Lum was wrong

While this site is still alive I report this (and just because I lost an earlier message where he was betting with Haemish that WoW wouldn’t reach the 400k mark):

Lum:
I’d be very surprised if even World of Warcraft gets 500k.

Blizzard:
This holiday season, demand for World of Warcraft was so great that more than 600,000 copies of the game were purchased by customers in North America, Australia, and New Zealand. With so many copies of World of Warcraft installed, the game went on to shatter all previous concurrency records in North America, achieving over 200,000 simultaneous players during the holiday period.

(bold in text is original)

Linkage. And this is just North America release. Let’s see what will happen when the game will really launch worldwide.

For reference below I’ll report the whole message Lum wrote that is interesting for other reasons:

…except that MMOs are niche products by definition.

The “casual player” or “mainstream player” so far has not paid a monthly fee for online content. Now, you can argue whether or not this has because no for-pay MMO has been created that can appeal to the “mainstream player”, but the point is that to date the most successful MMOs still appeal in the main to a very hardcore niche who have adopted that product as one of their primary forms of online entertainment.

Now, you can create a very profitable base from that (just ask SOE, or heck, the people I work for), and that would disprove that companies cannot successfully manage niche products. I would also argue that Mythic’s success disproves fairly strongly that PVP-oriented products automatically fail in the marketplace.

I have said, and I will keep saying until I’m disproven, that the most successful MMO launches in the near future are those that keep a sense of scale. 500,000 users is not going to happen. I’d be very surprised if even World of Warcraft gets 500k. 50,000 users may happen. If you can create a successful online service infrastructure budgeted around retaining 50,000+ users, you have just created a successful company that is in an excellent position to further leverage that infrastructure against future games.

DAOC launched with a budget assuming a userbase of 50k. Obviously we were pleasantly surprised to do better, but our initial staffing levels assumed 50k users. (Not coincidentally, our CS was completely overwhelmed until we were able to hire and train more.) We had a total staff including CS of I believe 50 at that point, half of which were developers.

You wanna be designer?

Oh, really?

Lum:
The problem is that game design is what everyone wants to do (or more accurately everyone thinks they can do) so most companies hire internally for that sort of thing. Your best bet is to get an entry level job (CS, QA, whatever) and work your way up, but be aware that all your coworkers are trying to do the same thing.

Lietgardis:
What he said. Support jobs are an easy way to prove your sentience — in CS and QA, you have plenty of opportunities to suggest solutions to the problems you report, and if they’re good, somebody will notice.

Lum:
Like I said, everyone wants to be a designer (and think they are qualified to be), whereas good coders are much rarer and their skillset is a much easier thing to quantify. And the game industry being what it is, it’s not very easy to find teams small enough where you can be both.

Raph didn’t get a job from being a board poster. He was one of the primary designers behind a popular MUD. So he had previous work to point to. Which in this industry means a great deal. And Dave started at the ground floor, first at CS for EQ, then as a worldbuilder for a small company whose future was by no means assured. In general walking into an interview and saying you want to take over the direction of the company’s flagship product is not a good way to impress your coworkers.

Ubiq:
Raph got his job because a friend of his worked at Origin already. I got my job because Raph gave me a golden recommendation. Connections are probably the most valuable way to break into the industry.

Barring that, trust me, the cream rises to the crop in this industry really well, especially in larger studios. If you are the best CS or QA person in your division, you will get noticed eventually. On UO2, we promoted at least 3 people from below to worldbuilding and data positions from CS and QA. John Hanna and Carly Staehlin both got lead design positions that started from being top-notch community people.

Dave:
Depends on how flexibly you define “game design”. Mythic hires most of their content team, world builders and the like, from their CS team. For that matter, I think two of the three people who filled my slots at Mythic after I left started in CS. And I personally went from board poster to EQ customer service, not design. That was a couple of steps later. Scott was hired to build the CS tools for Camelot, his part in server development and design came later. Raph was hired out of school, where he was working on a degree in literature, not off the boards.

