Tip.It Times: October 10

[Cheefoo]

Obnoxious first article, second article brings up a good point, but offers no solutions and is painfully short, and I didn't bother with the third fanfic article.

 

I honestly didn't see Nomad's Requiem and the Void quest line as some "shameless minigame promotion" quests. NR was a short, but challenging quest, the story wasn't very in depth, but was mysterious, and allows for speculation after the end. TVSB was short, but the story was interesting, along with moral choices made it an enjoyable line of quests. There's really nothing wrong with trying to expand on the background of minigames with otherwise scarce story. "Forcing" you to play at least one round of it is more to make sure you have an idea of what's going on, nothing wrong with that, it takes a few minutes anyway.

 

As for the second article, it's a good point that I've experienced, but isn't a very interesting read. An easy solution would be "display name history", which is often used when you're allowed to change your name somewhere (for example, on this very forum).

 

P.S. I noticed numerous grammatical errors in the first two articles. Not trying to nitpick though, just pointing it out.

 

they could do "bonus rewards weekend" for minigames - give bonus zeal, SC points, Castlewars tickets, etc.

 

that would work better

 

That actually sounds like an awesome idea! It could work like a community event with extra rewards to persuade people to join in the fun. I'd also love if they'd be a more regular occurance, not like a once-every-six-months affair like bonus xp weekends.

[roanlo]

1st one:

 

Your insulted Conquest like it's as crud as the rat pits. Conquest is actually a good game. The actual section where you are required to play 'conquest style', was also an interesting take. Far more engaging then Nomad's Requiem where playing the mini-game had no affect on the actual quest other then the fact that you should know the man and imp that give out the rewards.

 

Personally, i would have liked to seen 1-2 more waves of Pests, Conquest style. That would have been more 'grandmaster' is my opinion. Besides the 1st puzzle and the panel puzzle, there wasn't much exciting in terms of brain power; although, I did quite enjoy the Pest Queen.

 

Mini-games that are quite dulled done, do indeed need an upgrade, but i do not see Jagex in future promoting completely dead mini-games. All the ones they have promoted thus far, are popular with at least some part of the community, regardless of whether they are used purely for the rewards, or for the fun.

 

Don't expect to see the Rat Pits, or gnome ball (both which serve no enjoyment at all, nor the chance to actually play them) or the games room (as it's just as easy to play those games on Funorb or other websites).

[obidiah]

I have to agree with what many others have said about the frist article. Playing a minigame once to do a quest does not feel like a hardship. It's not really any different than being asked to do many of the other challenges that are presented to you in quests.

The reason some of the minigames don't get played is that quite a lot don't have rewards to match the time they take and a lot of them don't have that much variation to keep them interesting after a few plays.

But one playthrough of a minigame for a completion of a quest is a sufficient reward rate for most questers so that's the first problem solved, and one playthrough is not enough for things to get monotonous, so thats the second problem covered.

 

Second article, I can see where it's coming from a lot more, on the other hand I'm generally not embarressed to ask them their original username, I've not had anyone take offense to it yet. Surely if they're changing their names that much they can expect people to be losing track of who they are? and likely have been asked the same thing by other people already.

I don't know why some people would change their name quite so much, it seems a good way to get deleted by those users with friendslist space issues.

[A0z9]

1st article is total BS. The others are way better.

[Ts_Stormrage]

1st article is total BS. The others are way better.

And here... we... go!

 

Nice reasoning there... Your argument completely validates your points due to its well thought-out piece of intelligent TROLLING THAT YOU DUMP ON THESE FORUMS!!!

Go away, noone wants you here...

 

 

I happen to like the first article. The 2nd and 3rd article too, but since everyone already agrees with me there, I dont feel the need to discuss those...

I like it because it takes a controversial point of view, and manages to explain it in a coherent and intelligent and UNDERSTANDABLE way... It is one of the articles out there that has the potential to change someone's mind about how they feel about, in this case, putting a "taste of minigames" in quests...

 

The author saw it happen twice (three times if you count Diaries) and thinks this will become a trend to "promote" otherwise unused content in the future. He feels that if the content is unpopular it is not a fault of under-exposure, but rather of what that content itself has to intice us to play it...

 

Well done.

[Will H]

1st article is total BS. The others are way better.

And here... we... go!

