Bioware Austin.. damm more Dragons.. or Lightsabers?

[Malathor]

Rant.

Bravo. Let me throw in a few points about the "old guard" myself.

1. Believing your own Bull

Remember that these are Virtual Worlds not some game, not some MUD with graphics. That's why 90% of dev resources get put into crafting, fluff, and the economy while core game mechanics are pure shit. That's why shipping with broken combat systems and non-existant class balance are acceptable while shipping without a wedding dress is not.

2. Blaming the players for systems that don't work

"Oh those maladjusted Griefers! The fact that people refuse to play the way we envisioned they would is a product of them being Bad People, not the way we designed the game. Let's consign the lot of them to a Virtual ghetto where we won't have to think of them anymore or design a system that can make everyone reasonably happy. Let's face it, PvP in Virtual World is a niche. People will never be happy with PvP unless they win most of the time, and staticsics show that only 10% of players do win most of the time. What's that about all the millions of people playing and losing at BF1942, CS, Starcraft ect? Why those are games, not the Virtual Worlds we're making.

I cannot speak as to Vanguard, but I can tell you that this was not the attitude of testers in SWG until the moment that the release date announcement hit.

For the most part the early SWG testers were handpicked board warrior fanbois. What did you expect? Your "This is not a Galatic War Simulator" statement made it pretty damn clear the game was being fashioned to fit in with your vision, not the vision of most the people wanting to play the game. I daresay that not too many were envisioning SimBeru outside of you.

[Margalis]

One would think that a company could take their time and do prototyping and such with minimal staff. However the way most publisher agreements work doesn't really allow that. You get X money and have to hit Y milestone.

If the publisher gave the developer all the money up front taking a lot of time before content-creation gets underway might be viable. But no publisher is going to let you sit around for a year doing early testing and such, even if it is relatively cheap.

[Threash]

I think one reason why you hear the old guard with sour grapes about WoW is because it's not something that any of them could have done -- and I don't mean just creatively, I mean practically.

From the creative point of view, quite a lot of the old guard doesn't want to make the same game over and over again, any more than the jaded f13 folks want to play it over and over.

From the practical point of view, it takes an entire company culture to hew closely to a model like Blizzard's. The number of studios with that model in the entire industry is tiny.
And none of them were in MMOs.

Now that Blizzard has proven that taking your time and doing it right no matter the cost does in fact pay off in the end do you see the attitude changing to allow you and other developers the time and resources you need to make games of the caliber of wow?  I have no idea how much less time/money was pumped in EQ2 compared to WOW but i very seriously doubt it was in the same ratio as their sub numbers turned out.  I would imagine when the suits see that the difference between 40 million and 3 years vs 80 million and 6 years is 200k subs vs 7.5 million subs they might start to rethink their priorities.  At least thats my hope, i guess i should know better than that right?

[Venkman]

You can prototype game play experiences for small groups. But how do you prototype thousands of players testing the game-wide equipment and stat balance along with the economy without, well, building the entire MMO infrastructure you need host those players concurrently?

This is why middleware can be useful. Trouble is, middleware comes with many constraints of their own. If you're looking to knock off diku, great, tools exist. If you want to try something completely need (as a few upcoming games are), you gotta build so much more. And what and how you build is a complexity and uniqueness unto themselves as well. We're a long way from dedicated salaried teams banging out and hosting MMOs by the truckload in NWN2.

Basically, there's no shortage of innovative thinking in this industry. The devs get a bad rap for iterative execution, but it's not because they set out to copy something exactly. And besides, "devs" is just way way too singular. People blame the public faces while it's the thousand papercuts of middle management decisions that make a game what it is.

Now that Blizzard has proven that taking your time and doing it right no matter the cost does in fact pay off in the end do you see the attitude changing to allow you and other developers the time and resources you need to make games of the caliber of wow?

I don't think it'll be that direct (though you asked Raph ;) ). As discussed, who else has that much money and a publisher willing to give them that much time to test and test and test? Not to mention the decade-old game-based IP that comes with its own pre-built community?

It's not that nobody else wants the same quality. It's that by the measure of WoW, almost nobody else can.

[Threash]

I don't think it'll be that direct (though you asked Raph ;) ). As discussed, who else has that much money and a publisher willing to give them that much time to test and test and test?