The thing is, this is show business for geeks. It’s not enough just to pay your dues in CS or QA, because a lot of people are doing that. It’s not enough to be really smart, because a lot of those people are really smart. It’s not enough to be an effective communicator, because that’s the bare minimum to even have a shot. You need to be obsessed, driven, monomaniacally focused to an unhealthy degree. And then you have to get a little lucky, get the right jobs on the right projects at the right time, get opportunities to learn your craft and take the maximum advantage of them.

Cool ideas about games are easy. Any bunch of gamer geeks can sit down for a few beers and come up with pages of them by closing time. The hard part is learning things like project planning, management techniques, how to put together a budget, all the boring, tedious, apparently unrelated skills that go along with a team of these sizes. Right now, I’m not spending much time thinking about game design, I’m drawing tables of organization, writing job descriptions, development process flow-charts, and a whole bunch of things that once were the bane of my existence, I’m used to stomping all over procedures as getting in the way of doing the job, not defining what I know is only a pipe dream of how it is theoretically supposed to be done.

But I’ve seen the results of just letting these things slide, of ignoring process until the oversights bite you in the ass. Of failing to have a plan to deal with success. The usual result is a big flameout of a failure long before you get to launch, the “upside” is to succeed, and not be able to deal with it. To be reactive and reflexive, following the path of least resistance on a slow slide to irrelevance, eventually to be ditched by your own company. I’ve seen it in the regular IT industry as well as in games, and I don’t want to go down that road.

So I draw flow charts, and write job descriptions, and create nice neat orderly diagrams of how game development would work in some hypothetical perfect universe. Not because I believe it is actually going to go according to plan, but because without a plan, there’s no way we’ve even got a shot.

Cool ideas are what it’s all about, what we do this for. Getting your cool ideas turned into a game is the brass ring we’re all reaching for, what keeps us going after layoffs and cancellations and firings and all the drama that goes with the egos and politics. But they’re only the first step on the way to really *being* a game designer.

J.:
“Ideas are cheap. Ability is expensive.”
-John Kricfalusi, creator of Ren & Stimpy.

EDIT: And if it isn’t enough go to read also “Mr. Squishy” from Oblivion. The book I wrote about here. I wish I could paste excerpts but it wouldn’t work that well in italian.

Posted in: Uncategorized |

A Dave Rickey dance

Today I’m in for a Dave Rickey dance. This guy still speaks in a way I like. At least I can feel some passion that is nowhere to be found in the whole mmorpg panorama.


When I was Lead Desiger on Wish, there were certain things I thought absolutely had to happen, and other goals I thought absolutely we should abandon. Obviously my boss (the sole investor) disagreed with me.

Unfortunately, I get no satisfaction from any evidence I was right to be found here. I’ve got some good friends who are now out of work, and unfortunately I am not at a stage on my new project to pick up most of them. They’re good guys, highly competent and hard-working, and none of the blame for this should be placed on their shoulders.


Yes, I have a new project, no, I can’t say much about it right now. It’s vaguely fantasy, but not Tolkienesque or D&D inspired at all.


My first choice was to do a Sci-Fi project, that’s what I spent the first half of last year trying to find investors for. Not only does Sci-Fi interest me more personally, but Sci-Fi has so much more potential. There’s a lot of completely different themes in Sci-Fi, and it crosses over into the mainstream much more easily than Fantasy for other media.

But when pitching such a project, you have to answer the question: “What has been the market response to Sci-Fi?” And the answer is: Not nearly as strong as fantasy. You’ve got exactly *one* clearly successful title, SWG, and a bunch of marginal successes (Eve, Anarchy Online) and clear failures. Without a major liscense, the investors don’t want to talk to you about a Sci-Fi project right now.

On the flip side, the “overcrowded” fantasy market has produced 5 major successes, overall each being bigger than the last. The *market* analysis says that Fantasy isn’t overcrowded, in fact it is underserved. Two titles came out within a short window and both vaulted past the 250K mark like it was nothing.