 

Nice reasoning there... Your argument completely validates your points due to its well thought-out piece of intelligent TROLLING THAT YOU DUMP ON THESE FORUMS!!!

Go away, noone wants you here...

 

 

I happen to like the first article. The 2nd and 3rd article too, but since everyone already agrees with me there, I dont feel the need to discuss those...

I like it because it takes a controversial point of view, and manages to explain it in a coherent and intelligent and UNDERSTANDABLE way... It is one of the articles out there that has the potential to change someone's mind about how they feel about, in this case, putting a "taste of minigames" in quests...

 

The author saw it happen twice (three times if you count Diaries) and thinks this will become a trend to "promote" otherwise unused content in the future. He feels that if the content is unpopular it is not a fault of under-exposure, but rather of what that content itself has to intice us to play it...

 

Well done.

 

Woah, calm down. Think about it this way: Should quests not be allowed to include content or refer to its minigames, just to satisfy those with the idea that doing so is just promoting the minigame? It's not so wrong to use them as sources of content, and Jagex haven't promoted a failed minigame after it's become apparent that they've failed. Soul Wars, Conquest and Pest Control are pretty popular, if not up with the most popular minigames, so treating them as failed just isn't right.

 

If minigames were completely non-canon to quests, I'm pretty sure the storylines would suffer from it.

[obidiah]

 

 

The author saw it happen twice (three times if you count Diaries) and thinks this will become a trend to "promote" otherwise unused content in the future. He feels that if the content is unpopular it is not a fault of under-exposure, but rather of what that content itself has to intice us to play it...

 

Well done.

 

I do actually think the article is rather making assumptions about why Jagex are using minigames as quest requirements.

I quite like minigames as quest requirements and diary requirements, they don't generally increase my chances of playing the minigame afterwards, but it's nice to get the excuse to play minigames again that I'd only played once on release and then not got round to it again.

 

So it's entirely possible that Jagex are largely just trying to give us some nice variety in our questing gameplay rather than a particular campaign to create more players for particular minigames. (especially seeing as the two minigames we're largely talking about aren't particular popularity sufferers)

 

I also think he needs to be a little bit careful about generalised statements about what the community thinks.

 

For example

 

"These force-fed elements of the game give an objective player reflux, as our intelligence is insulted with these poorly fabricated ploys to drive activity in underused areas of the game."

 

Does this mean that I'm not an objective player because I didn't share his feelings of reflux at having to play one game of soul wars?

 

Opinion pieces are fine, I like seeing different points of view, but the writer needs to make sure that they are presenting things as their opinion rather than everyones, or they will get a slew of people saying the article is bad.

[Thanorpheus]

Saying that having to break away from the quests to do these minigames is a bit of a stretch. Personally i always try out new content either the day or soon after its released. Conquest is actually one of my favorite minigames now. And you actually had to use the knowledge of playing conquest during the actual quest so is good that they made sure you knew what you were doing beforehand. All in all, the Quest Cape is still a relatively common sight (at least in W48) and i still have mine so hopefully JaGeX comes out with a good sequel to WGS soon :P

[Jonanananas]

 

 

The author saw it happen twice (three times if you count Diaries) and thinks this will become a trend to "promote" otherwise unused content in the future. He feels that if the content is unpopular it is not a fault of under-exposure, but rather of what that content itself has to intice us to play it...

 

Well done.

 

I do actually think the article is rather making assumptions about why Jagex are using minigames as quest requirements.

I quite like minigames as quest requirements and diary requirements, they don't generally increase my chances of playing the minigame afterwards, but it's nice to get the excuse to play minigames again that I'd only played once on release and then not got round to it again.

 

So it's entirely possible that Jagex are largely just trying to give us some nice variety in our questing gameplay rather than a particular campaign to create more players for particular minigames. (especially seeing as the two minigames we're largely talking about aren't particular popularity sufferers)

 

I also think he needs to be a little bit careful about generalised statements about what the community thinks.

 

For example

 

"These force-fed elements of the game give an objective player reflux, as our intelligence is insulted with these poorly fabricated ploys to drive activity in underused areas of the game."

 

Does this mean that I'm not an objective player because I didn't share his feelings of reflux at having to play one game of soul wars?

 

Opinion pieces are fine, I like seeing different points of view, but the writer needs to make sure that they are presenting things as their opinion rather than everyones, or they will get a slew of people saying the article is bad.

