Well, in Vendetta Online you get space weather. Hive AI will scout locations for expansion then depending on whether or not it encounters resistance will choose to occupy territory (also dependent on the resource usefulness of that area), players will barter with each other, form alliances, pirate each other, build epic drama arcs... NPC convoys will travel from station to station carrying items that are in demand at the destination (these convoys can also be pirated by players, causing the destination to become resource-depleted).
A lot of this isn't that obvious up front, but it becomes more obvious the longer you play. After 14 years, I am still learning new things about the game. More on this as it relates to the thread topic later...
Others have mentioned Ryzom, Wurm, Eve Online, I would even say Rift had aspects of a living breathing world. The last time I played WoW was in 2007, but I wouldn't include it among this list. Don't get me wrong, it's an excellent game (rated the best MMORPG of all time by this site), but when I played I didn't feel like I was having any effect on the world or that my actions would create tangible ripples of any kind. In all the other games I listed this was the case, dependent on...
Time scales.
Take Vendetta for example (I'm about to get a little critical here, shocking I know); in the beginning you may or may not feel as though you were part of a "living, breathing world". My guess is that you will, due to the largeness of the world. This is true of most MMORPGs, however.
This phase lasts only so long; as time goes on and you begin to learn your way around the nuts and bolts of the world, it becomes obvious whether or not you really are in a "living, breathing world". No matter how many times I ran that battleground in WoW, the world didn't change. Not so in Vendetta Online. However, take the times scale from a year or two and zoom out to a decade or more; am I really in a "living, breathing world"? No, obviously not! It's a simulacrum: no matter how detailed the illusion, eventually I will get down to the metal. Even in a game as complex as Dwarf Fortress, this becomes apparent if you get to know it well enough. This is getting pretty philosophical, but I guess my point is that if you are expecting a game to present you with the richness of real life, expect to be disappointed. The challenge is to both understand the mechanics of the game well enough to manipulate the aspects that make it feel as though it were a "living, breathing world", especially during the middle stages, but also to remain open minded enough to be surprised during play and not to have any expectations despite a deep, intimate knowledge of the game's mechanics.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
This is very core to the pitch of Star Citizen. It was also what Everquest Next intended to do.
And it's something that GW2 went for.
I'd say it's simply the dynamic of it, MMO's are very static, and the content is just scripted in a way that even with NPC's what you see is a script in one infinite loop, same with quests, no impact in that content and in the game-world.
GW2 tried to fix this but still had to script everything, where the game-world is dynamic, the events, the chains, driven or not from what the players in the area do, and the impact that has does a very superficial yet better than most job at providing a "living breathing MMO".
Everquest Next had design ideas as, dynamic world, say one Ogre settlement looking for the right place in the world to settle in, and it is influenced by what happens, say if they were to be constantly attacked they would likely move away and look for a quieter area, that is the sort of design that for me provides the living breathing MMO.
Other is AI that is not walking and doing stuff in a pre-scripted infinite loop, the "sims" approach to its simulation should be a fresh air from what you find if you go now in one MMO like BDO; a static make-believe living AI.
For me, the AI the fundamental core piece to provide that experience.
For part of the beta FireFall had a nice system where the NPC's would invade in an organic way, going from station to station. You could stumble on an invasion force and call in other players to kill them in their track.
The system was actually fairly simple, but had a very cool immersive effect on the world.
What you seems to be vigorously sidestepping and avoiding is that any game system implementation can be tedious or fun.
I would love to see how you can make a have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system in a MMO or RPG fun.
Until then, i will only enjoy that "activity" in real life.
How quickly you jump to the extreme to attempt to prove a point!
and how quickly you avoid logic and reasoning. Torval said " any game system implementation can be tedious or fun."
So "any" includes, clearly, a "have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system". In fact, his statement includes the extreme examples, which I rightly pointed out, cannot be made fun.
Unless, of course, you find a way to make going to toilet frequently fun. I am all ears!
Well thanks, Captain Obvious!
Now it is obvious? How come such "obvious" logic and reasoning eluded you the first time?