Well that was sort of my point, i know nobody else was willing other than Blizzard, i was simply wondering if now after Blizzards success other publishers wouldn't be open to the idea that time+money=bigger money hats.  I have a hard time believing that nobody else has as much money, i just think its a matter of being willing to spend it and a proven success that was magnitudes more profitable than anything before it might encourage other companies to go the Blizzard route.

[Trippy]

I don't think it'll be that direct (though you asked Raph ;) ). As discussed, who else has that much money and a publisher willing to give them that much time to test and test and test?

Well that was sort of my point, i know nobody else was willing other than Blizzard, i was simply wondering if now after Blizzards success other publishers wouldn't be open to the idea that time+money=bigger money hats.  I have a hard time believing that nobody else has as much money, i just think its a matter of being willing to spend it and a proven success that was magnitudes more profitable than anything before it might encourage other companies to go the Blizzard route.

There are companies that have that sort of money like EA, and EA, and well EA and there are companies that have the same "when it's done" philosophy of Blizzard and in fact the first game company I know of that had the financial freedom to apply that philosophy was id but there are others as well like Valve, Epic, and 3D Realms (*cough*), all of which are, oddly enough, shooter companies. Blizzard was basically the first to apply that philosophy to an MMORPG (even though it was somewhat rushed out for Christmas 2004) and they are reaping the same type of success that those other companies have had and they themselves have enjoyed with their RTSes and Diablo except magnified because of the economics of a subscription-based game.

Unfortunately for EA, they don't believe in the "when it's done" philosophy even though they are one of the few that have money to put it into practice and being a public company isn't an excuse since Vivendi was willing to do it with Blizzard for many years when VUG was struggling though of course they had Blizzard's history prior to Vivendi's acquisition of Sierra as evidence that the "when it's done" philosophy does work when practiced by a talented group of developers.

Edit: added Diablo

[Raph]

The rush to quick money actually costs a lot of companies money.

I completely agree. In terms of overall revenue, it's almost always better to keep working on the title. The issue is running out of money before you finish. :)

Of course the way publishers pay out money based on milestones and such most dev houses have no choice or say in the matter.

Internal studios are subject to much the same thing, btw.

Although I understand what you are saying here, how come the presentation and content of many games are pretty poor?

Presentation and content are still hard. And they also now consume a huge amount of money as well, easily the lion's share of the budget. Figure at least 50% of the total spend is art, at least.

I really do believe you could take a game like EQ2 or FFXI, make a huge list of customer gripes, fix them one by one and end up something pretty close to WOW. One by one just eliminate all the annoying headaches and things that rub people the wrong way - without changing the core gameplay at all. Travel times too long? Make people run faster. Have to wait forever for a group? Rebalance monsters for solo play. Takes too long to find quests? Add handy icons. It is more tweaking than reprogramming.

I completely agree. But it takes a long time to iterate in that fashion too. :) And time costs... money.

Raph said above that starting small was one of the things that's only possible with a lot of money. I see more examples to the contrary though.

Not quite what I said. :) I said following the entire Blizzard recipe... Starting small is perfectly viable. But doing the whole "make one feature, then polish it to a fare-thee-well" gives publishers fits. They want to know that all the items on the bullet list are going to show up, and this doesn't tell them that. That's why the "Vertical slice" is preferred by publishers. "Make one of everything, THEN polish."

If Blizzard has resevoirs of cash and patience that no old guard company can match, then that's all she wrote.  Those companies are all doomed to being second-rate bitches for all time

Only if they let Blizzard write the rules. If they find new market segments, new gameplay styles, and so on, they can compete on freshness, new audiences, blue oacen, all that jazz.

If it only takes cash and patience why doesn't Microsoft own the market?

Microsoft DOES own every market they decide to. They go slow, do tons of iterations, and burn cash like nobody's business. Heard what the XBox unit's losses are to date? :)

To me it'll be the whoever can do the polished combat and questing acquisition engine with an equally compelling virtual lifestyle. Like, SWG executed as well as WoW. I've argued that SWG itself was a niche concept, but that has been mostly because the only parts that worked really well until JTL launched were crafting and commerce. The rest we accepted.

I think that if every element in SWG had been executed and polished, it would have owned and done extremely well. Even without any design changes at its core, even with "broken" design choices (of which there were plenty). Just based on the demographics of who we attracted, the growth rates, etc. What hampered SWG above all was lack of content and unbalanced combat. Have more challenge and fun to the combat, and tons of adventures and monsters, and the core MMORPG players would have stuck even more.

If you do it right the first time, ensuring that system A works, doesn't that save you money in the end?

