Take me to the Question of the Week Archive Online gaming has come into its own, and it seems to be growing in popularity, from the basic parlor games to the complex massively multiplayer games. Even console gamers can now get a slice of the action online. While it's true that online gaming isn't new, it definitely took off after the release of high-speed modems and the increased availability of residential broadband connections to the Internet. And it's not hard to understand the appeal of online gaming: The thrill of victory is ever so sweeter when you face off against human foes or work alongside teammates, who can be hundreds or thousands of miles away. And it all happens in real time. Even if you're playing a turn-based game, the immediacy of real-time play over the Internet can offer certain advantages over the computer opponent, since human players are more cunning and creative strategists.

　　As we look ahead at games of the year 2001, we ask our editors, "What online game are you most looking forward to?" To help us celebrate the year's new games, BioWare's joint CEOs Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk tell us about the games they're looking forward to playing. You can help, too, by voting for the online game you're most looking forward to in our Instant Poll. And if you'd like to tell us more about a game or two in particular, send us an e-mail. Your letter could appear in next week's feature. And if you've got a burning question about games or the games industry, or if you have ideas for upcoming questions, please let us know!

　　First: BioWare's CEOs talk about their favorite upcoming online games

　　Joint CEOs and Executive Producers, BioWare Corporation

　　Greg Zeschuk: There are a few online games I'm looking forward to. I played quite a lot of Ultima Online (and I'm a giant Ultima fan in general), thus I'm very interested in checking out Ultima Online 2. I'm most curious to see how Britannia changes and evolves in the next game. Another game I'm looking forward to is Star Wars Galaxies. Given that we're also working on a Star Wars RPG with LucasArts, I'm very curious to see how they implement the game. Also, I greatly respect the folks working on the game from my UO experiences. Of course, there's another online game I'm looking forward to... our own Neverwinter Nights ! More on that later.

　　Click for full size image Ray Muzyka: I'm interested in checking out the games that Greg mentions, plus most other MMORPGs, but actually I'm a little unsatisfied with some aspects of the conventional MMORPG paradigm and as a result, the game I want to try out most is our upcoming Neverwinter Nights, which we're developing for our publisher Black Isle/Interplay, which was also our publisher on Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II. The editor suite and dungeon master mode will provide something that is not present in any MMORPG that I've ever played. I really want to see what kinds of modules our fans make with the tools we provide, and I look forward to travelling between distributed, player-run servers via the NWN portal system. I like to play multiplayer games where there is an unified storyline, and where you can interact as part of that preplanned story (and roleplay, for RPGs) with a relatively small group of people (up to 64 in NWN) in a meaningful, focused way.

　　Both: Given that our topic is online games, we can't help but gush about Neverwinter Nights. As Ray notes above, in many ways Neverwinter Nights is our online dream game. Neverwinter represents a fusion of ideas directed into what we believe will be the ultimate online game experience. We thought we'd share the philosophy behind the game with you to allow for a better understanding of what Neverwinter Nights is.

　　Click for full size image First, we like the idea of a non-pay-for-play model; that is, players would pay the retail price for the game but not have to pay in an ongoing payment plan as occurs with most current MMORPGs (the possibility of extending the Neverwinter Nights model to an optional pay-for-play permanent world in the future also exists of course). Also, to extend the playability to a near-infinite level, we wanted to see a game put the "power to create" in the hands of the users, thus we wanted to include a robust set of tools and editors to create and manage content in Neverwinter.

　　Once you've created some content, what better way to control how it is used than to function as the master of your own dungeon - as the "Dungeon Master" client. The DM should be able to set the rules for his or her world - this is where the concept of setting "house rules" came from. The DM can set rules, such as whether player-killing is enabled, on his or her personal server in Neverwinter Nights.

　　Playing through a well-structured storyline, either in single-player or multiplayer mode, is something we prefer to do in our games. The module-based format will give our players a rich and immersive story to experience while playing Neverwinter Nights.

　　Also, if playing online, we'd rather play with a smaller group of people we know (similar to a pen-and-paper role-playing session) rather than thousands of people we don't know. In Neverwinter you can adventure with up to 64 people at a time per distributed server, but all servers can be linked together in a lattice work of portals - in effect creating a massively multiplayer, albeit distributed and player-editable, world. Of course, you can also play through modules by yourself if you so choose - the game can be played either in single-player or multiplayer mode and characters can move back and forth between sessions with varying numbers of players.