Oh i get it, you ignore reasoning and logic that contradicts your opinions.
For me, the AI the fundamental core piece to provide that experience.
EQN is dead, and no one knows if the idea works or not. Star Citizen looks like vaporware. And even if not, no one knows if it will work until it is released.
Ideas that sounds good may not work in real life.
At least we know scripting works to some extend (i.e. as long as you only play it once).
Originally posted by flizzer When people use this term they are really talking about nostalgia and the game they played when they were younger and had so much more free time. Nostalgia is a wonderful drug that distorts reality.
What game are you talking about?
EQ certainly wasn't "living and breathing" with slow static spawn, and camping.
Living and breathing in terms of the behaviour of players, their investment in the game and how they communicated so much with each other perhaps?
Rather than tinyMMOs with players running around, hardly doing anything together and never communicating outside of a Global "This is a Shit/Great Game! lol"
What you seems to be vigorously sidestepping and avoiding is that any game system implementation can be tedious or fun.
I would love to see how you can make a have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system in a MMO or RPG fun.
Until then, i will only enjoy that "activity" in real life.
How quickly you jump to the extreme to attempt to prove a point!
and how quickly you avoid logic and reasoning. Torval said " any game system implementation can be tedious or fun."
So "any" includes, clearly, a "have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system". In fact, his statement includes the extreme examples, which I rightly pointed out, cannot be made fun.
Unless, of course, you find a way to make going to toilet frequently fun. I am all ears!
Well thanks, Captain Obvious!
Now it is obvious? How come such "obvious" logic and reasoning eluded you the first time?
Oh i get it, you ignore reasoning and logic that contradicts your opinions.
No, you missed the point entirely. You immediately went to an extreme version of the system that wouldn't be fun; great, you're talking about a poorly implemented version. Exactly @Torval's point: such a requirement would make the mechanic tedious.
However, ARK has pooping, and it's not tedious, and it's useful to the player for various things. Same general mechanic, different implementation.
But hey, it's always nice to have someone who completely misses the boat attempt to insult my intelligence. It lets me know I'm on the right track.
Originally posted by flizzer When people use this term they are really talking about nostalgia and the game they played when they were younger and had so much more free time. Nostalgia is a wonderful drug that distorts reality.
What game are you talking about?
EQ certainly wasn't "living and breathing" with slow static spawn, and camping.
Living and breathing in terms of the behaviour of players, their investment in the game and how they communicated so much with each other perhaps?
Rather than tinyMMOs with players running around, hardly doing anything together and never communicating outside of a Global "This is a Shit/Great Game! lol"
I would not call lining up a queue camping to kill a static spawn "living and breathing" in terms of the behaviors of players, unless you count camp drama.
What you seems to be vigorously sidestepping and avoiding is that any game system implementation can be tedious or fun.
I would love to see how you can make a have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system in a MMO or RPG fun.
Until then, i will only enjoy that "activity" in real life.
How quickly you jump to the extreme to attempt to prove a point!
and how quickly you avoid logic and reasoning. Torval said " any game system implementation can be tedious or fun."
So "any" includes, clearly, a "have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system". In fact, his statement includes the extreme examples, which I rightly pointed out, cannot be made fun.
Unless, of course, you find a way to make going to toilet frequently fun. I am all ears!
Well thanks, Captain Obvious!
Now it is obvious? How come such "obvious" logic and reasoning eluded you the first time?
Oh i get it, you ignore reasoning and logic that contradicts your opinions.
No, you missed the point entirely. You immediately went to an extreme version of the system that wouldn't be fun; great, you're talking about a poorly implemented version. Exactly @Torval's point: such a requirement would make the mechanic tedious.
However, ARK has pooping, and it's not tedious, and it's useful to the player for various things. Same general mechanic, different implementation.
But hey, it's always nice to have someone who completely misses the boat attempt to insult my intelligence. It lets me know I'm on the right track.
May be you should learn to read first? Again, (i know i know, some people i have to keep repeating to), Torval said " any game system implementation can be tedious or fun." .. so his statement is that even extreme system can be made fun.