So, I’m doing another fantasy project because that’s what people are buying, and therefore that is what investors are willing to put money into. On the other hand, the fact that the EQ formula has been so repeatedly cloned, and polished to a high gloss by EQ2 and WoW, makes it a lot easier to convince people that it’s time to take some chances and break the mold. With the price tag for an EQ-clone rising towards the $50M mark, a $10M bet on something new looks more reasonable. At least this time I hold some equity.

(and no f–king elves this time. Or dwarves, hobbits, or any of the rest of that deformed human menagerie)

Soulflame:
Why should someone move from their old MMOG, with years of work on stability, content, and characters they’ve had for all this time, to a new hotness? EQ2 and WoW did it by having a lot of content in the game at release. Can a small indie MMOG do the same thing? I’m skeptical, to say the least.

Gameplay. Purpose. All the current fantasy offerings offer variants on the EQ formula of “Fight little monster and get stronger, so you can fight small monster and get stronger, so you can fight medium sized monster and get stronger, so you can fight large monster and get stronger, so you and 40 or 50 of your friends can fight the really freaking huge monster and one or two of you can get stronger.” It’s repetitive, it’s pointless, it’s ultimately an excercise in frustration because even inside of the context of the game, defeating these things makes no damned difference at all. After you and your friends save the world, you all get chivvied out the door and the ride resets for the next group of kiddies.

The whole concept has reached a blind alley, witness that the hot new idea, the plan for making it all better, shinier, SPECIAL NEW AND IMPROVED, is to take the first M out of MMOG and try to make a subscription version of Diablo. So not only is it pointless and transient, but the very place that it is happening is hermetically sealed away from everything and everyone else.

This is not what makes the MMO experience tick. This is not what got us excited in the early days of UO and EQ. The fire and passion that created BattleVortex, Dr. Twister, Lum the Mad, and for that matter got me to quit a job as a web server programmer at the height of the dot-com craze and take a job at a third of the money and twice the hours for Verant. Call it “Vision”, call it stubborness, call it just plain self-delusion, but I refuse to look at what we’ve got, and what the majority of the industry plans on making, and accept that *this* steaming pile of highly polished stairclimber-to-nowhere turds is all we can expect, the best we can do.

HRose:
But then you’d need very, very good artists to shape a fascinating world that isn’t already a well known archetype.

I think that without a wonderful visual impact you have no hopes at creating a fantasy setting out of the line.

There are fantastic settings of near-universal recognition that have not yet been explored. But yes, execution is important. Fundamentals are important. Not just the fundamentals of gameplay, but the deep down plumbing of server architectures and network protocols. At almost every level these games, although sometimes shiny and well polished on the surface, hide deep flaws of infrastructure that was no better than it absolutely had to be. This leads to a sort of drag on the creative process, things that aren’t done, aren’t even conceived, because the fundamental system architecture cannot support them.

Posted in: Uncategorized |

Wish joins the cesspit

I wrote this news a year ago.

I completely dedicated to it two months before understanding how it was going to go. I still have archived many threads I’ve saved from the beta boards before they were closed. I learnt a lot from this game and it’s where I started to develop my ideas.

It was also where I began to see devs and players flaming me.

Well, now Wish is officially canceled and it’s a sad news for me. It’s not fun to see that things went negatively as I expected. It’s also quite frustrating.

Dear friends of Wish:

Unfortunately we have bad news.

After careful consideration of all the facts and analyzing all the data which we have gathered from the Wish Beta 2.0 test so far, we have decided to cancel the Wish project.

Our Beta test will end this evening at 6pm EST, and at this time our Beta forums will close as well.

We enjoyed working together with our fans very much, and we are very sorry about this development. We wish you the best of luck in the future, and hope that you continue to enjoy online gaming, even with Mutable Realms and Wish not being available anymore.

We also wish the best luck to our competitors, and hope that they will not suffer the same fate as us.

