Monday, November 30, 2009

Live by the social sword, die by the social sword - or what 'killed' WAR


From a responce I gave on Tobolds blog

What killed war is people phrasing the question as 'what killed war?'. Or to be more exact, what removes subscribers is some sort of mental toggle switch which has 'The best mmorpg' or 'It's been killed' and can only toggle between them, with no middle ground that's 'Hey, I like this and it doesn't matter to me much what other people do or don't like'.


It's the fiscally nasty side of aiming for a viral 'social' game, because social customers come with this mindset. Live by the social game sword, die by the social game sword.
 
In other words, it doesn't matter if you make great content, if you then try to attract customers who don't care about content and only care about what other people care about.

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Games 'that are art'

Continuing on from play this thing

I think he's right, it's not art. A finely crafted chess set might be art as an object, but that doesn't make the game itself art. Nor does a bunch of arty stuff in a video game make it rise above being a game. It's just a crappy game with a bunch of art tacked on, in this case.

Now, can you make art by playing a game? Yes, yes you can. But that still doesn't make the game become art itself. A paintbrush can make art - that doesn't mean a painbrush IS art itself.

It's actually quite annoying to see people create art with a game in their own heads, then attribute what they created as being part of the actual game/activity. It attributes too much to the game and does not give credit to their own creativity. Table top roleplay suffers from this extensively.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Table top roleplay - the quick encounter

If you've ever done table top roleplay, you know what is just a small skirmish can take up a long time at the gaming table.

But what if you had something like this - there's the option of just rolling to hit, and comparing that to a chart it shows how many shots you use and how much damage the bad guys do, before they are defeated or forced into retreat.

Okay, the important thing is that this is actually an opt in system - the way it's presented is that before combat begins, the GM might want to do it this way, but all the players have to want to do it as well, otherwise it goes to the traditional combat system.

That way if it takes a long time, it's because the players wanted it to take a long time!

Further info ~~~
The model for this version is that all players have to want to do the quick version. If even one player wants to go traditional, you do. This doesn't mean other players slope off to play Xbox - they play out the combat, because if one person votes to do it traditional, then that's what everyone does. The one person who votes that way aught to consider why they would take that option, given the strong effect it has. Or if they just take it for selfish reasons - well, I consider gaming to be like playing in a band...and bands don't hold together very long with people who only think of themselves.

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

mmorpg; Symantic Zombies

I wrote a reply to a review of Urban Dead at play this thing.

There were a couple of posts I responded to that were  advocating this...thing. I'll just post one here
Ah, but you see...Once you get all your skills, then you can try influencing the tide of battle, getting in on large-scale troop movements, planning out battle strategy...


Or, you know, not. But some people do really get into it. ;)
And my responce

Yeah, but why? It seems like some real life instinct to assign meaning to mass carnage is at play here. Your just inventing a meaning to all that carnage but reacting to your invention as if it really is the case.


It's like being a moth attracted to a flame, because the moth thinks the flame is the moon and you think this carnage is a 'tide of battle'. When it's just carnage. Pointless. Endless.

It's like the human brain simply cannot accept any idea that real life is pointless and endless, so it starts inventing meaning to it. Fair enough in that case, what else can we do? But you don't fucking stop - you start doing it in games as well. And in doing so, you actually perpetuate games which are both meaningless and endless. You perpetuate the darkness. Games are some meaning we can add to real life, but your fucking perpetuating meaningless games. It's like your so certain life has meaning, your freaking destroying what meaning we have been able to make.

It's up to the author to invent a point for a game, not for people to take their RL meaning making and apply it to the game.
And I realised this is a philosophical point that needs to be made again.

We cannot accept the idea of a meaningless, pointless and endless universe. I'm not trying to prove it's the case, but we can't even accept it as a possible set up, really. So we invent meaning. And fair enough, what else are we to do, apart from fall to the earth from where we stood and move not again?

But then people start making meaning inside 'games' like urban dead, or world of warcraft...and the worst and critical bit is, they start encouraging more of these 'games'.

They make meaning because there is none in these 'games' - no proper ending or anything. And they want more 'games' like these made!

Do you understand? In a universe where we have to make and add our own meaning, they want to propergate stuff that has hundreds or millions of players, and they participate for large chunks of their life in a, by default, a meaningless activity.

"But they'll invent a meaning!"

No, they only invent a meaning for the fucking game, if at all! They stop making/adding meaning to real life!

