.
 
I know we have played this game before on your blog Tobold, but I am honestly interested: in the context of the next Blizzard MMO, what are the currently existing features (either in WoW or other games) that you would like to see incorporated?

Given that it is unlikely that Blizzard will try and do anything radically different from the mainstream of the industry, I think we need to restrict ourselves to currently existing game features. With that limitation in place, it seems to me that the only features that have undergone signifigant development/improvement since WoW's launch are the cash shops, which are not exactly the kind of feature you can build a WoW-killer/replacement around.
 
What is missing from this equation are details about this next Blizzard MMO.

Blizzard has, in recent history, released games that have been linked in some way to previous IP's. This allows them a userbase from the get-go, which played a huge part in WoW's early success.

However, I think that mbp is on to something with his "Bobby Kotick" factor comment. Blizzard did -not- need to jump into bed with Activision for any reason, and the only real thing that Activision stands to gain from this marriage is an interest in a completely new IP, which begs the question of how much cash Activision has infused into this new union.

Couple that with the fact that several of Infinity Ward's(Makers of Modern Warefare 2) top members have left in recent days, and one can see that things arent as cosy around the Activision/Blizzard house as one would think. Modern Warefare has generated sales in excess of $1 Billion, yes Billion, dollars since its release in November. $550 million of that in just the first 5 days, surpassing even Avatar ticket sales in the same timeframe. How does one let the brightest minds of a gaming franchise just walk out the door when fans will be counting on future releases?

At least Kaplan and the original WoW crew got out before all of this took place. One cant help but think that the next Blizzard MMO offering will contain the same kind of crack-pipe addicting elements of WoW and recent games, where challenge and achievement means next to nothing as badges and free epics are handed out en masse.

I hope I am wrong.
 
Blizzard created 3 completely new games - Warcraft/Starcraft (or we can count Warcraft III and Starcraft as two different games), Diablo and WoW.

If we look at the Blizzard history - they simultaneously creating new games and remaking old on new technology level.

step 1

remake: Warcraft II
new: Diablo and Starcraft.

step 2
remake: Warcraft III and Diablo II
new: WoW

step 3:

remake: Starcraft II and Diablo 3 and Cataclysm

new: ? next MMO

And you already wrote about this new MMO, I can bet, it will be World of Farmcraft.

May be it is look frivolous, but it is very good idea in a tideway of Blizzard design ideas.

I can add to your idea only one thing - new battle system for RPG side - more showy - like action and FPS games where players need to move and stats do not solve all problems.
 
Yea that sounds about right. Blizzard is also now flying under the evil overlords of the industry Acti-NO-Vision .

I think,that it is Activision flying under Blizzard and Activision managers can only pray to Blizzard games.

As I know, in some year Blizzard games make 70% of Activision total income.

If Blizzard or the core of their developers will go away - it will ruin Activision and their stock price forever.

MW2 make 1 billion - but WoW make more money every year. And parts of CoD franchise were made by different developers - but no one can even clone Blizzard games. There is no serious clones of Starcraft or Diablo or Warcraft III - and all clones of WoW does not get even to 1% of WoW success.
 
I think you've overstated the 'sequel to WoW' perspective.

While WoW used many of the elements of Diablo, it had enough new elements to make it a standalone title in its own right.

I believe the new MMO will do the same. If it's only 'WoW but better', you'll see a mass-migration. I don't think this is Acti-Blizzard's strategy.

WoW, SCII and Diablo3 are sufficiently distinct that Blizzard will be able to reach into our pockets 3 times. Anything that upsets this balance or canabalises subscriptions is not going to please shareholders...
 
It became interesting and I go for more information to Wikipedia.

Activision and Blizzard Entertainment still exist as separate entities.[9] The holding company does not publish games under its central name and instead uses its subsidiaries to publish games, similar to how Vivendi Games operated before the merger.[10] The merger makes Activision parent company of Vivendi Games former divisions.

While Blizzard retained its autonomy and corporate leadership, other Vivendi Games divisions were not so fortunate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision_Blizzard
 
WoW, SCII and Diablo3 are sufficiently distinct that Blizzard will be able to reach into our pockets 3 times. Anything that upsets this balance or canabalises subscriptions is not going to please shareholders...

