Curse

Billiard · Jul 16, 2007, 01:32 PM // 13:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tijger

The question could be, why should they care about a minority of self proclaimed 'hardcore' players (whatever the hell that may be) when the much bigger majority who also gives them a lot less grief doesnt care one iota about their 'issues'?

I remember PvP as being fun and a challenge but it wasnt Anet who ruined PvP imho, it was the players, maybe all you 'hardcore' PvP'ers should take a good hard look at your own behavior (and yes, thats a generalization) in game and towards other, less experienced, players.
I dont go into PvP anymore because I dont appreciate the kind of abuse, raqequitting and general bad behavior you see from other players there, its that simple and it has nothing to do with builds, skills or aptitude.

I'm afraid such criticism will fall on deaf ears since we all know 'ANerf' is the root of all evil which is a real shame.

You know I think you might have a point here. ANet could be just culling out all the players that were socialized in the old system now in order to have a different playerbase in the future. Perhaps they dont' want hardcore PvP because they have already found that those players are not worth it money-wise. And perhaps they want to get out of the habit of responding to player complaints because history has shown that they cannot please everyone anyway. So in the future they'll just go about designing their game as they think it should be, and focus on the playstyle they want and develop the game as they think players should play it rather than the other way around.

This would be fairly consistent with how many companies go about developing new products. You start listening to customers and fitting your product to various niches. Once you get established you stop worrying about the niches and move onto the main market instead. In this case, hardcore PvP would be a niche.

Phades · Jul 16, 2007, 02:55 PM // 14:55

Still, amputating to fix a cold isn't a very good solution either. Despite how people enjoy the way pve functions within GW, arguably there are better options out there for the standard kill monsters till you reach the finish line setup that is the majority of what GW pve offers. What is interesting about the few GW pve complaints outside of how skill re-balancing affects them, you see suggestions or complaints requesting to make GW more like its pay to play cousins in different aspects such as higher level cap, auction house, and others.

Furthermore, GW2 is going to have to be something more than GW in order to convince the existing player base to transition over to it. Trimming away aspects of it and only serving what already exists is not going to cut it really and is more along the lines of an expansion to an old product rather than a new product entirely. Yes, i know that new graphics can attract players and the existing EA sports line of games shows that virtually no gameplay or content changes over time can still support interest, but GW is not simulating reality in any aspect or draws from any outside appeal the way EA products do.

Blame the Monks · Jul 16, 2007, 08:11 PM // 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiard

In this case, hardcore PvP would be a niche.

Yup, this is what I think is happening. GW was originally marketed as a competitive pvp MMO that was free to play. Time over skill, fast rolling pvp chars, big time tournaments, the works. Then they found out that the competitive aspect is a nightmare to balance unless they actually listen to the community and understand high end pvp. So they seem to be forfieting that turf to pay-to-play (warhammer, fury) and instead are making GW the MMO for people too cheap to play wow.

The PvP concept and ideas in GW:Proph was great, but anet has abandoned what was a great concept. You could see it in factions on -- they had to add content to sell chapters, even at the expense of quality play. You can see it in a failure to support pvp and instead focusing on adding low depth trinkets (minipets, holiday events, grind titles, etc). The PvP in GW2 will likely be highly superficial and casual, much like Factions on pvp has become buttonmashing at the expense of depth.

GW has failed as a high end competitive MMO at this point and won't likely try to retake that market. Paint it any way you want, the business is trying to survive by shedding what made the company attractive initially. Perhaps the lure of free play will be enough to survive. They do seem to have a lot of appeal to people under 15 and really cheap/casual gamers, so assuming you can run a viable business out of that demographic GW2 will be a "hit." It just won't be a hit as a pvp game, which is why I won't be back.

Ensign · Jul 16, 2007, 09:13 PM // 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiard

You know I think you might have a point here. ANet could be just culling out all the players that were socialized in the old system now in order to have a different playerbase in the future. Perhaps they dont' want hardcore PvP because they have already found that those players are not worth it money-wise.