There are virtually no creative fields in which you "do it right the first time." Instead, you don't SHOW it until you have done it enough times to be presentable. cf my post on that here: http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/01/17/iteration-in-games-a-mini-rant/

That's why 90% of dev resources get put into crafting, fluff, and the economy while core game mechanics are pure shit.

I gotta tell you, everyone always says this, especially about SWG, and as a percentage, it's just so loopy-wrong-crazy that I can't let it pass again. Even on SWG, with all those other systems, combat and combat-related content was easily 2/3 of the overall design time.

For the most part the early SWG testers were handpicked board warrior fanbois.

Only the first 150 were. By the time period I was referencing, there were thousands of testers, let in by lottery. The tone of the SWG beta was very positive right up until the day we announced a release date. Then it turned ugly.

One would think that a company could take their time and do prototyping and such with minimal staff. However the way most publisher agreements work doesn't really allow that. You get X money and have to hit Y milestone.

Yeah, "stage gate" development is very uncommon in games. Popcap uses it, so does Blizzard. Not too many others do. That's because it's all dirven by SKU planning and franchise needs.

Now that Blizzard has proven that taking your time and doing it right no matter the cost does in fact pay off in the end do you see the attitude changing to allow you and other developers the time and resources you need to make games of the caliber of wow?  I have no idea how much less time/money was pumped in EQ2 compared to WOW but i very seriously doubt it was in the same ratio as their sub numbers turned out.  I would imagine when the suits see that the difference between 40 million and 3 years vs 80 million and 6 years is 200k subs vs 7.5 million subs they might start to rethink their priorities.  At least thats my hope, i guess i should know better than that right?

I cannot tell you what the EQ2 development budget was. Your ratios are off, though. WoW really did outspend everyone (except for TSO) by 4x or so, I would guess. And yes, they reap more than 4x the rewards -- that's the nature of a commodified market where the products are substantially similar.

The attitude, I think, is changing somewhat as a result. But remember that almost nobody can play on the $80m playing field. Everyone else isn't going to stop trying.

i was simply wondering if now after Blizzards success other publishers wouldn't be open to the idea that time+money=bigger money hats.  I have a hard time believing that nobody else has as much money, i just think its a matter of being willing to spend it and a proven success that was magnitudes more profitable than anything before it might encourage other companies to go the Blizzard route.

You have to factor in opportunity cost. Any given title has a 10% chance of earning out, whether you spend lots or not. Spend lots and your eventual magnitude of hit may be much bigger. But it's still just as likely to fail. Given that, do you make 1 $80m game, or 4 $20m games?

[schild]

Good god Raph.

Anyway.

QuoteIf Blizzard has resevoirs of cash and patience that no old guard company can match, then that's all she wrote.  Those companies are all doomed to being second-rate bitches for all time

Only if they let Blizzard write the rules. If they find new market segments, new gameplay styles, and so on, they can compete on freshness, new audiences, blue oacen, all that jazz.

That's what people were saying 2 years ago. All signs point to bullshit. Yes, I know you want to make something like Kaneva with swords or MyHovel with a trading/economy/crafting metagame. But comeon.

[WindupAtheist]

What'll be funny is when Blizzard (or someone) comes along a couple years later and releases World of Shantycraft, which is exactly like MyHovel except with quality production values.

[schild]

Blizzard won't release World of HovelCraft. MySpace will. And MySpace will automatically convert your account over, add a friends bulletin board with all your friends autoadded and all the blog shit playing on a TV in your MyApartment while your MySelf MySturbates.

[WindupAtheist]

Blizzard won't release World of HovelCraft. MySpace will. And MySpace will automatically convert your account over, add a friends bulletin board with all your friends autoadded and all the blog shit playing on a TV in your MyApartment while your MySelf MySturbates.

"But that's completely unfair!  MySpace has, like, money and resources and stuff!  Oh well, time to find new markets and a new audience!  MySpace will only rule over us other hovelgame developers like a wicked god if we play by their rules!"

[schild]

Ya know, I'd like to see the result of MySpace and Second Life getting together.

[WindupAtheist]

It sounds like an idea, but I betcha the end result would be ten million teenagers going "tehse graphics sux lol!" and a front page USA Today article about Junior being cyber-molested by a gang of furries.

[schild]

If ten million teenages aren't complaining about [graphics on] the Wii, they sure as shit won't complain about a place where they can let every deviant fantasy they've ever had run wild.