Be able to reach into our pocket 4 times - much more better. )

But here is an interview with Blizzard COO Paul Sams exactly about this theme:

These are brainstorming types of conversations because we anticipate the question, and we’re concerned about it. Is it going to cannibalize or not? And the good news is, I think the game is going to be significantly differentiated enough. Such that, you’re not going to feel like they’re one in the same resulting in that you have to pick or choose. My feeling is that they’re distinct enough to where you’re going to say, “Okay, I have all my friends over here. I dig this, I have a lot of time and energy in this, I’ve got these characters and my guild, and this that and the other.” So I have connectivity there, and I want to continue that connectivity. But man, I think, “Well, this is awesome, and I want to go check this out too.”
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2009/08/blizzard-co-interview/
 
My hopes are on a Blizzard quality standard version of darkfall. Highly unlikely, but one can dream...
 
Another another side note, i'm sure there's a saying floating around the internet in the lines of

Q: "What killed Everquest?"
A: "Everquest 2"

Wonder about it :). Blizzard will need to time their release perfectly, because if anything remotely -different- and -fresh- release in the same timespan as WoW 2.0 or Starcraft MMO [or whatever theme] , people are going to use the opportunity to "try something else" .
 
i like the way you describe what a MMORPG can be. But before we doing that, define first what RPG is.

Back to basics....
 
This is slightly off topic, but I feel the mention of WoW 2 pertains to this.

The next xpac is really WoW 2.0

It is the first time since the game launched that we have a total revamping of not only mainstay game mechanics, but real storyline progression, complete 1-60 zone changes/progression, and a movement from many of the "archaic" concepts that have been a part of WoW and mmos in general. We've had major changes before, but never had so many at the same time that will drastically change almost every aspect of the game from that lvl 5 Troll, to PVP, to PVE.

This expansion should stop any talk of a WoW 2, because thats exactly what we are getting with Cata. Instead of splitting the playerbase Blizzard has simply change their game to essentially what a WoW 2 would have been.
 
To add to that. Just look at the WoW 1.0 and look at the version of WoW we have right now. They are so different that if WoW after launch and WoW post Wrath had different names you could mistake them for different games. Almost all the game mechanics have been tweaked/changed or completely thrown out since launch, the classes and specs are radically different. Hell change the race/class/city names and you couldn't tell the two versions are the same game. Cata will just finally bring the major overworld changes to what is now essentially WoW:The Sequel.
 
@ Vedomir, Blizzard did not create three entirely new games in Warcraft, Diablo, and WoW.

Warcraft: Orcs & Humans (being its full title)? Westwood Studios released the RTS Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty 2 years prior to WarCraft's release. Dune II was not as successful as Warcraft, but it was still very popular and still had everything we've come to expect in an RTS. Blizzard took the Dune II idea and put their own spin on it.

Diablo? How about Rogue, widely accepted as the father of all action-RPG type games. Blizzard took the action-RPG idea and put their own spin on it.

World of Warcraft? Come on! You're kidding, right? You're really just trolling, aren't you? World of Warcraft is a new game? Everquest? MUDs? MOOs? Tigole was a big name in EQ before he moved to Blizzard and worked on WoW.

Blizzard do not make new games. They take existing, successful ideas, polish them to a brilliant shine and in the process create great games, but they do not make new games.
 
Blizzard has already stated that their next MMO will be an original IP. I was surprised. I figured an MMO Starcraft was a sure thing.

I'd like to see some shooter elements in it, but true FPS stuff and not kind of shooting we had in Tabula Rasa.

I sort of like leveling and improving my character, so I'm ok with that in a new game. I like theme parks because I enjoy Blizzard's always improving ability for creating interesting content. But I'd like dynamic player-driven content too. And I'd like some randomized "dungeons" like we get in Diablo.

Even if all Blizzard does is polish and refine existing ideas, that's ok. There are a lot of things they can add to their next MMO that would be interesting to see -- Blizzard's take on housing, better guild support (how about in-game guild message boards?), more destructible terrain, more use of phasing, etc.
 