 

 

Wait...the author tried to present it as everyones opinion? Where? Your quote was the only one that goes slightly into the direction of that. And tbh, he's kind of right. If you can't see it as a simple ploy to present the minigame, something is wrong. The only difference is if you care or not, where the author cared and others did not.

 

Also, going through the tutorial would've been more than enough for Nomad's requiem. As said, the storyline is pretty shallow anyway.

 

 

"You wonder what the Soul Obelisk is for? I'M charging teh powa!" Battle. Quest finished. Oh well, I forgot the incredibly difficult riddles which were completely suited for a grandmaster quest. I think it's good to have a challenging boss(I haven't yet killed him), but not at the expenses of Storyline and riddles, especially if its a GMQ.

 

And I liked the first article, it's just that I do not agree with it.

 

Just one thing

 

"Many can argue that perhaps the least popular activities catered towards the masses are minigames. Some are hugely popular and see enormous buy in from players, such as Stealing Creation at its advent, or the original roll-out of Pest Control."

 

I don't really get what is being said here. May be because English is not my native tongue, but to me this doesn't make sense. Can anybody explain?

[dragon246665]

Wow that article was negative, I throughly disagree with at least half of it.

[obidiah]

"Wait...the author tried to present it as everyones opinion? Where? Your quote was the only one that goes slightly into the direction of that."

 

Well I can expand on what I was saying, I didn't want to pull apart the authors article to much, it wasn't THAT bad.

 

But seeing as I'm being challenged:

Maybe not throughout, but there were definite times where I felt he was misrepresenting the views of the community.

I personally still think the quote I mentioned was a strong enough example of this to make the point alone (unless I'm confused as to what reflux is)

 

But additionally "Conquest, which went out recently with all the popularity of a fart in a space-suit, was the new target"

Seems a misrepresentitive statement too. As can be seen by other comments in this thread, quite a few people enjoy conquest, maybe not everyone, but considerably more than would enjoy being in a fart filled space-suit.

(actually in retrospect - a lot of people would think it was cool enough to get to be in a space-suit they could overlook the fart - maybe the author was saying that the update was quite popular and I have misinterpreted him)

 

I'm sure I could nitpick other parts of the article if I wanted, but I don't think it's needed. I don't particularly like certain things about the article and have described my reasons why - hopefully in a polite and constructive enough fashion not to offend the author.

I don't think the article is a disaster. (though I think below par compared to other articles I've seen in the tip.it times.)

[Dire_Wolf]

I liked the article "Do i know you?". It was short and clear. :thumbup:

[D. V. Devnull]

So... didn't read article #3 (don't normally read fictionals, lol)... :oops:

 

 

As for Articles #1 & #2, I feel that they're both square-on. :thumbsup:

 

A lot of the recent changes to RuneScape have appeared in some way or another to be mere half-baked attempts to please the player base. Heck, I can think of a lot of things that Jagex should do that they haven't, and a number of things that they should have never done (and need to direly undo) and were unreasonable to do in the first place. <_<

 

Further, I like a couple of people's ideas in this thread about Display Names. Long-standing friends should be able to see their friend's original IDs. As for how many changes, I'll disagree just slightly and say that 7 per year would be reasonable, with reversals not counting, and only allow activation of one of those 7 changes every 14 days at the closest, with ability to reverse any time that a user likes without issues. :huh:

 

~Mr. D. V. "I get how these ranting Tip.It Times writers feel." Devnull

[Racheya]

I agree with both the articles in the Times this week :) I do find the idea of minigames becoming a requirement for quests a little jarring, to say the least. A few may not be a problem, but I think that it's because we've had two of these quests in a relatively short amount of time. Half a year isn't that long of a time when it comes to content development.

[Jonanananas]

You did not misunderstand him.

But, popularity means it is liked and played by a greater deal of players, and tbh, after the initial crazy that comes with every update, no matter how bad, has died down, I don't see a lot of people playing conquest left. So, it is kind of unpopular, while of course not as bad as the games room ;)

[Troacctid]

I'm fine with the first article. I think the author is too harsh on some of the minigames, probably projecting his own opinions of them onto the greater community--certainly with Soul Wars, and probably Conquest as well--and it seems dubious that Jagex's main motive in including them in quests is to advertise them. So pretty much I'd say it's wrong. But it's adequately-presented so meh.