　　Click for full size image Given that we would never be able to limit the manipulation of character data by players, we think it's OK for players to be able to manipulate their characters if they so choose. Of course, we want to be allow people to choose if they play with others using manipulated characters or not, thus we have included two streams of characters - "legal" characters from Neverwinter's online character vault, and potentially hacked characters stored locally. When choosing where to play, you essentially choose who you play with - we're not trying to constrain players from editing their characters but rather allowing people the freedom of knowing who their characters are adventuring with.

　　Finally, at BioWare we've always trying to prove that CRPGs can have state of the art technology, thus we're really pushing it with Neverwinter Nights. The BioWare Aurora Engine has beautiful cutting edge 3D graphics and lots of sizzle in the spells and effects.

　　So those are the reasons we're making Neverwinter Nights. Neverwinter Nights is our absolute dream game, and the team working on it is pouring its heart and soul into making it great. We can honestly say we're looking forward to playing Neverwinter Nights more than any other multiplayer online game!

　　Next: Andrew has his eye on these games

　　Managing Editor

　　Click for full size image There are quite a few online-only PC games in the works, and there are a great many I'm interested in playing, but a lot of them won't be coming out this year and may not even be finished next year. However, I'm particularly interested in three online games that are scheduled for release in 2001, and it seems likely that each will actually make its release date.

　　I'm definitely looking forward to Neverwinter Nights. Neverwinter Nights will attempt to re-create the experience of a tabletop role-playing game session online, and it looks better each time I see new versions of it. I have played in and have run a number of tabletop campaigns myself, and though I've come to believe that there's nothing quite like hastily scribbling out dungeon maps and tossing fistfuls of dice, I'm intrigued by the prospect of an online computerized session. Running a campaign with a computer interface populated by fully 3D characters and monsters may leave less to the imagination, but it'll make keeping track of numbers and statistics much easier, and the game's 3D world will be the ultimate visual aid.

　　Click for full size image I'm also looking forward to Anarchy Online, Funcom's futuristic online role-playing game. I recently received notice that I'll be admitted into the next phase of beta testing, and I've taken to dutifully checking my mailbox each day for the CD. Anarchy Online will be a game that, like most games of the sort, lets you create your own computerized avatar in a persistent world, but your character won't just be limited to being some variant of a fighter, sorcerer, or thief. Anarchy Online will feature four different playable races and lots of different and unusual character classes, each of which can choose to be affiliated with the game's outlaw rebel faction or the oppressive corporate faction.

　　Click for full size image Finally, I'm very much looking forward to its experience with online multiplayer games, I don't doubt that Camelot will turn out to be a fantastic game.

　　Next: Trey thinks these games will be intriguing

　　News Editor

　　Click for full size image I'm looking forward to two upcoming online games, one because I'm very interested in playing the game itself and the other because I'm interested in seeing how it will change the gaming world, if at all. The online game I'm looking forward to playing is BioWare's Neverwinter Nights, an online fantasy role-playing game based on the 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons rules. I saw the game at E3 last year, and even back then, it looked great. I just hope the team can pull off its ambitious goals.

　　The part of Neverwinter Nights that most intrigues me is the editor that will let players build, populate, and manage their own custom worlds, as well as host up to 64 players per server. While 64 players doesn't qualify as massively multiplayer, it will definitely provide a more-than-adequate multiplayer experience. For those who need access to larger numbers of players, servers can be connected together to support almost limitless numbers of players. I'm hoping the easy-to-use editing and dungeon mastering tools will give rise to a community of player-run worlds that function much like modules in the tabletop version of Dungeons & Dragons. I think the smaller number of players per server will let the dungeon masters provide a more personal experience than one of randomness, which is found in huge games like EverQuest; it will also provide enough player-to-player interaction to avoid the static single-player storyline experiences found in games like Baldur's Gate. Of course, I enjoy playing both EverQuest and Baldur's Gate, but I don't get the same feeling I get while playing tabletop D&D. Neverwinter Nights looks as if it will have the potential to mimic personalized modules populated with player characters. We'll have to wait and see how the game turns out and if it can attract a large and devoted player community.