In being so instinctually meaning making, they are not only ceasing to do so but actively pushing for activities that are by default without meaning - letting in the very thing meaning making is supposed to be a bulwark against - just pure nihilistic darkness. It's becoming a zombie in itself - a thing that does not self reflect upon it's hunger and moves to spread that.

Why do I write so passionately? Because even if I'm wrong on this, I'd rather write passionately and yet be foolishly wrong, rather than assume everythings dandy and be horribly wrong.

Monday, November 23, 2009

Yay, next level is up for my story gauntlet game!


Built up the next level and compiled the exe! Here's it's blog page: http://philosophergamer.blogspot.com/2009/11/gauntlet10.html

I think one of the things that's tripped me up in the past that rather than rearranging content that I've made before, I code up entirely new objects. This is like making up new enemies and platforms in a mario game, every single time AND making a level, instead of taking the platforms and enemies already made and simply arranging the level.

I was headed toward that here, but I think I got out in time, heh! And it's made a few more assets to use in future.

Sunday, November 22, 2009

mmorpgs; endless gameplay - not considered a type of hell?

My responce to a post at Tobolds blog, which pretty much qualifies as a post itself:

Well, exactly, why play for gear and all that when the servers will shut down one day? I'm always scratching my head over that one.


See, with a game that ends, it makes sense. It's like climbing a mountain. Once you've done it, you can say you've done it. It's a life accomplishment.

But you guys who want a game that never ends - your mountain never ends!!! You never accomplish anything except progress up a mounain that doesn't stop. It's like that guy in hell who pushes a boulder up a hill and always just before he gets to the top, it rolls down again.

I don't know why your into the whole 'endless' thing? And why your into end game, instead of the game ending?

Things you shouldn't say AS a girl gamer

Kind of a responce to here, in no particular order:

1. "You're not bad ... for a girl." The "not bad" part would have been sufficient. Said with a cocked eyebrow and a smirk would even be quite endearing. But that "for a girl" kills it, fella.

On the flip side, men have been competing with other men since they were born - if it seems like the woman didn't even really care about winning AND she beat you, it's soul shattering. You want guys to chat you up nicely? Try not shattering their souls first. This might be sexist, but as a woman you might not be used to competing with others since birth (unless you had three brothers or something...), so maybe your a bit more relaxed about the whole thing and don't outwardly show any sweat. Start showing your sweat - and genuine sweat, not some made up crap (yeah, were men, but we still know when it's BS, k).

4. "Wow. I can't believe you actually beat me." Sorry 'bout that. Maybe the game cheated? A congratulations, however bitter, and a challenge of a rematch would have been a better way to play this scenario.
Umm, guys face this as well. Don't bother thinking it's about your gender - this stems from a basic inability  to accept a reality they didn't expect.

8. "No, you wouldn't like this game. It's all bloody and gory." Yes, and my tiny girl brain would not be able to handle anything that's not pink and glittery.
Perhaps not for all men, but the subtext here is "I'm a little ashamed that I like blood and gore as much as I do and I'm trying to hide that a bit to look better in front of you rather than look like a homicidal maniac...and I seem to be digging a hole for myself?? I'm confused and WTF, somebody help me?". Again, if you want guys to chat you up nicely, start reading their subtext on what they are actually trying to do...however clumsily they are doing it.

3. "You play video games? What, like 'Wii Fit' and 'Wii Tennis'?" Nothing against the Wii (sorry, I'm just not a fan) and casual gaming in general, but if someone is telling you they're a "gamer," these are probably not their games of choice.
Male subtext "Hey, I'll try and reach out to you and...oh, oh, uh, okay, I'm wrong...I'll stop trying to reach out now..."
Wow, throw a bone, perhaps?

I mean, did you even try and guess what games they play? Try to do it first next time and you might find what it's like to really stumble and fall on that part.

And on 10 & 5 I'm just in denial that men would say that! I really hope not!

There's your gaming flirting advice for gamer girls!

Saturday, November 21, 2009

mmorpgs, persistant changes - can they be done to some degree?

You used to see a dragons head above the stormwind gates, sometimes. And even that was a bit cheesy, since...well, you kept seeing her head there. And now you don't even see, in any mmorpg, this sort of stuff.

Is it really that hard to compromise the idea of a persistant change with ongoing content?