[Lizard_X123]

Could have at least added a "Warning: Angggrrrryyyyy" tag to the first article.

 

Did it ever occur to you that tying minigames into quests/diaries/what-have-you wasn't really a "Hey, we put time into designing this, but it's not popular so we're going to force you to play it to make ourselves feel better!" notion?

 

You mentioned Barbarian Assault in the Fremmenik diary. Now, while you and I might be quite well versed in the game, and know of BA's existence, it is entirely possible (and I'd say probably) that a large number of new players have no clue what BA is. There is no "List of Minigames" button on their UI. There is, however, a tab dedicated to the diaries, and through this, a player could be directed towards BA, and may find that they really enjoy the game, something they may not have found for quite some time!

 

Expanding upon that, I believe that having minigames linked to more 'standard-fare' content is less about forcing you to partake in some content you deem nauseating, and more about gaining exposure for the game, so that people who would enjoy the minigame but would otherwise not have found out about it for X period of time, CAN find out about it and direct their attention towards it.

[GreenStorm]

I find the first article a bit of a disgrace. It is nothing more than a collection of unsupported opinions and slander. Some of the author's notions are patently untrue. For instance, the idea that the only people to frequent Soul Wars are bots and pures is quite obviously a falsehood, as is evidenced by the existence of well-organized and maintained high level SW clans. Secondly, the section on Nomad's Requiem seems to be written by one extremely embittered, perhaps by personal failure at the quest. For me and for many other players, Nomad was frustrating, yes, but at the same time a unique and fun challenge of our RS skills. Just because you might have failed, storm, does not mean that everyone else has.

 

When the author begins to discuss Conquest, we step once again into the territory of unsupported opinion. Many high leveled players, myself included, enjoy Conquest as a fun and alternative way to earn Pest Points. Also, it is a bit ridiculous to classify Pest Control as a outmoded and underused minigame. One has only to go to one of the Pest Control worlds, or interact with a clan like Heart Unit to find that Pest Control is as vibrantly active as ever.

 

Lastly, I find it extremely interesting that the author has no tolerance for being "forced" to play one single game of Conquest and Soul Wars. It is quite a daunting experience to spend ten minutes familiarizing one's self with the mechanics of a minigame; far more difficult than spending hundreds of hours clicking the same rock [/sarcasm]. I could understand legitimate protests against a quest requiring the earning of hundreds of PC points, but this is an altogether different scenario. If you can't spend ten minutes playing one minigame to progress on a quest, I suggest your time would be better served by playing Pong, or perhaps by repeatedly hitting your head on a rock.

 

It is also interesting to note that the author references, with tones of horror, a quest dealing with the Mage Training Arena. We already have it-- it's called Rune Mechanics. For future reference, Tip.It Times Editorial Panel, it would help to pick a writer who has a functional grasp of language, instead of whatever inbred monkey we have here.

 

I also find an extremely unpleasant whining undertone to this article.

 

I beg the Editorial Panel to not allow pieces of this quality to be published again, for the sake of humanity's collective rationality.

[blakdragon39]

To reply to the first article, I like the minigames being incorporated into the quests.. sometimes. I think completing the tutorial to do an unrelated part of the quest or something like that is silly, but I liked how Conquest was put into The Void Stares Back. I think it was my favourite part of the quest actually. :)

 

And I totally agree with the 2nd article! It's so frustrating not knowing who you're talking to in your cc or something like that, happens all the time now. >< Any name changes I've made I've stuck pretty close to my original name. I went from Blakdragon39 (original) to Blak Ajah, back to my original name. So everyone knows who I am!

[Kirbyfreek33]

In response to Pimp my Minigame!,

 