　　Click for full size image The other upcoming online game I'm looking forward to hasn't been officially announced, but there have been several hints that an online multiplayer version of The Sims is in the works at Maxis. It was only a matter of time before the Sims invaded cyberspace; it seems like the next logical extension of the hugely successful virtual life game. Not many details have been released, but even a basic online version of the original game would be fun. I'm hoping that Maxis will include a bunch of features that didn't appear in the original version, but at this point, it's anybody's guess. The game has already had an enormous impact on the gaming world. I'm interested in seeing if the online version of The Sims will prove to be as influential as the original game. I wrote about a massively multiplayer version of the game in a previous QOTW entry. Hopefully, we'll all learn more about the game later this year.

　　Next: Giancarlo gives his take on new online games

　　Click for full size image The second online game to look forward to is BioWare's Neverwinter Nights , which goes to great lengths to refine a feature originally attempted by Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption. Essentially, Neverwinter Nights features a detailed dungeon master mode in which you can create entire worlds for players to venture through and explore. There are 200 different types of buildings, 15 tile sets, and 60 3rd edition D&D monsters, so you should have plenty to work with while you're in the initial construction phases of your dungeon. Even if you don't feel like creating and managing your own world, there will more than likely be an enormous editing community waiting to supply players with new scenarios. For those who don't want to spend time constructing dungeons or towns, there is a preset world that you can play through cooperatively.

　　Next: Craig looks forward to Tribes 2

　　Click for full size image Another game that I may want to try is World War II Online. This will be another team-based game that requires people to work together to win. The battlefield is persistent throughout the year, so missions can take place at any hour. Players take sides and play in any of the military's branches. Mission success will depend on coordination between the branches, because a beach invasion will surely fail without naval and air support. Players gain rank after a successful mission and eventually will be able to create or lead the missions themselves.

　　I may be tempted to try out an online RPG in the future as well. Being an Ultima fan, even after the Ultima IX debacle, I want to see how Ultima Worlds Online: Origin turns out. Britannia in the industrial age will be a drastic change for this land, and I can't wait to see it. Another RPG that I have heard about is Dark Age of Camelot. Instead of a fantasy world, the game will take place in a semireal past. I say semireal because the races, lore, and land are based on real events in history. Of course, magic and some of the character classes aren't real, but what's an RPG without spellcasters and gods? In Dark Age of Camelot, King Arthur's land breaks up into three realms with three peoples - the Britons, the Celts, and the Norse - after he dies. Each has unique classes and abilities; for example, the Norse are better fighters, whereas the Britons excel at magic. Lower-level characters will be able to explore around their own realm, while the high-level ones will be better suited to frontiers, where there is a danger of invasions by opposing realms. The point of the game is to take magical artifacts out of enemy realms. The game seems to have elements similar to team-based first-person shooters like Team Fortress, where the different character classes need to back each other up in combat. There's also a "capture and hold" style, because characters can take over keeps in enemy realms and use them as a base of operations for further incursions. While I didn't sign up for the beta test, I think I will follow the game closely to see its development.

　　Next: Amer waxes poetic about Majestic

　　Click for full size image Majestic isn't the only game that'll wake you from your sleep when it requires your action. Verant is working on a persistent online strategy game (Verant making an online game? Who would have thought?!) called Sovereign . This game was announced a long time ago, but it has since received a complete facelift - the last time it was publicly shown was at the 2000 E3. The game puts you in command of a number of different modern-day units, such as tanks and aircraft carriers, which are tasked with protecting your main city. Matches, however, can last for days. To accommodate, Sovereign will use a number of paging technologies, including beepers, phones, e-mail, and even AOL Instant Messenger, to let you know when your forces are under attack. It's certainly an interesting premise, but can you imagine the frustration and helplessness you'd feel if you received a page from the game while you were stuck in a meeting or in class? The agony.

　　It'll be interesting to see if both Majestic and Sovereign will live up to gamers' expectations.

　　Next: Jennifer will stay up late for Anarchy Online

　　Features Editor

　　Click for full size image One of the most promising online games I'm looking forward to is Anarchy Online. I enjoy science fiction, but there are no current sci-fi online role-playing games, and certainly none that is massively multiplayer. Anarchy Online has a lot of appeal for me simply because I'm looking forward to a fictional sci-fi fantasy world and because I'd like to try something different for a change instead of pursuing the same old quests and monsters in fantasy worlds like EverQuest's Norrath. I enjoy fantasy gameworlds, but I feel that killing the same fantasy creatures donning different looks and textures has gotten a little stale. I'd like to go about adventuring in an unfamiliar land populated by bizarre creatures that I've never seen in my avatar's existence before. And Anarchy Online is the game that promises to deliver a story and plenty of adventure.