For example, say you had it that a new bad ass dragon shows up. Okay, instead of the first time the dragon is 'killed', have it that it drops into some lava or off a chasm or the ground swollows it up. Or you could even have it that the players take it's head, it goes up on the gates, then after X days, poof, it magically starts to glow and after a few hours, vanishes!

This isn't to just repeat the cycle over and over forever. Just say the dragons spirit is strong enough to return about 100 times or so. This gives alot of groups the chance to take it down a peg. After the hundredth time or whatever, it actually dies for good!

"But then that contents gone"

Okay, here's where you keep the content, but now the dragon has an undead skin placed on it. It's as if it's spirit was too strong to just die and even it's corpse must be batteled. Same loot, same battle (though now with the emphasis of keeping it in it's grave rather than keeping it from marauding the countryside by putting it in it's grave).

What say ye, oh silent traffic that passes my blog in the night!?

Friday, November 20, 2009

mmorpgs, myth of cheap entertainment. Mark 2

There's a myth around, about how mmorpgs are cheap entertainment. This hinges on the idea that 'hours' of gameplay provided, are a good thing.

Let's shoot that out of the water right now. Take this example, where we quantify fun had over the entire experience into actual points.

  • Game A gives 500 points of fun over 20 hours and costs $20
  • Game B gives 500 points of fun over 10 hours and costs $20

"OMG", most of the gaming community would cry "Game B only gives 10 hours of entertainment, what a rip off!!!!!1!!"

Actually, game B is better value!

It's because weve all sucked up a lie that 'hours' are somehow entertaining in themselves, that we are thinking completely wrong headedly.

Look at the numbers - it's 500 points of fun for either game, over the entire experience. Whether it's 20 hours or 10 hours, it's 500 points of fun either way.

Starting to see the difference here? See how in the 20 hour game it's just taking you 10 more hours to get to the exact same level of fun as the 10 hour game?


It's not better that it has 20 hours. It's actually worse! ALOT worse!

It's at this point that you realise hours are actually a cost alongside the monetary cost. Hours are a negative! While most gamers look at it as 'hours of play' divided by price, this is like evaluating a car by fuel consumed per mile divided by the cars price...as if more fuel consumed per mile is a good thing. As if more hours of your finite life span consumed is a good thing!

I'll leave it there for now, since the key issue to get across is that hours <> value.

The longer version of this is here.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

mmorpg, free, review: Runes of magic


Just a quick note on this mmorpg, since I've gotten a few characters above level 20. It does have alot of the charm of world of warcraft, while having this off kilter German sort of attitude, and also feels a bit like a bunch of excited gamers around a table putting something together. Personally I like the daily quests in it, which it has for all levels. After all, it's BS that you finish any of the quests...so it feels more 'realistic' and participating in a world to do a daily quest to get X amount of items and be paid for it in XP and gold (and tokens), than helping some granny fight off a stranger...only to see someone else fighting him off even before you turn your back. It just feels more like engaging the world when you know the quest is repeating, since it's more like there's an ongoing need in the imagined world for whatever items or whatever encrouching monsters slayed. Ongoing needs make more sense than granny being 'saved' a million times.

It's charming and a growing mmorpg (they added an elven starting area since I signed up) and it gives you that high of being in a world a bunch of other people are running around and caring about the world to some degree. Also yes, it has micro transactions, but you buy diamonds to do so, and you can actually buy diamonds on its auction house for normal game gold you earn by playing (people post diamonds there so they can get gold easily. I wish I could figure a way of turning diamonds into money again, because I've been able to buy quite a few with gold earned). Also I have a character motivation competition here.

So, here's the link to the game: http://www.runesofmagic.com/

Monday, November 16, 2009

Free will - how free?

If you've come across the biomechanical arguement in terms of free will, this is something to consider. Even if will is simply an execution of physics, the word 'simply' is not enough. If you trace the smoking gun of physics, it didn't start yesterday, nor the day before - it traces all the way back to what we currently understand as the larger origins of everything, the big bang.

Even if free will is simply physics, the final expression of physics that is free will is an expression that originates in a big and still pretty damn mysterious explosion! You could literally consider your own will as a small ongoing part of that explosion. Indeed if scienctific evidence forces you to think of youself as biomechanical, then your just as much forced to consider yourself as a small part of that explosion, ongoing.