I seriously doubt it's anything like that. Yes, the most serious players make the most noise and cause more headaches than a casual customer who just logs in to play every once in a while, but that cuts both ways. Sites like this one aren't built by your casual audience. The loud voices matter because they have audiences. If they're happy, a lot of other people are happy, and you benefit from revenue that comes from the increased publicity, positive feedback, and corresponding sales.

Honestly I don't think the neglect to PvP was intentional, but was more a problem with A.Net not understanding the real needs of a serious PvP game. The business model is a part of that as well. Their revenue was coming from selling a lot of content, worlds and missions with a ton of new items and skills and all that. That's exactly what you want for a PvE game, to give people a lot of content to play through so they can feel they got their money's worth of gameplay. But in a PvP game, the exact opposite is true - it isn't about how much you can add, but how much you can take away. Good PvP games are about easy to understand objectives and an clean interface, with tight, well developed abilities. The goal is to create the simplest mechanics possible for the game, while still preserving deep, complex, strategic gameplay.

That simply got left behind when it came time to sell new chapters. A six month timetable for Nightfall was insane, and they did really bloody well given how little time they had to get it out. But they didn't have the time to really refine the gameplay of that chapter, and it showed. Similarly, Guild Wars has never been terribly good at doing aftermarket support of its title. Frequent, even daily patching was one of their goals before release, and they never even came close to achieving it. All staff was needed to make the next chapter come out, and there weren't the people left over to clean up the problems with the previous one. Big problems were allowed to linger.

Overall I'd say that they set out to do a lot with Guild Wars, and several of the ideas they tried ended up being simply incompatible with each other. I'd have to think that's why they're moving to Guild Wars 2 instead of continuing to make more chapters - to start over with the design and fix those problems. We'll see how well they do.

lacasner · Jul 16, 2007, 10:45 PM // 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Guild Wars has never been terribly good at doing aftermarket support of its title. Frequent, even daily patching was one of their goals before release, and they never even came close to achieving it. All staff was needed to make the next chapter come out, and there weren't the people left over to clean up the problems with the previous one. Big problems were allowed to linger.

You are right, but I cannot even come close to using Nightfall and PvE events to justify not updating skill balances, which is the biggest problem in pvp imo.

DreamWind · Jul 17, 2007, 03:33 AM // 03:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiard

This would be fairly consistent with how many companies go about developing new products. You start listening to customers and fitting your product to various niches. Once you get established you stop worrying about the niches and move onto the main market instead. In this case, hardcore PvP would be a niche.

I just have to say, that is a excellent point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Overall I'd say that they set out to do a lot with Guild Wars, and several of the ideas they tried ended up being simply incompatible with each other. I'd have to think that's why they're moving to Guild Wars 2 instead of continuing to make more chapters - to start over with the design and fix those problems. We'll see how well they do.

Another fair point. I'd say as of now though I am not sold at all on GW2 because of those ways Anet dealt with GW1.

...Of course, we could look at it and say "they can't possibly repeat the same mistakes twice", but I have to see some real evidence of that before I ever go near GW2, as I see no indication of them changing their ways.

twicky_kid · Jul 17, 2007, 07:09 AM // 07:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Overall I'd say that they set out to do a lot with Guild Wars, and several of the ideas they tried ended up being simply incompatible with each other. I'd have to think that's why they're moving to Guild Wars 2 instead of continuing to make more chapters - to start over with the design and fix those problems. We'll see how well they do.

Starting over will be good but the same problems will simply repeat. Since the game doesn't have monthly fees they are going to repeat the same old thing. Not enough staff between clean up and making the new chapter.

Money is what really killed GW. GW2 is going to run into the same understaffing as GW1 did because they don't have a stead flow of cash coming in.

Tijger · Jul 17, 2007, 08:58 AM // 08:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I just have to say, that is a excellent point.