[WindupAtheist]

If ten million teenages aren't complaining about [graphics on] the Wii, they sure as shit won't complain about a place where they can let every deviant fantasy they've ever had run wild.

Random Wii-hate aside, have you tried playing Second Life?  I know it gets lots of media love and is on a huge growth spurt lately, but let's have a little perspective.  According to the Bruce chart (yeah, yeah) it still has a few thousand users to gain before it tops fucking Tibia.  Second Life is ass.

And even if someone spends the time and money required to craft a Not Shitty Second Life for just this purpose, I question how much of a difference it will make.  Millions of teenagers might want to gossip and bullshit and socialize online, but the subset of those who want to build a virtual house to have creepy cybersex in is undoubtedly a vanishingly small fraction.

Not that we're teenagers, but as an example, you and I are "socializing" in having this discussion.  That doesn't mean I want to build a virtual hovel in F13 Life Land, then teleport over to the Palace of Teh Hate and talk things over with your giant purple hippo avatar.

[stray]

Not that we're teenagers, but as an example, you and I are "socializing" in having this discussion. That doesn't mean I want to build a virtual hovel in F13 Life Land, then teleport over to the Palace of Teh Hate and talk things over with your giant purple hippo avatar.

Not everyone uses it for that...But why should it matter to you anyways? There's nothing wrong with the idea of extending the ways people use the net. Not everyone has to socialize like you and I. If we really carried that prejudice to it's fullest degree, we'd still be using BBS's and Gopher. Second Life (or things like it) should be seen as no different than other protocols, such HTTP, Email, or *gasp*, online gaming.

[schild]

In a year or two, some marketing/MBA type will come up with a new virtual buzzword. People will be able to trade homemade music and video with eachother within the confines of a virtual world. You'll have blogs, integrated youtube style video and all this other shit. Me? I'd call it a clusterfuck. Someone else? Money printing machine. And it would be. If you don't think guys and girls would like to flirt NORMALLY online using a service like that, you're insane. INSANE.

And furry sex aside, it would be popular. Sure, news reports and magazines would focus on the more risque side of the business, but their bread and butter would be high school and college guys and gals flirting with eachother when they're not actually having sex. Yes, even teenage women have completely incorporated computers into their lives. The number of super hot chicks I knew in college who talked on AIM for 3-4 hours a day and played Snood is overwhelming. They're ripe for the picking for this type of virtual world. Something at the midway point between SW:G and Sociolotron. It would be easy to say that the midway point is a yoda shaped dildo. But you know exactly what I'm talking about. Game meets world. World meets game. Everyone who isn't a gamer subscribes. And if a company could attach RMT to that whether that be music for your ingame jukebox or a virtual movie theater, so be it. They win.

I *think* that's what Raph wants. If he doesn't, he should, because anything else would be half-assed. Yea, yea, I know, baby steps. Well, look what baby steps got you. While you tripped and had your pants down, WoW came out.

As to rerail - uhm - Dragon Age will not be that game. I suspect it will be more like the original design docs of Horizons, but with less angels and demons and shit (hey! that design doc was good shit!). Lookit what I dug up.

[Venkman]

As I've said, Second Life is the most talked about game nobody actually plays. Here's some numbers (my read on an Economist article). They have an awesome marketing department. The people they manage to attract though are either there to conduct business (and learn the interface because they're getting paid for it), or get immediately turned off by the interface. The rest are the diehards getting turned off by all the neophytes coming with dreams of a personalized CADD community, only to encounter Red Light districts in the newbie zone and pay-to-access private islands home to the people who know better.

It's high concept, and as a concept has potential. But the experience itself needs a few iterations and then a Blizzardization before it'll hit the main audience. The big thing is that UI.

That's what people were saying 2 years ago. All signs point to bullshit.

Every market Blizz has entered they've capped because they won based on the rules that existed. And what has happened as a result is either they've gotten bored or the rules were changed and Blizz decided to take a step back. There have been very successful RPGs after Diablo and RTSs after Warcraft. Maybe none that carry the longevity of the combined starpower that is "Blizzard" and "*craft" in the same sentence, but for how many years now have their eggs been either in one basket or continually pulled from ones even older than that?

Domination always requires the rules be changed if anyone else competes. The question now isn't whether the rules will change, it'll be how they change. Pure speculation of course, whether it's Metaverse done right or someone else out-diku'ing Blizzard with a broader experience and more cash. Or sports games. From the future. With guns!