Best regards,
Your Mutable Realms Team

Good luck Lepidus.

After a year I’m just more jaded, pessimist and frustrated.

Bounty hunting in World of Warcraft (Part 2)

I kept thinking at it instead of sleeping and the whole idea changed completely to be player driven. This new system is more simple, more fun and can still coexist with the other so that we could have both an automated and a player-driven bounty system.

This is how the player-driven bounty system works:


We get rid of the bounty points completely. The system isn’t anymore zone dependent, nor time dependent.

– Any player can put a bounty on a player of the opposite faction. To do this he must offer a money reward that goes from a minimum of one gold to infinite. The bounty is valid up to a month. Only the first bounty hunter to kill the target will collect the reward.

– The “bounty boards” will list the whole list of bounties created by the players. This list has various fields that you can use to sort it (similar to the Auction House interface):
Name – Level – Bounty Value (in money) – Name of who offered the bounty – Date when the bounty has been created – Online/Offline status

The last obviously shows if the target player of the bounty is currently online or offline.

– Now the bounty hunters can browse this board and take from it up to two targets to hunt, following this restriction:
While the bounty hunter can see the whole list of bounties on the bounty board, he can only grab those bounties that go from two levels below up to five levels above the level of the bounty hunter.
Different bounty hunters can take and try to collect the same bounty at the same time, remembering that only the first to win will collect the money reward. Once a bounty hunter succeed the other bounty hunters hunting the same target will be informed that they are too late.

– The hunt follows the system explained above. The hunter gains a new skill with a reuse time of ten minutes. When triggered the server checks the zone and the precise location of the target (it fails in the case the target is currently dead or offline, informing the hunter) but it delivers this information to the player only three minutes later. In the exact second an hunter uses his skill the target receives a voice message and a status icon telling “You are being hunted”. No more than this.

– If the hunter wants to collect the bounty he needs to use a second skill right before starting the attack on his target. This skill becomes usable when the target is whitin double the normal line-of-sight. These are the effects of the skills on both the hunter and his target:
* Both will be disbanded if grouped
* Both will loose any external (not self casted) buff
* Both will be invulnerable to PvP attacks (even from factional NPCs) if not coming from each other
* Both are vulnerable to each other attacks, no matter of the ruleset on the server
* The target (and only it) is healed completely if wounded

– This second skill can only be used once. When triggered the hunter has up to eight minutes to find and kill the target, if he fails or flees or gets killed the bounty is lost and can be obtained again from a “bounty board” only after eight hours and up to a max of three different attempts.

Now you can become a bounty hunter as a profession and collect money offered by other players :)

Bounty hunting in World of Warcraft

I should go to bed but I wanted to write down a simple fun system I imagined to implement in World of Warcraft. Its mechanic isn’t complex and it should be easy to implement and fun to play. It also fits easily with the planned additions and both with the PvE and PvP ruleset. Here’s how it works in the practice:


Every time a player kills or helps to kill a player of an opposite faction he gains a point (one and only one, no matter of the levels). This point will finish in a pool called “bounty points”. So if a player killed ten other players he will have ten bounty points.

These points decrease with the time. Every ten minutes without killing anyone a player looses one bounty point. This up to an hour. For every hour the points to loose every ten minutes increase by a factor of three. So for the first hour without killing anyone you loose one point every ten minutes, for the second hour three points every ten minutes, for the third hour six points every ten minutes and so on. This happens always, including when you are logged out.

Now the fun is that a player of the opposite faction can visit a “bounty board” located in each zone. This bounty board will list the top 20 players of the opposite faction that are from at least ten minutes in that zone and with the highest bounty points. On the board you’ll be able to see name, level and the bounty points of those players, but not the class. An “headhunter” can grab from this board up to two different “targets”. When a target is taken the target player will receive a voice message telling he is “being hunted” and an icon stating so, no infos aside this. The hunter instead will gain a new skill with a reuse time of ten minutes. When this skill is used the server will get the precise location of the target but it will deliver this information to the hunter only three minutes later. In the case the target is dead when the server checks it, the skill will fail and can be used again one minute later.