So next you said what i said was "obvious" .. clearly agreeing with my point (otherwise why would it be obvious to you). Now you are flipping back.
May be it is logic that insults your intelligence, not me.
Originally posted by flizzer When people use this term they are really talking about nostalgia and the game they played when they were younger and had so much more free time. Nostalgia is a wonderful drug that distorts reality.
What game are you talking about?
EQ certainly wasn't "living and breathing" with slow static spawn, and camping.
Living and breathing in terms of the behaviour of players, their investment in the game and how they communicated so much with each other perhaps?
Rather than tinyMMOs with players running around, hardly doing anything together and never communicating outside of a Global "This is a Shit/Great Game! lol"
I would not call lining up a queue camping to kill a static spawn "living and breathing" in terms of the behaviors of players, unless you count camp drama.
It does not matter what they were doing, they were doing something other than madly dashing about. This allowed the time for communication.
For me, the AI the fundamental core piece to provide that experience.
EQN is dead, and no one knows if the idea works or not. Star Citizen looks like vaporware. And even if not, no one knows if it will work until it is released.
Ideas that sounds good may not work in real life.
At least we know scripting works to some extend (i.e. as long as you only play it once).
Well, ambition to do something new to that extent takes risks, so obviously locks it to a very small subset of games, EQN was one that was rethinking how that works moving on from classic MMO's.
GW2 though is the best released example of trying to make you feel that, even though it's all scripts on a loop, so it's I think about turning those scripts in a loop into actual AI simulation so say fights, invasions, events, etc... are driven by simulation leading to a dynamic chains of events triggered by that simulation and/or players.
#1. I've met people who played that game for years and years and had never fired a pistol shot. The social aspect was incredible. When you walked into a Cantina, it felt just like the Mos Eisley scene from the original Star Wars: A New Hope. There were incentives to visit these places for non-social players, e.g., mind buffs, trading, healing, etc.
#2. The crafting was so deep. Resource gathering was a game itself. Resource statistics were all over the place; thus, almost every single crafted item was completely different. The best crafters became very well popular; their stores were always packed with high-end weapons and armor. When you walked into one of the player-made malls, it was packed with people. It felt like walking into a real mall.
#3. Players could literally band up and create player cities. The more successful cities could actually be names and placed on the authentic game map.
#4. The maps were gigantic. Distant places actually really felt distant.
The list could honestly go on forever. I could talk about the world pvp, the monumental space exploration, the incredible player / clothing customization etc, but I have to go to work.
What you seems to be vigorously sidestepping and avoiding is that any game system implementation can be tedious or fun.
I would love to see how you can make a have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system in a MMO or RPG fun.
Until then, i will only enjoy that "activity" in real life.
How quickly you jump to the extreme to attempt to prove a point!
and how quickly you avoid logic and reasoning. Torval said " any game system implementation can be tedious or fun."
So "any" includes, clearly, a "have-to-go-to-toilet-every-5-min system". In fact, his statement includes the extreme examples, which I rightly pointed out, cannot be made fun.
Unless, of course, you find a way to make going to toilet frequently fun. I am all ears!
Well thanks, Captain Obvious!
Now it is obvious? How come such "obvious" logic and reasoning eluded you the first time?
Oh i get it, you ignore reasoning and logic that contradicts your opinions.
No, you missed the point entirely. You immediately went to an extreme version of the system that wouldn't be fun; great, you're talking about a poorly implemented version. Exactly @Torval's point: such a requirement would make the mechanic tedious.
However, ARK has pooping, and it's not tedious, and it's useful to the player for various things. Same general mechanic, different implementation.
But hey, it's always nice to have someone who completely misses the boat attempt to insult my intelligence. It lets me know I'm on the right track.
May be you should learn to read first? Again, (i know i know, some people i have to keep repeating to), Torval said " any game system implementation can be tedious or fun." .. so his statement is that even extreme system can be made fun.
So next you said what i said was "obvious" .. clearly agreeing with my point (otherwise why would it be obvious to you). Now you are flipping back.
May be it is logic that insults your intelligence, not me.
BTW, is this "obvious" too?