[Slyfeind]

I *think* that's what Raph wants. If he doesn't, he should, because anything else would be half-assed. Yea, yea, I know, baby steps. Well, look what baby steps got you. While you tripped and had your pants down, WoW came out.

Actually -- and he can correct me if I'm wrong -- but I think he's mentioned that he's making another MMO. He's just predicting other people to come up with weird conglomerate MyHabbo SpaceLife things. And of course there's going to be tons of crappy versions of those things before someone gets it right. It seems to me that MySpace + SecondLife = VeryVeryNiche. You can't just throw two successful things together; otherwise we'd all be driving donut cars, living in blue jean houses, with calculator sharks as pets, and be playing Sims Online.

[stray]

OK, you got me there. SimsOnline is telling.

[SnakeCharmer]

Actually -- and he can correct me if I'm wrong -- but I think he's mentioned that he's making another MMO.

You don't think that SL qualifies as an MMO?

[Krakrok]

It seems to me that MySpace + SecondLife = VeryVeryNiche.

Really? IMVU is up to 6.8 million accounts.

[Venkman]

Actually -- and he can correct me if I'm wrong -- but I think he's mentioned that he's making another MMO.

You don't think that SL qualifies as an MMO?

SL is niche. 1.5 million "citizens", but less than 35k paying $10 a month or less for it, and less than 15k concurrency. That's well below even Eve, which is an awesome game but itself decidedly niche in appeal.

So SL is an MMO. It's just not that big of one :)

[Slyfeind]

IMVU is up to 6.8 million accounts.

Huh, I always thought IMVU was just a little 3D avatar that sat next to the user's IM client. Seems more like SL with less options...and thus more accessible, like WOW was to EQ! I'd be interested in knowing how much users communicate through their home pages versus the 3D space. (And also how many users came back after initially signing up.)

You don't think that SL qualifies as an MMO?

Sure. And he could be making something along the lines of SL. My point is I don't think he's going to make a competitor to MySpace, since he said "I'm not making the next ChatSpace 3D" or words to that effect.

[UnSub]

This thread is a bitch fight in the best sense: hair pulling, name-calling, accusations, clawing...hell I might even go so far as to say there is some mud westling going on. I was surprised at how quickly people of all stripes jumped on the thread and made a bunch of assumptions about the (unknown) game thereby giving us insight into their mindset.

The truely hilarious thing is that, regardless of what is said here or even once more information is released, there will be a sizeable proportion of f13 posters who will try to get into this MMOG's beta.

The h8 is for the day-to-day, but is easily shed once some new luv appears on the horizon.

[stray]

I have never once been in a beta that I particularly cared to be in. And I've been in many at this point. In fact, my hate seems to just grow stronger once I do get invites.

Eh, probably just screwed myself by posting this.

[Venkman]

MMOG developers should make it a point to only get testers from outside the current playerbase. Probably would be pretty hard, but I think they should at least try.

I know some would argue they wouldn't get good Testers. But really, how long has it been since Beta testing was really just about testing? And, how many of those they do get as testers are any good at testing anyway?

I say they should avoid the noise and get general gamers. Best to avoid the history veterans bring with them, particularly if you're making a derivative game. Vets will call you on that stuff, and then make sure it becomes public fact. At least newbies you can try and fool for awhile :)

[SnakeCharmer]

I know some would argue they wouldn't get good Testers. But really, how long has it been since Beta testing was really just about testing? And, how many of those they do get as testers are any good at testing anyway?

No doubt.  The last few betas I've participated in seem to revolve around (in no particular order):
1) E-peen waving  - Random game forum:  Yeah, that's right, I got into X beta.  It's so cool, but I can't tell you about it cuz I'm under an NDA
2) Finding exploits (xp/credit/gold/whatever) and NOT reporting them and hoping to hang onto them once the game goes "live".
3) Advertising through word or mouth via forums or between gaming friends on Instant Messengers, NDA be damned
4) In addition to number 3, I've not seen a marked improvement from beta to release

Betas I've participated in: CoH, SWG JTL, EQ2, DDO, RF Online

[stray]

I say they should avoid the noise and get general gamers. Best to avoid the history veterans bring with them, particularly if you're making a derivative game. Vets will call you on that stuff, and then make sure it becomes public fact. At least newbies you can try and fool for awhile :)

Funny, because I am a general gamer (I've only been playing mmo's since 2003...and there was only one game I found enjoyable for longer than 3 months. The rest were just short trials and torture experiments). I think that's precisely why I tend to hate this stuff. Because I expose myself enough to other games.