Will we grasp the origins of that explosion more thoroughly in future? Probably, but its a much more grandiose thing. The frightening element of simply seeing oneself as a biomechanical machine is that it seems so pointless and meaningless. But that's basically because it's such a short term way of looking at things (if humans are very flawed, to look at it this way is to engage in another flaw). Beyond our ability to grasp from moment to moment, we trace all the way to one huge explosion that pretty much made everything (or atleast allowed it to exist/birthed it). That's pretty significant!

If you haven't run into the biomechanical arguement - in a way you both need to know, yet I'm lothe to say since I wont be there to run it past you in person. I'm not sure it should be passed on alone. Anyway, here's a long essay that might help on it - it's long, so maybe you wont get through it anyway, or find the length to be some company.

Also see: Philosophy: An arguement against "Humans are fundamentally bio-mechanical"

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Character customisation: Stupid!

I've noticed in a few reviews of mmorpgs or dragon age, etc, around, that there's an emphasis on character customisation and how good it is.

Character customisation is stupid. It's the ultimate reflection of the shallow "It's what's on the outside that counts".

How your guy looks, does not matter. I'll admit, I've fiddled with face, etc. But it's fiddling - it's nothing significant at all. I know it was a waste of time. But not everyone does - other people seem to go in thinking it deeply important.

Substance, not style! Deeds, not looks!

But no, we get a display animal/peacock culture. Perhaps even stemming way back to table top roleplaying, where the players had some incredibly railroaded gameplay, so they just focused on making pretty characters because that's all they got to choose. And what do you get in video games - take the rat killing quest or...stand around doing nothing. So pretty much again, railroaded.

I remember that WOW's presentation at a blizzcon of the wrath of the lich king expansion included a barber shop, and there being cheers from the crowd apparently. Of all the things, of all the events, self preening was the most epic!?

Character customisation is stupid! Indiana Jones is not Indiana Jones because of his hat! Spiderman is not spiderman because of his suit!

Now, thinking your cool looking after completing some sort of deed or event, fair enough. But just fidling around with looks, just for their own sake? It's being a poser.

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Game design diary: challenge approach vectors



One of the playtesters of my new computer game said he could rush past the enemy generators to the end. He thought this wasn't my intention. Well, it wasn't my intention to always do it - but it was my intention that it's one additional approach vector to dealing with the challenge, beyond just shooting it.

I suppose I was thinking of fallout 3 combat, particularly in the open wasteland, and how there are usually several ways of approaching it (or even several ways of being approached by it!).

I once heard this anecdote of some general from the past that would, as he traveled, ask his fellows what they would do if an attack came from a certain hill or copse of trees. So as to have some sort of plan in mind if it did actually eventuate, rather than waiting for it to crop up and make something up on the spot.

It occurs to me that there are probably two ways to approach a game - just try to beat it, and the other is to use it as a training platform for 'what if' scenarios. In the latter case, just rushing past all the time isn't training yourself for all the possible 'what if's. Yes, it's possible. That doesn't mean the training platform fails - it can't train you into wanting to train for what if scenarios.

On the other hand, most people play in the former case, just trying to beat it. So in the end I put a 70% chance of an invisible wall in front of the boss. So you can decide to risk getting up close to see if you can rush through, or just fight it conventionally. Or even if you can rush through, you might fight conventionally if that's what your training yourself for at the moment.

I should probably make up a name for that training platform idea, since I use it alot and thus really need to refer to it quickly alot.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Like a change of government in WOW?

There's an interesting post on Tobolds MMORPG blog about the changes to WOW's looking for group system. There does seem to be a policy change in WOW group forming development, changing from 'Fend for yourselves' to some sort of actual human resource management on the part of the company.

http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2009/11/kudos-to-blizzard-for-honesty.html

Monday, November 9, 2009

Make money online: I made $10 so far! And also some stuff on adsense/adwords



YAY! I just made 1100 points on rewards central + myopinions combined! That equates to $10! I joined rewards central on the 23rd of September (and joined myopinions shortly after) and now it's the 10th of November. That makes it take around a month and a half to make $10. And you can cash out $30 at 3300 points.

Here's the review I did of rewards central, a little while back:
http://philosophergamer.blogspot.com/2009/10/make-money-online-suplemental-income.html

So that's not a bad bit of side income, eh? What's interesting is they have an e-bank, where you can term deposit your points at rates that beat seemingly all the banks (it probably does, but I'm covering my bases by just saying it seems to). For example, if you put in 1100 points for just one month, it's at 7.7765 variable (and I've only seen them vary upward) that's 0.23 of a point per day, so another point every five days or less. Put it in for longer, it takes even fewer days to get each bonus point. The more you earn, the more you earn!