Blizzard did not create three entirely new games in Warcraft, Diablo, and WoW.

I mean new to Blizzard. The point of the Tobold post were that Blizzard will copy WoW in their new project.

I think they will create somesing new - not entirely new for the whole computer games, but new to Blizzard.

It will not be a copy of WoW, Diablo, Starcraft or Warcraft.

Blizzard do not make new games. They take existing, successful ideas, polish them to a brilliant shine and in the process create great games, but they do not make new games.

The main question - what games we call new.

Yes, I know. But Blizzard do not clone other games. They take existing ideas and develop them to the ideal state.

There is a lot of ideas that require Blizzard development and polish. Much more then single WoW style MMO - especially when Blizzard promise infinite addons to WoW, while it will be interesting to players.

By the way Diablo was original. I remember Dune II and even Dune I, Meridian 59 and Ultima Online - but I do not remember ancestor of Diablo - the idea of rogue genre itself cant be count, or we can describe RTS as clone of turn-based strategies - as they both strategy. Or even clone of the chess.

PS Dune II and first games of C&C franchise were very popular, may be more popular then Warcraft, but developers themselves killed C&C.
 
Thanks Tobold :)
I knew you wouldn't like to speculate. But look at it this way: If you are wrong nobody will even remember.
If you hit the nail on the head, however :)

I still hope that Blizzard tries to perfect EVE Online. But I do agree that you version is more probable, though. Let's say 50% to your version, 30% to EVE perfection and 20% to something surprising.
 
There are a lot of things they can add to their next MMO that would be interesting to see -- Blizzard's take on housing, better guild support (how about in-game guild message boards?), more destructible terrain, more use of phasing, etc.

I think, that such changes can be added into the WoW in the next expansions, after Cataclysm.

For the new MMO I see some evident features

1) World of Farmcraft and integration with Facebook etc

2) User generated content like Second Life

3) Better battle system - more showy, more dynamic, that will be better suits to the cybersport and TV translations.

Something like Prince of Persia or God of War

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIGuW1ABKyM

Imagine raid for 10 players with such visual....

An existing ideas, that Blizzard can take and polish. ))
 
Vedomir:

Put this kind of graphic in a raid and you will be have a monster headache after 2 minutes playing. Additionally you won't really see anything while looking at the screen. Just flashes and more flashes.

Besides: This looks too easy and with no challenges at all.

I'm also don't fele immersed into such kinds of over-exaggeration. James Bond looks credible after looking at this.
 
I'd like to see some shooter elements in it, but true FPS stuff and not kind of shooting we had in Tabula Rasa.

Extremely bad idea, and I'm pretty sure Blizzard is aware of that, so the rumors of a fps Blizzard MMO are completely untrue.

The basic premise of what you call "true FPS stuff" is that sub-second reaction times and aiming determine your success in the game. That works great for male teenagers and young adults. That works horribly for the majority of the current customer base of World of Warcraft, which is more female and older on average than the typical FPS player. Two thirds of current WoW players would never play an FPS game for long, not even if it was made by Blizzard.
 
Put this kind of graphic in a raid and you will be have a monster headache after 2 minutes playing. Additionally you won't really see anything while looking at the screen. Just flashes and more flashes.

Are you forget WoW raids and dungeons? A huge sea of flashing FX where you can't see other player and look only on interface for doing your job?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XodAfSKLmGA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8NDBlSpM4g

Besides: This looks too easy and with no challenges at all.

It is only idea with realization for 1 player. The blood and distance of camera can be changed - idea is about game system.

It modern wow standard combat is: stay in one place and use skills in right time. Only stats on your gear will determine - will that fireball hit you or not. You cannot jump from it.

Only raid bosses looks different - but it is not a game - it is special encounters.
 
Starcraft 2 is Starcraft 1 with pretty graphics and no LAN play. That is a no purchase in my book. C&C 4 offers new gameplay features that Blizzard missed in SC2.

Cataclysm is WoW 4. Burning Crusade was WoW 2, WotLK is WoW 3.

The next Blizzard MMO is probably something even more casual to draw in the 20 million Farmville players. It's more money!
 
Two thirds of current WoW players would never play an FPS game for long, not even if it was made by Blizzard.