Look at the loudest haters at this site as well: They're in the same boat as me.
 
Don't let my ability to converse in "MMO lingo" or my mere presence here deceive you.  I might have lost my soul a bit, but I am still very much one of those "newbies". Or at least, that's the angle I'm trying to come from.

[Ironwood]

 But there were also a lot of good things being tried. (And I still need to make a HAM simulator so people can try what I was hoping it would play like).

You should not do this.

You will be totally disheartened if you ever do make it and we all turn round and say 'No, that also sucks ass.  And it's unworkable.'

Let it lie.

[Venkman]

Actually, I'd think it'd be more disappointing if the system worked and everyone was like "wow, yea, I'd have definitely played/stayed-with SWG" :)

Funny, because I am a general gamer (I've only been playing mmo's since 2003...and there was only one game I found enjoyable for longer than 3 months. The rest were just short trials and torture experiments). I think that's precisely why I tend to hate this stuff. Because I expose myself enough to other games.

I include Age in "newbie" as well. It's not an accident that Acclaim and MTV are bringing MMOs to America that not only don't target the WoW pyschographic (playstyle preference), they don't target the same demographic (included in that is Age). Younger kids, different references.

[Morat20]

 But there were also a lot of good things being tried. (And I still need to make a HAM simulator so people can try what I was hoping it would play like).

You should not do this.

You will be totally disheartened if you ever do make it and we all turn round and say 'No, that also sucks ass.  And it's unworkable.'

Let it lie.

No. He should do it. Look, there's two possible outcomes if he puts together what he had in mind:

1) People think it sucks, and he learns from the experience, drops it and works on something else.
2) People love it, and he might use it now that he has something besides the galaxy of suck SWG became to point to the "fun" factor.

Right now, he's got the "It was never tried the way I designed" thing going. Often that's just an excuse for suck ("This only sucks because I was forced to compromise my VISION. See: Vanguard), but given the way the game industry pushes shit -- every once in awhile it's true. Only way to find out is for him to throw up a demo and let people try it, and then be appropriately sarcastic.

It's certainly better to try it out on a jaded and generally hostile enviroment then a bunch of starry-eyed beta testers who don't want to piss off the Powers That Be. (Although SWG's beta wasn't that bad, the NGE "sneak peaks" were. Flying your ass down to Austin for a super-sneak-peak? Virtually anyone is going to find something positive to say at that point, no matter how much it sucks. You want honest opinions? Find a bunch of sarcastic assholes who have been playing games since fucking Pong. They might not have jack shit in common with your target audience, but they're not really going to hold back either).

[El Gallo]

Somehow, I feel too tired to have a real throwdown. :) SO mostly, I am going to ask more questions.

Dude, you can't invoke throwdown and then refuse to throw anything down.  It's just not done in polite society.

[Krakrok]

Huh, I always thought IMVU was just a little 3D avatar that sat next to the user's IM client. Seems more like SL with less options...and thus more accessible, like WOW was to EQ! I'd be interested in knowing how much users communicate through their home pages versus the 3D space. (And also how many users came back after initially signing up.)

I don't know those numbers. I do know they've added 6150000 accounts in the last 326 days. I'd rate it as sticky as MySpace. Probably more because the client gets installed and then it's in your face every time you reboot. You have to pay $8 to register your name (and become a developer to create content) and $20 to access the adult area. It has software rendering. It has built in RMT. The 'comment' functionality seems to mainly be used for 'answering machine' messages. There is no mail function beyond that which shunts all other communication to the IM client. 'Developers' can create animated actions & content but there is no scripting functionality ala SL beyond what 3DSMAX exports.

I'd describe it as an instanced version of SL (or a P2P version take your pick). WoW is to Guild Wars as SL is to IMVU functionality wise.

[Morfiend]

For the most part the early SWG testers were handpicked board warrior fanbois.

Only the first 150 were. By the time period I was referencing, there were thousands of testers, let in by lottery. The tone of the SWG beta was very positive right up until the day we announced a release date. Then it turned ugly.

I dont know about this. I mean you would know more that I about tester feedback. But I remember hordes of testers screaming "ITS NOT READY". As release date speculation got more and more, all the testers where saying, "This wont release for 6 months at least, there are still tons of bugs and issues", then the game released like 2 weeks later.