　　Click for full size image I'm also interested in Star Wars Galaxies. This game offers a universe that's quite familiar to me. But unlike passively watching a movie, I'll be able to enter the gameworld and interact with other players and nonplayer characters. You'll also be able to visit places like Tatooine, according to the official FAQ. One of the more interesting things about Star Wars Galaxies is that players will advance based on skills, the mastery of skill trees, and activities instead of levels, and the class system won't be important, either. In other words, how you play is more important than what you play. And one of the more interesting aspects of the game is that you can own and operate vehicles. This should make travel easy, and it's important when the gameworld spans planets and galaxies.

　　Click for full size image Verant Interactive is currently developing the Star Wars Galaxies game, and this has caused some controversy on gamers' message boards. Some players are of the opinion that the game will be Star Wars transposed on EverQuest-type gameplay mechanics and that the game will suffer from things that have made EverQuest a time sink for everyone but the most dedicated core player, one who is willing to invest lots of time into character advancement. From what I can tell from the official FAQ, the game design is different, and the common denominator of both games just seems to be political factions. I'm still sort of skeptical about Star Wars Galaxies, but I'm hopeful.

　　Next: Greg is looking forward to nights with Neverwinter Nights

　　Executive Editor

　　Almost one year ago, our editors wrote about which massively multiplayer role-playing games they were most looking forward to. Now, we're revisiting the topic, but the question is much more open ended; after all, in addition to role-playing games, lots of other types of online games are now in development - and this indicates that the market for online games has really expanded. Even so, massively multiplayer games are still particularly interesting to me. I never really got into MUDs, but I started following online RPGs closely during the humble beginnings of 3DO's now-obsolete Meridian 59, as well as Origin's well-known Ultima Online. These games were totally fascinating to me - they seemed so remarkably ambitious. Ultima Online in particular purported to have an actual working economy, for example. Of course, neither of these games was completely successful in its intentions.

　　When EverQuest came around, I didn't think that it was entirely successful, either. It had incredible graphics, but it also seemed to have a lot of problems with its gameplay. But I think it has really grown a lot over time and has definitely become the ultimate game in its class. Now, more than two years after I was first introduced to it, I still play EverQuest - quite a bit, even. Honestly, I can't easily imagine that another online game could replace it for me. EverQuest still has its problems, but the setting of the game is so fully realized that these problems seem as contextual and natural as most day-to-day real-world problems.

　　Click for full size image Of course, I always keep an open mind about games, and I am certainly willing to put aside EverQuest once something better rolls around. I think its two big contenders this year are the forthcoming massively multiplayer RPG, Anarchy Online, and also BioWare's online D&D game, Neverwinter Nights. Both these games look as if they'll be very impressive once they're complete.

　　Anarchy Online is looking more and more like a rethinking of EverQuest. The EverQuest influence is apparent, and yet the game itself is very different. For one thing, it has a science-fiction theme, rather than a high-fantasy theme. And this difference is fundamental, rather than skin deep. Anarchy Online has a lot of very interesting ideas, like a very flexible quest system that caters to both casual and hard-core players. It also has a lot of great character classes and story elements. The game is almost finished, and the open beta period is coming up, at which point I'll finally get to try the game firsthand. I can't wait.

　　Click for full size image Neverwinter Nights seems to be the game that Dungeons & Dragons fans have been waiting for all their lives. Dungeons & Dragons has such a rich history and so many great play elements - the new 3rd Edition rules are so much more suited for use with computer games - that in a lot of ways, a game like Neverwinter Nights really has its work cut out for it. Then again, because of Baldur's Gate II, BioWare has some pretty high expectations to meet - especially since it's developing an all-new engine for the game.

　　Even so, games such as EverQuest and Half-Life: Counter-Strike seem so deeply entrenched by now that even really impressive-looking games such as Anarchy Online and Neverwinter Nights will still undoubtedly have a tough time vying for players' time and attention. So many online games are now in development, and most every one of them seems as if it's designed to be the one and only game that you have time to play - and so it's interesting to think about what'll happen to the industry a year from now. It's apparent that most of these games simply won't survive, and it seems more than likely that some of the older ones - such as Ultima Online and EverQuest - will continue to be much more successful than most of the newer ones. If only there were some way to transfer our characters between all these games.