I disagree quite wholeheartedly with the idea that Conquest in The Void Stares Back was "extremely forced and way out of place". The only part that felt out of place during that segment in my opinion was that the floor was conveniently decorated in a checkered pattern. In my opinion, it would make sense that *name hidden* would send splatters after you because their area of effect would most likely do the most damage, and that your party would hide in a small cavern that the splatters' explosions would block, leaving Savant to send in a Void Conquest squad. Also, the reasons for being forced to move in a turn-based manner also make sense; the Void Knights know the pests have a variety of different threats, so they wouldn't blindly charge in, instead standing their ground. Also, if the commorb worked in a similar way to a trickle-charge cell phone, the idea that you would only be able to issue one order at a time makes sense too. In my opinion, the Conquest segment was definitely not an "absurd situation that led to a simulated match of the minigame’s basic rules and operations", given that #1 the Void Knights had created Conquest as preparation to defend against a pest threat in the first place, which is why they would be readily available, and #2 that the party wouldn't just let the pests through the portal into the Kinshra's basement, hence having to use the earlier-mentioned Conquest squad to defend the portal. I felt that the Conquest section was a fitting interlude to allow *name hidden* to tie up *name hidden* and *verb hidden* *name hidden* in order to *verb hidden* *noun hidden*, giving urgency to *name hidden* to charge mindlessly through a door.

 

As for Conquest having "all the popularity of a fart in a space-suit", I once again disagree as I have seen many players playing Conquest for one reason or another (though people like insulting me when I just have fun messing around with "Kirby's Stupid Tactic Hour"), as it can be a welcome alternative to running after portals in Pest Control for points, and there are still plenty of people who play Pest Control as well *cough*Heart Unit*cough*. Also, while I don't like Soul Wars, I wouldn't call it horrific, as I have seen many players who enjoy it for its actual gameplay or its rewards, even if there are some people that just sit near the entrance and attack barricades to keep their activity bar up for relatively work-free experience. As for the Barbarian Assault tutorial being in the easy fremennik achievement diary, it is perfectly understandable for it to be there, as the tutorial isn't that long to go through, and there are STILL players who should go through it in order to know what they're doing in the game (though it seems most players finally actually watched it instead of skipping through the whole thing). One game of Soul Wars isn't really a problem for a quest (and while yes, Nomad was hard, that doesn't mean he has "tested the limits of players’ collective patience", given how I have seen many forum posts), even if it didn't make that much sense compared to Conquest in The Void Stares Back. Also, Nomad's Requiem is most likely a prequel to something else, hence there being not a whole lot of sense in the plot thus far.

 

Soul Wars, Conquest, Pest Control, and Barbarian Assault are by no means "underused" in my opinon, and forcing a player to go through one game or a tutorial of these fun minigames is not much of an ordeal to go through, if you consider it an ordeal at all. I've also noticed some contradictions, or at least, strange absences, in this article...

 

If it is a problem for an easy achievement diary to make you look at a tutorial, and if it is a problem to have a Grandmaster quest require you to play a game of Conquest both in and out of the quest, why is it no issue for you to get halfway through wave-wise in the Fight Caves, which is definitely a minigame; or to have to complete it entirely for the Elite diary? Is it purely because this is something that "any player" could handle since it is primarily just "kill these things over and over", holding much similarity to normal grinding, not needing an ulterior objective like in the previously mentioned minigames? Or is it just because the author doesn't think the Fight Caves is at all an ordeal to do? I have completed the Fight Caves, but I would not like to go through them again, as I have found them too pressure-filled and not enough actual fun, and I don't care that much about re-gaining Fire Capes.

 

If the author considers Pest Control and Soul Wars "underused", why has the author not mentioned content that at least to me appears much more underused such as Trouble Brewing? I love playing TB for fun, but not many players (comparatively) play it due to its lack of up-to-date rewards and no real incentive to win, since winning does not garner you anything extra. I was surprised that this minigame was not mentioned.

 

Requiring Temple Trekking to get ONE type of second ingredient for Summoning is hardly a crime in my opinion, especially given that the familiar that this charm would summon is the one that gives the MOST experience out of any of the Summoning familiars, which helps to (but admittedly doesn't completely IMO given how rare nail beast events are) balance out the time taken doing Temple Trekking and Burgh de Rott Ramble.

 

I believe there is quite a bias in this article, and I disagree with most of what the author has written. However, even with the bias and my disagreement, I found the article to be pretty well-written anyway, and I disagree with the poster 2 posts above who appears to imply that this article is not of very good quality. It simply offers a different perspective, though it admittedly would be nice if the author could draw attention to the article being his or her opinion a bit more.

[Andregiant]

I totally agree with the 1st articlle. I play, don't do quests or minigames.

If a minigame is to be part of a quest, then put it in game.

 

The 2nd article is right on. Kids, yes I say kids, keep changing their names.

They don't tell you, most times :) Hey Andre! this is yyyy, I'm now xxxx :)

 

And I love the fictional. Great story there, following it.