[mod edit]
[mod edit]
Actually, you set up an unreasonable implementation (pooping every 5 minutes) and as with any good strawman you demanded others defend your premise.
Its rather obvious to all in this conversation (hence the comments) your particular scenario could never be fun, either in game or worse, in real life.
But you continue to not acknowledge pooping mechanics could not be made useful, or interesting in terms of resource management such as soil enrichment to increase crop yields but "obviously " the devils in the details. (Hence the troll references as this is your typical MO when responding)
Also you continue to be stuck on the word "fun." All types of games from MMORPGs to Survival to simulations have activities which by themselves can be downright hateful or boring (mining in EVE comes to mind).
The actual satisfaction comes from the reward such as selling the ore for ISK which I then use to fund bigger and more expensive ships and activities which are "fun " (I so hate how subjective that word is, renders it almost useless as any form of objective measure)
"But Kyle, I don't like those activities, and developer's are not under any obligation to provide them as clearly most other players don't either or they would already be doing them."
Save it, not the point, yet again another of your strawmen the fact remains such systems can be made interesting and useful (to "some" people) if implemented correctly and of course "obviously" would suck if done as you keep trying to suggest.
Back to Torvals original point, he wasn't sure many players would really enjoy too much realism. He might be right, I'm not a great fan of such which is one reason why I don't do survival games.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I'm very confused at peoples perception of a living breathing world. A living breathing in an mmorpg is a world that is immersive. The NPCs and creatures don't just stand in one spot, they do things. There is weather, and realistics sounds such as crickets, etc. This is what I think of with an living breathing world. Black Desert certainly has these things. You can walk through a city with no other players around and seem like you are surrounded by people everywhere. I remember Ryzom being advertised as a living breathing world because of the way the NPC creatures would migrate amongst other things.
I think a living breathing world is anything immersive that doesn't have loading in between zones. Open world with people running around everywhere. Even if NPC's aren't moving around there should be enough of them around to make it actually feel like a town. Sometimes games have decent ideas to help make a world feel living. Age of Wushu had player characters do things in game while you were offline, so you always had people around doing things, it felt immersive. I think personally BDO is probably the best example of it, or ESO in my opinion.
NPCs that aren't static ( They actually have a personality, livelihood )
MOBs that have social behaviors ( Invade, Ambush, Retreat, Reinforce )
Quests that are dynamic ( Anything that can be done more than once is not dynamic )
Free player economy ( None of this, you can't trade crap like BDO )
Large SEAMLESS world ( Something BDO did right )
Ambiance ( Animals, Music, Weather, Day / Night Cycle )
Features ( Trade Routes, Taming, Fishing and so on )
Voice Overs for the immersion factor
That isn't really simple at all. It reads more like a wishlist than some kind of hard definition.
Let's say for instance a game marked off all those criteria except it didn't have voice overs. Or it had all the features except while all the zones are large and open world, there is a loading time between them.
Your list seems to describe a living breathing world, but it doesn't seem to be the only valid description to me.
EDIT: I would also argue Wurm Online is both a true sandbox and a living breathing world. Other games may or may not be but any definition which would deny an MMO with full terraforming the title of sandbox, and a game where trees grow on their own according to the trees currently in the area and NPC predators hunt NPC prey the title of living breathing world seems to be ridiculously strict to the point of uselessness.
@nariusseldon look, "any" is the set of reasonable options. Just try and discuss things like a grown up.
wow wow wow .. i thought you are one of those who needs to use the English language accurate. "any" is NOT the set of reasonable options. It means all options.
Unless you think "massively multiplayer" only needs to be "reasonably" big .. like 15, i can't see how you can advocate the use of accurate language in one case, and not in the other.
Actually, you set up an unreasonable implementation (pooping every 5 minutes) and as with any good strawman you demanded others defend your premise.
I am not the one who used the word "any", which clearly includes the pooping scenario. I only thought that people here are really serious about using language accurately.
I suppose it is my mistake to believe that people here are genuine, and not hypocrites that only want words to be used accurately if those words are "massively multiplayer".
Beating a dead horse?