　　Next: Readers take a critical look at conventions

　　Reader Letters

　　What game convention should be changed in 2001?

　　Click for full size image The worst convention in PC gaming is shipping a game that is incomplete or buggy and then relying on patches to correct the problem. Although a few publishers (notably Blizzard) perform thorough beta testing, most perform inadequate or downright shoddy testing. We have all been conditioned to accept certain stability or gameplay problems, but the industry should show more responsibility. And the trend is only worsening with the growth of online gaming. Can we agree that a ready-to-play game will always sell better than an incomplete game? The other unwanted convention for PC gaming is an unfriendly and archaic save-game feature. It is a crime for publishers to punish PC gamers with save features that belong on a console. Tension should come from gameplay, not the save- game scheme. Look at System Shock 2. I was able to save that game anywhere, anytime, and it provided more tension than any other game I have ever played! Publishers should free PC gamers from the shackles of a console and give them freedom over games!

　　-Joseph Carter

　　Click for full size image These are conventions that need to change. They are not limited by technical considerations or market factors; they are decisions that game designers make solely because their predecessors made the same one: Having to reach a save point to save your game. Second, a static technology tree in an RTS game. Why not use a more fluid system to model invention? Why do I have to research a barracks before I can create an archery school or some other unit? Just because our society progressed in one path doesn't mean my computer world has to. Third, "everything on the screen is your enemy." First-person shooters that stray from this convention (like Half-Life) create a much more immersive world, but still we find the "kill it or die" model appearing again and again. And lastly, "Win the race to unlock the car." Sometimes I buy a racing game to race the best cars, and I don't want to have to earn them. Why not allow me to start in Formula 1 if I want? Or earn my way from midget sprint cars all the way up?

　　-Brian Marshall

　　I am an avid video gamer and a computer programmer who is a proponent of technological advancement and of pushing the technological limits to new and unexplored heights. I have loved video gaming all my life not just for the entertainment value, but also because it really goes much further than other types of computer applications in discovering new abilities with our technology.

　　By far, what I would most like to see change is using sex to sell games, and, more broadly, using explicit adult themes in games should be removed from the mainstream games. I wish everyone would be honest and state the truth, which is that resorting to sex to sell games is uninventive, uncreative, and immature. It is nothing more than what the tools company Snap-on does to sell tools and calendars. This same sellout attitude has caused the quality of other forms of entertainment to fall woefully low, while our technology and tools for creating higher quality content have advanced.

　　-Brad O'Hearne

　　Next: A long letter from a game designer

　　Reader Letters

　　What game convention should be changed in 2001?

　　No more jumping. Jumping as a vital gameplay element is a few notches beyond tired. Jumping has been with us since Donkey Kong, where it was used well. It stayed with us and experienced a revitalization when Sonic the Hedgehog first used it as a nonviolent means of defeating enemies. But with the advent of 3D and more-involved physics, jumping has clung to the action genre with ferocious tenacity. When I first played Tomb Raider, I started to get a feeling that the jumping puzzle had finally overstayed its welcome.

　　Click for full size image And it's really not an appropriate gameplay element anymore. Puzzles or challenges that involve gauging the distance or the height of a jump are annoying. A gameplay element that takes something relatively intuitive or simple in the real world and makes it challenging is a nuisance. It's like playing the notorious first-person fumbler Trespasser, in which you play a quadriplegic adventurer who has great difficulty using her one arm to pick things up. Have you ever been irritated when you misjudged the angle or distance of a jump that you know you could do perfectly in real life, only to see your character onscreen stoically execute a plummet to its death? And it seems that one of the few constants in games with a "jump" feature is that characters are able to jump their own height. How moronic is it to be confronted with a low wall that you can't climb over but can jump on? And have you ever watched or played a deathmatch game and realized how stupid it looks when everyone hops around like Mexican jumping beans in order to minimize their chances of being hit?

　　I have to concede that there have been some noble attempts at making jumping interesting again. Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver injects tension back into the jump by attaching a glide feature. I say that this is fair because the game is not jump happy, and the gameplay element suddenly becomes your ability to judge distances and determine if you can get there with a glide. And the recent game American McGee's Alice adds a feature that allows the gamer to place crosshairs where they want Alice to jump. It brings a certain degree of intuitiveness back to the jump at the same time that it drives home the point that jumping is going to be a critical gameplay feature.