I agree, completely.

It does, however, beg the question of whether or not Blizzard will retain the same type of fight mechanics in their new MMO. If they do stay away from a twitch component in their new offering, does that mean we will still be slaves to the almighty random number generator as well?

I'd really like to see an alternative combat system, but I'm afraid that a radical shift would cause player confusion and would negatively affect player retention if it were too foreign. Add in the issues of balancing a new combat system between PvE and PvP, and it stands the chance to get ugly real quick. What I mean by that, is unless Blizzard caters to its current WoW userbase, and retains similar combat elements from WoW, they stand the chance of alienating a substantial number of current WoW players.

Tobold, have you considered how the migration of WoW players to a new MMO might occur - considering WoW will more than likely still be around when the new MMO is released?
 
Tobold, have you considered how the migration of WoW players to a new MMO might occur - considering WoW will more than likely still be around when the new MMO is released?

Which is one of the important reasons for why I think Blizzard will not copy/paste WoW. It just doesn't make sense.

WoW can be resold for forever. They'll do it for the forth time soon.

They should develop something that supplements WoW. An EVE-perfection would certainly make sense. The prove of concept has been delivered already. They just need to make it a little bit more casual-friendly and polish, polish, polish, ...
 
The conundrum is that no company has the resources to do more; yet since 300k subscribers would be a failure at Activision, Blizzard has great incentive to not be too innovative.

There are 2 dials and a switch they can adjust that will greatly affect my enjoyment. I can not conceive they would turn on non-consentual PvP. But they can adjust the extent of crafting and twitching. The professions have always been a bit weak in WoW. And it is very distressing how much more FPS/xbox Wotlk has become. Especially managing healing mana versus now getting out of the fire in 1500ms while making sure there is a heal every 2000ms.
 
Blizzards next MMO is a new IP, will be targeted towards the casual market, and will implement FPS.
 
I realize that twitch gaming will turn off a lot of gamers, but you can mix the twitch stuff with the traditional acquire target and roll the dice combat too. Some classes could just be old-school and not have to be twitchy, and some classes could use FPS aiming. As long as the damage and damage mitigation each class could do was comparable, I don't see it driving away players.

I think the biggest challenge to twitch gaming in an MMO is actually pulling it off in an open world with dozens of players running around. Isn't Huxley now basically an instanced game?

And I don't think Blizzard's next MMO will cannabilize WoW that much. I fully expect an all-in-one pass where you get access to both games for a reasonable price. We'll have to see how greedy Bobby Kotick is. I think $20 for WoW and game X will be ok with millions of us.
 
I'm hoping Blizzard remakes Eve Online.

It fits the criteria of being new to Blizzard, but pioneered elsewhere. That gives Blizzard room to add in their customary polish. It's different enough from WoW so that it won't automatically cannibalize WoW subscriptions.

Plus, I'd love to play a space shooter Privateer-style game that wasn't so complex as "spreadsheets in space".
 
Regarding the FPS/Twitch system, i would more look into what Age of Conan did in making the existing "action-bar" system more dynamic and more "active" .

Even LOTRO moved in that direction with the classes added in the Moria expansion. Look at the Warden ;).

So there's MASSIVE room for improvement without going the FPS route. WoW imho is still very much "auto-attack" focused, AoC did a nice job with their "active-combo" system, but it's not fully realised.

But it gives a nice balance between "twitch action" without losing out on the good old action-bar-mashing style.
 
Starcraft 2 is Starcraft 1 with pretty graphics and no LAN play.

Did you play StarCraft 2? Did you even read about changes in the second part? I am playing closed beta now - not so much, because I am casual player.

Starcraft 2 is like Cataclysm - with even more changes. Most of units and new, only small part of the SC1 units survived, many new map, economy and gameplay elements. Significant interface changes.

Single campaign completely redone and looks like very interesting. New battle.net is something like Dungeon Finder. And new map editor offers really great opportunities - DoTA and tower defence invented in older versions will be surpassed with no doubt.


That is a no purchase in my book. C&C 4 offers new gameplay features that Blizzard missed in SC2.