The hunt begins. Once the hunter or the target die in a direct duel the “victory spam” will be delivered to the whole zone and the winner “rewarded” with a nifty graphic effect. In the case the hunter is the winner he will also “earn” ten bounty points. If the hunter is defeated he will have to wait at least twenty minutes before picking up again the same target.

The hunt can also finish if an hour passes without an actual attack or if the hunter leaves the zone or logs out for more than five minutes. In the case is the target to leave the zone the hunter will know so. He can use the skill to know where the target is moving to and he has ten minutes to be in the same zone. If he succeed the hunt will continue, if the hunter doesn’t follow the target the bounty will be dismissed. The target will be attackable by its hunter (and vice versa) no matter of the zone setting and PvP/PvE ruleset.

The encounter between an hunter and its target works like a duel. A hunter can activate a flag when he wants to start the fight. This flag works instantly and it produces the same effects on both the hunter and the target:
– Both will be disbanded if grouped
– Both will loose any external (not self casted) buff
– Both will be invulnerable to PvP attacks (even from factional NPCs) if not coming from each other

The hunter has eight minutes to start and win the encounter after this state is activated. If it doesn’t happen the encounter is considered lost. This special state can be triggered only once.

That’s all, probably I’ll add more details, tweaks and changes in the next days. It is one idea I started to imagine because I want to rebuild completely the PvP system of my “dream mmorpg” to integrate the new things I’ve learnt from playing World of Warcraft :)

WoW european release: 11 Feb

Voices give the World of Warcraft european release to be around the 11 February.

It’s actually believable. It will be probably one or two weeks after the next patch.

EDIT: The “Final Beta” officially started. If the release will miss the 11 Feb it will be for the end of the month.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

(fears about) Emergent behaviours in WoW’s PvP (to vanish)

Posted on World of Warcraft official boards:


This is a comment to the current ruleset on the PvP servers. I believe, and I’ll explain my reasons here, that the battlegrounds plus the reward/honor system will *break* the fun and the depth that the current ruleset was able to produce. While these two upcoming systems (rewards and battlegrounds) are surely a good thing for the PvE servers, they risk to completely denaturalize the PvP servers. Similar to what happened when Ultima Online introduced the concept of Trammel/Fellucca, offering improvements from a side but also breaking the core of what made that game unique and deep from the other.

Those considerations come from my direct experience on the PvP servers both during the closed beta and now at release. With this game many players finally demonstrated that the market rewards a game with a decent PvP system. If so many players have choosed a PvP server it means that this server offers something different and compelling. So this difference is seen by a large part of the players as a “quality”. A quality that I hope noone wants to see vanish.

My point is that both the reward system and the battlegrounds, while a great addition for the PvE servers, could break the quality that made till now the PvP servers so interesting and fun to play.

Now to continue to explain my reasons I have to point out exactly where is this “quality” I see in the PvP servers and that now I consider “menaced” :

The two ruleset aren’t that different and I love the PvP server exactly because it isn’t an hardcore environment.

The basic difference is that on the PvP server there are less OOC system that you can use to your advantage. The core difference is that on the PvE server the PvP is optional, like a cookie with zero gameplay value and role into the world. While in the PvP server the PvP is encouraged and part of the world, within a structure coherent with the setting based on well distributed zones (alliance, horde and contested). It’s the game, not a side-effect.

The reason why I love it is because PvE and PvP are melted together within a game world with its own coherence. Not anymore undependent layers that you can swap pressing a switch.

It’s here the only difference. It’s not just more or less “risk”.

It is encouraged for the simple reason it cannot be ignored to some extent. You’ll have quests dragging you in the contested zones and if you want to go there you are forced to accept the PvP as a reality. To me this “makes a world”. It’s less an OOC system and more a RP layer I can accept and consider.