Here's the ideal signup (as it is a referal link from me - if you find this info useful and want to join I'd appreciate if you use these links, thanks :) ):
http://www.rewardscentral.com.au/Join/Default.aspx?refer=scrollbreak
And for myopinions, which is as far as I can tell rewards centrals sister site
http://www.myopinions.com.au/join/default.aspx?refer=scrollbreak

Now I'm gunna hybridise this post, because I've been looking at adwords and adsense. Some of the words out there get a heck of alot of searches. Like I thought make money online got alot at 3mil per month, but 'harry potter' gets 20mil per month! That's alot of clout! Of course it's copy righted IP, but at the same time discussing it is okay. I know there are a million Harry Potter fan fics out there, and people doing HP roleplaying on forums. There would seem to be ways of vectoring a blog into that significant search vector.

Bringing that up as a discussion point, beyond just noting the milestone with rewards central.

Quick Review : Scribblenauts game


We got scribblenauts for our son, which was much anticipated by him. On the rare occasions I played it myself, it proved a pretty good mix of classic puzzle, plus it's special feature of being able to type words and get the object. As a bonus, I'm sure that helps a childs spelling too!

Since there are so many words you really end up drawing on your imagination to an extent I'm certain no other computer game does at the moment. However, at other times it can just require a combo of a couple of known items to solve something. The good thing in that case is that it often requires a bit of fine tuning of your actions and plan, so it's not a total pushover. Also there's some replayability in trying to figure out a less cheesy way of solving it latter. Sometimes dropping a car on them just isn't enough! ;)

Another good feature, probably a very important feature in a game like this, is that it comes with a level editor. My son made a couple of levels and yes, I failed them a few times before beating them!

It's really engaging and I think would help improve not just childrens imagination and spelling/word range, but adults too. Also it's alot different from most other games out there that copy the old cut and dried formats. It's a bit of gaming history already, that way. I'd really recommend getting it!

No story? Or did you forget what you did?

MMO crunch asks is borderlands a mmog, and in doing so asks if there is a story
http://www.mmocrunch.com/2009/11/09/is-borderlands-a-mmog/

This is what I had to say in short:

In terms of story, I always look at gamers who expect to read a story in an interactive medium and think "Wha!?". It's an interactive medium - YOU make the story.

 
What I would grant is that these games, not at all right now, have any tools to record player actions and layout a story (or atleast a log of cool events). So it's easy to forget the story you just made.
Taking it further, the specific ways the program recorded events would shape the story made. Like if it puts more emphasis on rescuing someone than blowing up ten guys at once...well, then the emphasis would be on rescues. You would be making the story, but the 'bard' who is recording it would also influence how it's remembered.
 
But you just don't see any of this right now in games...or do you?
 
Remember all the stat pages of the games you've played? That record lots of stuff you've done. See, it's coming! Now gimme lots of money for just saying it first! lol!

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Your Runes of Magic character motivations!




Are you on Siochain OR Macantacht server? If so, what's your Runes of Magic character motivation? Even if it's light hearted and a single sentence, that's fine! Even if your guys just a fighting guy, that counts!

Your characters motivation is important! So I'm paying 3k gold each!!! That's for 50 motivations total (I've only got so much gold!).

Leave your character name in your post (AND which server they are from), so I can mail you the gold. Or you can send me in game mail and point out which post was yours (send to 'Dreambroken', with a capital 'D'). You can post anonymously for this, that's fine. Only one entry per character per day.

I look forward to hearing your character motives!

Oh, and if motivations get a bit overly serious I might delete them here (but I'll send the gold anyway if it seemed a serious entry). There's one below that's a bit overly serious.

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Grinding out grind

Grind reminds me of the old woody allen skit/joke, where he's telling his therapist he hardly ever has sex with his wife, only once or twice a week. Then his wife complains they always are having sex, usually twice a week!


Clearly game companies like you being a subscriber for a long time. But this doesn't mean they have to drag out gameplay. Take EVEs skill learning - do you have to grind that out, or set it up and it takes time, but it does so automatically and even while offline.

Now imagine if you killed a monster and got some XP, but then there was also a large amount that slowly trickled into your character, even while your offline. You don't have to grind all that XP, and the company gets it's maintained subscription.