As for a living breathing world? they can be single player or multiplayer. A living world for me is one that simulates an ecosystem. I'd love a pve experience where I'm the hunted as well as the hunter. A good balance is always key, I never want too much micro management.
For me, it was original Darkfall. There eco-systems of players. You could recognize the same players and get to know people. You would know who was hostile, who was friendly, what language they spoke, where they hung out, what their routines were. You had your own routines to do what you wanted to do. Where to go for pvp or pve and when. It all depended on the other players.
It was always meant to be a clan-group oriented game, but there were lots of lone wolves and we knew each other. You could make it that way and have fun. Sometimes we grouped up to help each other out with a project. But we liked the freedom to play how we wanted to.
Comments
A lot of this isn't that obvious up front, but it becomes more obvious the longer you play. After 14 years, I am still learning new things about the game. More on this as it relates to the thread topic later...
Others have mentioned Ryzom, Wurm, Eve Online, I would even say Rift had aspects of a living breathing world. The last time I played WoW was in 2007, but I wouldn't include it among this list. Don't get me wrong, it's an excellent game (rated the best MMORPG of all time by this site), but when I played I didn't feel like I was having any effect on the world or that my actions would create tangible ripples of any kind. In all the other games I listed this was the case, dependent on...
Time scales.
Take Vendetta for example (I'm about to get a little critical here, shocking I know); in the beginning you may or may not feel as though you were part of a "living, breathing world". My guess is that you will, due to the largeness of the world. This is true of most MMORPGs, however.
This phase lasts only so long; as time goes on and you begin to learn your way around the nuts and bolts of the world, it becomes obvious whether or not you really are in a "living, breathing world". No matter how many times I ran that battleground in WoW, the world didn't change. Not so in Vendetta Online.
However, take the times scale from a year or two and zoom out to a decade or more; am I really in a "living, breathing world"? No, obviously not! It's a simulacrum: no matter how detailed the illusion, eventually I will get down to the metal. Even in a game as complex as Dwarf Fortress, this becomes apparent if you get to know it well enough.
This is getting pretty philosophical, but I guess my point is that if you are expecting a game to present you with the richness of real life, expect to be disappointed. The challenge is to both understand the mechanics of the game well enough to manipulate the aspects that make it feel as though it were a "living, breathing world", especially during the middle stages, but also to remain open minded enough to be surprised during play and not to have any expectations despite a deep, intimate knowledge of the game's mechanics.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
And it's something that GW2 went for.
I'd say it's simply the dynamic of it, MMO's are very static, and the content is just scripted in a way that even with NPC's what you see is a script in one infinite loop, same with quests, no impact in that content and in the game-world.
GW2 tried to fix this but still had to script everything, where the game-world is dynamic, the events, the chains, driven or not from what the players in the area do, and the impact that has does a very superficial yet better than most job at providing a "living breathing MMO".
Everquest Next had design ideas as, dynamic world, say one Ogre settlement looking for the right place in the world to settle in, and it is influenced by what happens, say if they were to be constantly attacked they would likely move away and look for a quieter area, that is the sort of design that for me provides the living breathing MMO.
Other is AI that is not walking and doing stuff in a pre-scripted infinite loop, the "sims" approach to its simulation should be a fresh air from what you find if you go now in one MMO like BDO; a static make-believe living AI.
For me, the AI the fundamental core piece to provide that experience.
The system was actually fairly simple, but had a very cool immersive effect on the world.
Oh i get it, you ignore reasoning and logic that contradicts your opinions.
EQN is dead, and no one knows if the idea works or not. Star Citizen looks like vaporware. And even if not, no one knows if it will work until it is released.
Ideas that sounds good may not work in real life.
At least we know scripting works to some extend (i.e. as long as you only play it once).
Living and breathing in terms of the behaviour of players, their investment in the game and how they communicated so much with each other perhaps?
Rather than tinyMMOs with players running around, hardly doing anything together and never communicating outside of a Global "This is a Shit/Great Game! lol"
However, ARK has pooping, and it's not tedious, and it's useful to the player for various things. Same general mechanic, different implementation.