The PvP is there, if you want to play the game you need to accept that in the zone there could be enemy players that could gank you in the worst situation possible. BUT at the same time it’s still an acceptable game because I’m not really loosing, nor I feel frustrate.
At worst the PvP is a timesink, an annoyance, at best it’s a whole new stack of fun possibilities and situations.

I’m noticing a trend as time passes. Everyone feels this PvP/ganking as pointless, boring and often frustrating. Obviously there’s no incentive. This is producing fun behaviours because with the time I’m seeing more and more horde ignoring me or even teaming up, communicating with emotes.

The ruleset is actively policing the game. Since there’s no incentive to fight endlessly we are starting to see an “emergent society” forming. Teaming-up becomes more appealing that charging on sight.

The more the zones put horde and alliance into close contact, the more the players ignore each other or team up.

I’m not sure how much this is unintended but I consider it the very best part of this game. The server is policing itself and unfun/ganking is somewhat limited because there’s no point to do it. Even the most dedicated ganker gets bored of it quickly.

What happens is EXACTLY roleplay at its finest, this is my point. Often miscommunication or a mistake bring to break a temporary friendship and produces a fight. Cooperating isn’t easy and this mimics what exactly should happen within the roleplay level. We are in a world where the two factions aren’t at war as many players assume. Instead they try to cooperate and often they fail. Building friendship is an hard effort that everyone can break up easily, going back at the starting point. This is already in the lore and mirrored right in the game without the players even noticing it.

This game produces real behaviours and real consequences because it mimics its deep structure instead of faking everything in every part of the design.

What happens is that the current system is able to melt completely the OOC to transform it into perfect IC. I have a lot of OOC fights when my group wants to freely gank everyone and I oppose myself to do that. But from an observer point of view this is also perfectly plausible as IC. There are players trying to cooperate, players that go hostile only when under a threat and also players that attack everything on sight and often break those cross-faction friendships. I’ve seen peoples fighting and blaming each other because someone was seen fighting side-to-side with horde.

This is magic. This is roleplay happening without effort from the players. We don’t even need to struggle to get into the role, it happens automatically because the structure of the game is so wonderfully crafted. It’s immersion within a game that respects its own rules.

For me this is spectacular. WoW is offering an environment that is absolutely unique and that cannot be found on any other mmorpg.

Now all this risks to vanish. This because of two points:

1- The PvP battlegrounds are wonderful on the PvE server but they will clash with the design of the PvP servers. This is where you mirror the Trammel/Fellucca model. You are drawing a line between PvP and PvE. As I wrote above the soul of this wonderful PvP environment you created is because those two layers are finally melted to the point that they are impossible to discern. They form a cohesive world. It’s obvious that a battleground goes right against this concept. If a battleground can be considered as a way to balance the combat (since it’s an instance you can regulate the access and so prodice a “fair” environment), the implementation of this system on the PvP server risks to draw a line between “fair combat” / “griefing”. Where the “fair combat” is the instanced zone and the “gank party” is the rest of the world.

In this case the PvP servers don’t offer anymore a “quality” that the PvE server cannot deliver. They just become: PvE server + griefing.

2- The reward system. Right now we are starting to see that wonderful example of emergent behaviour I described above. The PvP servers are really gaining a depth that no type of premade content will be ever able to offer. The fact that the two factions are starting to cooperate, producing infinite layers of possible interaction, can be seen as a side-effect that needs to be cut out. Obviously I believe that instead here lies the real quality of this game. You should nourish it, not suffocate it. Now think to what happens when a player of an opposite faction is a complete “character” that *may* be hostile or not, opening a stack of possible reactions that you need to figure out as fast as possible both in the case it’s a menace or a somewhat friendly and useful opportunity. This is exciting, it’s involving for the player and then for the player roleplaying its character. But now that player of the opposite faction is something else: it’s a bag of points. Or “bags of improvements” as Lum would define them.