The mmorpg model has been really strange in how it's maintained the same pattern of stretching out content, even though it drives everyone mad, rather than looking at ways that both developer and player can come to a compromise. Or is grind as we know it supposed to be a compromise?

Thursday, November 5, 2009

gauntlet10




This is for the newest story gauntlet I'm running!

The game is here: http://gamejolt.com/freeware/games/wilderness-gauntlet/download/1183/
Check it out, it's a short and fun shoot 'em up adventure!

To activate the easier difficulty mode (half as many badguys spawned), press enter at any time.

If you have already played and have the special code that will allow the adventure to continue, write it in the comments below!!! Or DOOM!!!

Seriously, by getting feedback I know people want more, which helps me create more! It's helping out a struggling fellow game designer! Thanks!

The log bypass code is: Press '8' on your keyboard
If you've already done the first level, the skip code is pressing '1' on your keyboard

Is the GM trying to play your character? Or are you trying to play the GM's characters?

If all the NPC's have it in for you...

If the GM is playing out the character of NPC, then you seem a bit of a prima donna rather than him being the problem. It's alright for you to play out your character, but he's not allowed to play out his character(s)??


But if the GM's just trying to bully you into playing your character the way he wants you to play it, yeah, he's the problem.

There's also a tricky middle ground - if all the NPC's want to bully your PC into acting like them, are you okay with that? Or do you demand that all NPCs respect how your character wants to live his life? Because really, does an NPC have to give a crap about whether your PC is having a hard time?
 
It's worth thinking about.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Taking the wrench that is game and using it as a hammer...and still calling it a game

Starting from here

I think there's this trend to use a wrench as a hammer/game to create something creative, then people continue using the word 'game' even though they are not using it as a game. That's why you get 'games' like the graveyard - because the designers have not only strayed from 'game', they've strayed so far it can't even be considered a game in a secondary sense.

Instead they are using the rules and constructs much like the rules and constructs of musical instruments. Here the rules create something which is like music in how expression and form intermingle, but from a new vector other than sound.

And yet the people who do this will wrestle and fight for the use of 'game' and hold onto it desperately, pitching a symantic definition war which I don't think they deserve to win. Yet they think they must in order to preserve that new vector of creativity. Which I don't think they have to at all - you could call that vector 'pomigranites' and it'd work. Their problem is that the vast majority of people, when presented with something that reminds them of gamism, go all gamist. And that includes including the people who want to participate in this new vector!!! They write up stats, they have to hit rolls, they have skill checks...and the only thing they try and do to get to that vector is symantic warfare about 'what a game is'.

Slowly, and still rarely, now indie games are coming out with 'stats' like 'Hates his country: 4D6' or suchlike. Rules that really start to intertwine issues and mechanics together, instead of doing the same old BS stats like INT and CHR and then retardedly browbeating people for 'not playing to their stats'. News update, there is nothing to play in an INT score! And by nothing I mean like when I've finished a bottle of beer and say nothings left in it, even if there is a thin smear of beer left inside, there's nothing there. But some guys keep with the old thin smear stats. And getting symantic about changing on that, because in an anal technical sense, a thin smear isn't nothing.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Is there a demo for Torchlight?

Torchlight looks rather nifty and is going around as the latest fun little game. It seems their model is to bring out a single player game then bring out an MMO latter, based on profits. If you think about it, world of warcraft worked from much the same model with it's RTS games (admittedly they were multiplayer, but like just a handful, so not an MMO).

It sounds like 'Fate', as in it has a pet which fights for you and also sells loot for you, which is exactly what fate had. I'm not sure if the development teams are the same.

But there appears to be no demo? Or have you heard of one!? Please leave a comment if you have!

Monday, November 2, 2009

Adwords and looking at 'make money' Vs 'make money review'

I was looking at the google adwords tool, which shows you how much certain terms are searched.

Do you think it's disturbing that 'make money' gets over three million hits per month globally, while 'make money review' gets a mere three thousand hits per month, globally?

I mean, people check out movie reviews before they see a movie (or so I think), but gosh, when it comes to making money, screw reviews, lets just dive in!

Crazy!

Forum ‘right givers’

As a supplement to my thread here.


Looking at the D&D forums, they also have a little forum culture where they start granting themselves rights. Like 'Oh, the GM can't cheat' and such. And they have a thread where they all agree with each other that that is the case. And 'thus' it's the case for their group. Except it's only the people on the forum who have agreed with that, not their own group.