For what? Classical RTS gameplay are still interesting. I like base-building and wide strategical options. But there are simple no games with such gameplay!

I do not like DoW idea, but even if I do - it is a different thing. Where can I get classical gameplay on modern technology level?

Even classical C&C gameplay differs from Craft series, but it is no more.

I play SC1 sometimes but it's graphic and interface are too old, it bad on my 23" LCD.

I am ready to pay money and only Blizzard want to take this money. It seems strange for me. Well, better for Blizzard.

The same with Diablo - there are no modern games with such gameplay. There were few clones - but too bad to became new Diablo and they all gone.


Cataclysm is WoW 4. Burning Crusade was WoW 2, WotLK is WoW 3.

You count expansions as next part only for WoW or for all games?

Brood War - Starcraft 2? Episode 1 - HL3? )


It's more money!

Or more fun? Or both? I am a casual player. ))


If you invented something really good - why you need to throw it away? May be it will be better do develop and polish it with time?

Chess or football are still good without "new gameplay features"
 
So there's MASSIVE room for improvement without going the FPS route.

Is there only FPS route as alternative? There are many third-person action games and even Blizzard's Diablo - from where designers of new MMO can get ideas.
 
@Vedomir

Yes, I've been in the Starcraft 2 closed beta going on 3 weeks now. So yes, I am qualified to make a comparison.

SC2 is SC1 with pretty graphics and no LAN play. Sure they changed some units around, new maps, new single player (that is only Terran). There is no Zerg or Protoss campaign. Blizzard wants to sell you SC2 three times over the next couple years. It's a money grab. $50 for SC2 Terran, $50 for SC2 Zerg and $50 for SC2 Protoss. Since SC2 does not offer LAN play, a primary feature we utilize at our LAN parties, our gaming group will be passing on Starcraft 2.

Battle.net is a platform to advertise directly to you and to move to RMT in Blizzard games. Its being sold as some cool feature to see your friends online. The only thing it does is it lets Blizzard track your game playing habits.

I think you missed the new gameplay features in C&C4 (which isn't out yet). One feature is you can respawn if you die on a map in a different roll. For example, you can be a support base, an offensive base or a defensive base.
 
To those of you dismissing the FPS option, including Tobold: you need to remember that Modern Warfare 2 has sold nearly 12million copies already. That is a huge market. It seems pretty obvious to me that there are a helluva lot of people out there who would play a MMOFPS if it came from Blizzard. Not every game needs to be designed around "housewives and old men with bad reflexes" in order to make a lot of money.
 
"What I would wish is that Blizzard would create a radical new vision of a MMORPG, which combines Blizzard's attention to detail and ability to create huge amounts of content with the will to differentiate the new game from World of Warcraft in terms of gameplay."

Exactly how I feel. Well said Tobold.

As a side note, I think that StarCraft 2 not having an NDA is a great move by Blizzard. It allows the community to generate more hype than their PR department ever could do on its own.
 
SC2 is SC1 with pretty graphics and no LAN play. Sure they changed some units around, new maps, new single player (that is only Terran).

It is great. There too many great old games died only because no one can make a good sequel - developing great old ideas.

But wait.. where is Thors and Colossus in SC1? How can I select 100 unit or many buildings? Where is Xel'Naga watch towers, MULE and etc? How can I easily find opponents with my skill level?

Is it really SC1?

Blizzard wants to sell you SC2 three times over the next couple years.

Standard expansions. Starcraft had one expansion, Starcraft II will have 2 expansions. Is there anything unusual?

Its being sold as some cool feature to see your friends online.

It is cool feature in beta. )

I think you missed the new gameplay features in C&C4 (which isn't out yet).

Why are you calling it C&C?

It is another game now. It is not C&C. There are different gameplay.

It will be better to give it new name - may be C&R )
 
Not every game needs to be designed around "housewives and old men with bad reflexes" in order to make a lot of money.

Did you ever seen housewife playing... Luxor 2 or Zuma?

I see very day. There is a lot of accurate and fast aiming. Much more than in WoW or many action games. Less than in Q3 or CS... but there is fast aiming.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home
Newer›  ‹Older

  Powered by Blogger   Free Page Rank Tool