[Misterknowitall]

I kinda like the idea of the Quest Cape being a "been everywhere, done everything"-Cape.

[stonewall337]

A major part of minigames, outside reward, is control. Both MA and Conquest have TERRIBLE UI. Thus I played them no more then necessary. Game room and gnomeball were flawed from the start. No reward, not great UI, ability to play GR games on otherwebsites easier/better, etc all lead to their lack of popularity.

 

And whilst there is a lot of content in RS, after thousands of hours, I've done just about everything that is "fun" in its own right. Many people quit due to boredom, same reason I quit MW2. Those who stay often have other reasons, goals, community, etc.

 

Personally, I'd like conquest if it were balanced better, and had better UI. Right now, its just Ugh. The main way to win against even opponents is to wait until one messes up.

[Foodfight13]

I find the first article a bit of a disgrace. It is nothing more than a collection of unsupported opinions and slander...

 

When the author begins to discuss Conquest, we step once again into the territory of unsupported opinion. Many high leveled players, myself included, enjoy Conquest as a fun and alternative way to earn Pest Points. Also, it is a bit ridiculous to classify Pest Control as a outmoded and underused minigame. One has only to go to one of the Pest Control worlds, or interact with a clan like Heart Unit to find that Pest Control is as vibrantly active as ever.

 

...For future reference, Tip.It Times Editorial Panel, it would help to pick a writer who has a functional grasp of language, instead of whatever inbred monkey we have here.

 

I also find an extremely unpleasant whining undertone to this article.

 

I beg the Editorial Panel to not allow pieces of this quality to be published again, for the sake of humanity's collective rationality.

I find it ironic that you criticize the author of using unsupported opinions and slander when you also are using unsupported opinions and slander in your criticism. <_< You're offering no more factual evidence than he is. You may think that people enjoy Conquest, but your opinion isn't necessarily the truth. If you're trying to convince someone who has no knowledge of Conquest and it's popularity (such as myself) that it's actually played a lot you're not doing a very good job. It certainly doesn't help that you did an excellent job of being polite and not calling names. </end sarcasm>

 

On a different note, thanks for all the comments on the fictional. ;)

[stonewall337]

I find the first article a bit of a disgrace. It is nothing more than a collection of unsupported opinions and slander...

 

When the author begins to discuss Conquest, we step once again into the territory of unsupported opinion. Many high leveled players, myself included, enjoy Conquest as a fun and alternative way to earn Pest Points. Also, it is a bit ridiculous to classify Pest Control as a outmoded and underused minigame. One has only to go to one of the Pest Control worlds, or interact with a clan like Heart Unit to find that Pest Control is as vibrantly active as ever.

 

...For future reference, Tip.It Times Editorial Panel, it would help to pick a writer who has a functional grasp of language, instead of whatever inbred monkey we have here.

 

I also find an extremely unpleasant whining undertone to this article.

 

I beg the Editorial Panel to not allow pieces of this quality to be published again, for the sake of humanity's collective rationality.

I find it ironic that you criticize the author of using unsupported opinions and slander when you also are using unsupported opinions and slander in your criticism. <_< You're offering no more factual evidence than he is. You may think that people enjoy Conquest, but your opinion isn't necessarily the truth. If you're trying to convince someone who has no knowledge of Conquest and it's popularity (such as myself) that it's actually played a lot you're not doing a very good job. It certainly doesn't help that you did an excellent job of being polite and not calling names. </end sarcasm>

 

On a different note, thanks for all the comments on the fictional. ;)

 

 

COUGH logical fallacy.

 

 

A "letter to the editor" (these responses, for sake of argument) do not require the same amount of evidence that an article writer needs. There is a major difference. In fact, a person responding in the negative about one of the author's claims is proof, however small, that the author may actually be incorrect.

 

I would agree that this article was, actually, rather lacking in real content. Quotes such as this

 

In Nomad’s Requiem, players were forced to try out Soul Wars, a horrific minigame, visited largely by those who wished to abuse bugs to harvest heaping experience, and pure characters who wanted fast experience without the annoyance of killing monsters or watching a screen.

are ones I hope to never see attached to another TIF times article.

 

Is it horrific, well that is more due if anything to the quality of the PLAYERS then anything else. There are balance issues, etc, but the game more often fails because the players are either clueless, or they just don't care.