　　Click for full size image There have been some steps backward as well. Witness console RPGs such as the Final Fantasy and Grandia franchises, in which your character comes up to some gap in the road or a bridge with a missing plank--you have to maneuver your character around in a tiny area until you find the spot that the game designers decided would trigger the "action" button, and then you can jump over. What a useless attempt at gameplay. Why would anyone not jump over a trivial obstacle?

　　So what needs to happen? Getting rid of jumping altogether isn't the answer. Go play a jumpless game like Perfect Dark or Gauntlet Legends and see how it feels to be 2 feet away from your goal but not be able to reach it because your character can't jump some trivial distance. It feels like an utterly arbitrary obstacle, with the level designer giving you the finger. Instead, I think the answer will lie in keeping the intuitive part of a jump intuitive, and otherwise eliminating it as a means of getting around trivial obstacles. Gliding is good, and timing is good. Aiming is good when there's more than one potential jumping destination. Perhaps game designers can take a look at their kindred souls in the film industry and see when action heroes jump--and when they don't jump--in the movies.

　　-Andy Megowan

　　Lead Engineer, Monolith Productions

　　Next: Even more reader letters

　　Reader Letters

　　What game convention should be changed in 2001?

　　Click for full size image I would like to see games, particularly RTS games and RPGs, where you don't necessarily choose your civilization or character class before the action begins; rather, these games would eventually assign you one (with resultant tech trees or subclasses) based on your actions. While this has been done in certain games (Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Ultima IV, Warlords Battlecry), the method is usually to allow for personalization of the character (or in the case of Ultima IV, a series of questions that was easy enough to be what you wanted, but entertaining nonetheless). While these can often make for quality games, I think it would be interesting to see games where everybody started out as rudimentary equals whose abilities and advantages were determined by their own style of play. I feel this would force players to experiment with different styles, add to replayability, and allow characters to better represent the players themselves.

　　Games, particularly RTS games, often reward fast reflexes and cheap strategies. Recently, we have seen the development of games, like Majesty's, where actual unit movement is handled by the AI, and only broad orders are given.

　　Another similar game that showed great potential despite its awful interface was Gangsters. I would like to see more games use the Diplomacy style of action, where orders are given and then all action happens simultaneously. This would make for some hilarious scheming in multiplayer games.

　　-Jeff Kean

　　I'd like to see a change in the convention of using violence to market games. It's a crutch that is too easily used to prop up unremarkable gameplay, graphics, and stories. I'm not making an argument for a frag-free gaming experience, but I do insist that violence is a thematic convention that should be questioned.

　　I was surprised not to see this in your poll choices, particularly following the "using sex to market games" option. Perhaps I should not have been so startled--our country's preference for exposing children to violence rather than sex is quite well known. Odd, though.

　　-Elijah Newton

　　Please, no more RPG characters with the following traits: the anime "look," the "attitude" (snotty rejoinders, crassness, rudeness, pointless rebellion, smug ignorance, and brashness as a substitute for confidence), and the personality of a stereotypical teenager (or is that the same as attitude?).

　　-Michelle Elliott

　　Director of Game Development, WickedWare, LLC.

　　Click for full size image Not going out on a limb really needs to be changed. Too often in this industry we have developers going to the "tried and true" ways of doing things. Oni has colored keys with colored doors and, heaven help us, rooms with crates! The main character in Oni is supposed to be a type of secret agent? She cannot bypass locked doors?

　　What we need are games that allow players to use their creativity, to try new and different ways, to get past an obstacle. For example, games should have a locked door that a player must breach to enter a research building. One player may just decide to blast the door down and decide to fight it out with whomever may hear the noise of the door being blasted, along with any alarms that may go off. Another player may just decide to remove the doorknob and move the latch with a knife (this being really easy to do on most doors). While still another player may decide to use a grappling hook and climb up to a second floor window, and, using a window cutter and a portable EMP device, cut the glass and render any alarm system inoperative.

　　In this day and age of advanced computers and advanced consoles, a convention of deformable environments--which would allow for the ideas above to happen--needs to be put into play. Games that have only one way to complete an objective are very restrictive to the creative, imaginative gamers.

　　-Tom Jenkins Take me to the Question of the Week Archive