But hey, it's always nice to have someone who completely misses the boat attempt to insult my intelligence. It lets me know I'm on the right track.
So next you said what i said was "obvious" .. clearly agreeing with my point (otherwise why would it be obvious to you). Now you are flipping back.
May be it is logic that insults your intelligence, not me.
BTW, is this "obvious" too?
It does not matter what they were doing, they were doing something other than madly dashing about. This allowed the time for communication.
GW2 though is the best released example of trying to make you feel that, even though it's all scripts on a loop, so it's I think about turning those scripts in a loop into actual AI simulation so say fights, invasions, events, etc... are driven by simulation leading to a dynamic chains of events triggered by that simulation and/or players.
I did create a thread on this on the scenario of SC today: http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/468221/scs-subsumption-nobullshit it's just a base part of what it takes to achieve that dynamic set to release soon, but it shows that's the direction.
#1. I've met people who played that game for years and years and had never fired a pistol shot. The social aspect was incredible. When you walked into a Cantina, it felt just like the Mos Eisley scene from the original Star Wars: A New Hope. There were incentives to visit these places for non-social players, e.g., mind buffs, trading, healing, etc.
#2. The crafting was so deep. Resource gathering was a game itself. Resource statistics were all over the place; thus, almost every single crafted item was completely different. The best crafters became very well popular; their stores were always packed with high-end weapons and armor. When you walked into one of the player-made malls, it was packed with people. It felt like walking into a real mall.
#3. Players could literally band up and create player cities. The more successful cities could actually be names and placed on the authentic game map.
#4. The maps were gigantic. Distant places actually really felt distant.
#5. Real player bounties...
The list could honestly go on forever. I could talk about the world pvp, the monumental space exploration, the incredible player / clothing customization etc, but I have to go to work.
Its rather obvious to all in this conversation (hence the comments) your particular scenario could never be fun, either in game or worse, in real life.
But you continue to not acknowledge pooping mechanics could not be made useful, or interesting in terms of resource management such as soil enrichment to increase crop yields but "obviously " the devils in the details.
(Hence the troll references as this is your typical MO when responding)
Also you continue to be stuck on the word "fun." All types of games from MMORPGs to Survival to simulations have activities which by themselves can be downright hateful or boring (mining in EVE comes to mind).
The actual satisfaction comes from the reward such as selling the ore for ISK which I then use to fund bigger and more expensive ships and activities which are "fun " (I so hate how subjective that word is, renders it almost useless as any form of objective measure)
"But Kyle, I don't like those activities, and developer's are not under any obligation to provide them as clearly most other players don't either or they would already be doing them."
Save it, not the point, yet again another of your strawmen the fact remains such systems can be made interesting and useful (to "some" people) if implemented correctly and of course "obviously" would suck if done as you keep trying to suggest.
Back to Torvals original point, he wasn't sure many players would really enjoy too much realism. He might be right, I'm not a great fan of such which is one reason why I don't do survival games.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Let's say for instance a game marked off all those criteria except it didn't have voice overs. Or it had all the features except while all the zones are large and open world, there is a loading time between them.
Your list seems to describe a living breathing world, but it doesn't seem to be the only valid description to me.
EDIT: I would also argue Wurm Online is both a true sandbox and a living breathing world. Other games may or may not be but any definition which would deny an MMO with full terraforming the title of sandbox, and a game where trees grow on their own according to the trees currently in the area and NPC predators hunt NPC prey the title of living breathing world seems to be ridiculously strict to the point of uselessness.
Unless you think "massively multiplayer" only needs to be "reasonably" big .. like 15, i can't see how you can advocate the use of accurate language in one case, and not in the other.
As for a living breathing world? they can be single player or multiplayer. A living world for me is one that simulates an ecosystem. I'd love a pve experience where I'm the hunted as well as the hunter. A good balance is always key, I never want too much micro management.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
It was always meant to be a clan-group oriented game, but there were lots of lone wolves and we knew each other. You could make it that way and have fun. Sometimes we grouped up to help each other out with a project. But we liked the freedom to play how we wanted to.