Now you can guess by yourself that everything that works right now in the PvP servers won’t work anymore after these two systems will be in. At least it won’t work in the same way. The fact that players will be able to gain “honor” (or whatever) from killing a player of an opposed faction means that all the encounters will be just of two types: charge or flee. If you expect to win you charge, if you expect to loose you flee.

All the complex interactions that the ruleset is starting to produce now will vanish as the Greench after the 31 December: With no warning. The game will loose its depth and will become more an arcade, where the players are forced to react to a situation as expected. No freedom, just whack-a-mole and collect your bag of improvement.

At this point I won’t write another post of this length to offer solutions and design ideas, since I feel always like wasting my time, but I’ll suggest a way that may be able to coordinate the development of the PvE server along with the PvP server:

– Instead of gaining points (of any form) from killing players, please give rewards (of any kind) only by strictly accomplishing goals. Conquering and holding a town for “x” time may be a goal. Please develop the whole reward system so that it works *exclusively* on goals and NEVER rewards for killing a player, even in the case the fight is fair. So give us something to fight for and reward us when we achieve that goal but don’t incentivate the fight between the factions outside those goals.

This will preserve that “quality” that the PvP servers offer now.

P.S.
I give out free cookies to who suggests a better title for this message so it can get read more than ten times before sinking in the archive of posts.


Plus another reiteration to summarize the concept:

The battlegrounds will simply draw a line between “fair” combat and griefing. While they make sense in the PvE server they don’t in the PvP one. Because the basic idea of it is that the PvP melts with the PvE. The battlegrounds break this concept directly. It’s a theme park you go join. It’s Dark Age of Camelot, not World of Warcraft. It’s faked, not cohesive.

Instead the reward will simply wipe the complex interactions we have now. When a player is a bag of points you know already what to expect. Right now a sight of an enemy players may deliver so many possible interactions. With a reward system all this is wiped completely because the interaction will be strictly codified.

Kiddo counterattack

This is a counterattack to a commonplace that Jeff Freeman wrote recently.

Blatantly ripped off from Q23:

Brad Wardell:
I’m a very very bad, dad. At least, that’s what the dentist told me when I refused to bring my son in to have the cavity in his baby tooth filled.

So I said, “Lady, if I don’t listen to social services, what chance do you think you have?”

Which means it’s probably not surprising that I allow my 8 year old to play World of Warcraft. In my home office I have two computers side by side so often we quest together. He loves that.

But he also loves soloing. But soloing to an 8 year old means something very different to power levelers elsewhere. He’s been playing since the day it’s out. He’s only level 9 even though he’s put in quite a bit of time.

His Night Elf Hunter made a journey all the way to Stormwind. Through some pretty scary places to get there. You can imagine what people thought seeing a level 3 (at the time) character running through areas with level 30 to 40 creatures all over the place. But he made it.

His character, “Bud” (get it, buds on a tree, night elf? lol) likes to sing and dance. He’ll hang out in a small town and start dancing. Others will join in and before you know it, the whole town is dancing.

He loves to go around to different places and click on the characters until they get annoyed (keep clicking on them and they’ll eventually say “you’re getting on my nerves”). He’s heard elves, dwarves, gnomes, and humans of various sorts tell him where he should go.

His character loves to skin, cook, and fish. He only occasionally kills monsters. Instead, he’ll try out various fishing spots. He’ll kill a rabit and skin it. He’ll cook various dishes.

He also likes to visit “newbie” areas and hand out free food he cooked to the new users. I’ve seen him quest with other people in Westfall and seen him running from a level 33 undead ogre in Duskwood.

He’s just having a blast. I know most people would be aghast that a kid would be playing this game but you know, it’s really not a bad game for kids. His reading gets better from reading so much on-screen. He’s learning about money and bartering and economcis a bit. He’s learning how to follow directions even better.

Plus most importantly, it probably distracts him from that cavity in his tooth.

Yep, I’m a great dad.. ;)

Posted in: Uncategorized |