...Of course, we could look at it and say "they can't possibly repeat the same mistakes twice", but I have to see some real evidence of that before I ever go near GW2, as I see no indication of them changing their ways.

I'm sure that Anet's devs will regard some matters as mistakes with hindsight but I'm also sure that some of what you or others consider mistakes weren't in their view.

At the end of the day GW(2) isnt a wiki or some hive 'product', its a fairly finished product made by developers (with regards to the overall design of it) who make, and have to make, choices with regards to features and what is and what isnt possible/doable/financially desirable etc. Devs and designers make those choices, not your or me and some decisions will be made for financial and/or business reasons.

I dont know what GW2 will be yet but I am definitely looking forward to it, I do have faith in Anet mainly because I've been a pretty satisfied customer for the last 2 years now, GW has given me more playing hours then any other game I've bought and I'm still playing.

Billiard · Jul 17, 2007, 12:17 PM // 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Starting over will be good but the same problems will simply repeat. Since the game doesn't have monthly fees they are going to repeat the same old thing. Not enough staff between clean up and making the new chapter.

Money is what really killed GW. GW2 is going to run into the same understaffing as GW1 did because they don't have a stead flow of cash coming in.

Actually, as I wrote about earlier, I think GW was pretty much about proving that the business model would work before throwing more money into the franchise. I expect that there will be more dev and marketing support for GW2 than there was for GW (some evidence of this already with recent ANet hires and pretty constant recruiting they are doing on their site). In addition, they have already learned a lot, so the same people should actually be more efficient than before. They mentioned this at the Community Day I attended - there was a huge learning curve for Prophecies and Factions, but they were able learn a lot from that so Nightfall was a lot smoother for them. I would hope the same would apply to GW2.

Blame the Monks · Jul 17, 2007, 01:18 PM // 13:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiard

Actually, as I wrote about earlier, I think GW was pretty much about proving that the business model would work before throwing more money into the franchise.

Which business model are you referring to?

If GW was about proving what works before investing more money, I think we can expect GW2 to be squarely based in the the free pve grind model. The instancing and streaming downloads and the like are technically significant, I'm told, and free is always popular. On the other hand, as business model based on skill > time and competitive play, GW has clearly failed and I don't expect that to be a focus again.

As that was what attracted me, and many others, to GW, GW is effectively dead for me. I don't want free grind with lots of cutsey new content, I want a competitive pvp mmo with skill > time spent. Unfortunately, GW has been moving away from their beginning principles since release.

Yue · Jul 17, 2007, 01:21 PM // 13:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

Yup, this is what I think is happening. GW was originally marketed as a competitive pvp MMO that was free to play. Time over skill, fast rolling pvp chars, big time tournaments, the works. Then they found out that the competitive aspect is a nightmare to balance unless they actually listen to the community and understand high end pvp. So they seem to be forfieting that turf to pay-to-play (warhammer, fury) and instead are making GW the MMO for people too cheap to play wow.

The PvP concept and ideas in GW:Proph was great, but anet has abandoned what was a great concept. You could see it in factions on -- they had to add content to sell chapters, even at the expense of quality play. You can see it in a failure to support pvp and instead focusing on adding low depth trinkets (minipets, holiday events, grind titles, etc). The PvP in GW2 will likely be highly superficial and casual, much like Factions on pvp has become buttonmashing at the expense of depth.

GW has failed as a high end competitive MMO at this point and won't likely try to retake that market. Paint it any way you want, the business is trying to survive by shedding what made the company attractive initially. Perhaps the lure of free play will be enough to survive. They do seem to have a lot of appeal to people under 15 and really cheap/casual gamers, so assuming you can run a viable business out of that demographic GW2 will be a "hit." It just won't be a hit as a pvp game, which is why I won't be back.

I can't really agree with that. Anet hardly marketed Guild wars as a competitive MMO. Just look at the box. Prophecies box was pretty much hamstorm vs some dragon in pve. The only mention of any pvp at all on the thing was HA. I didn't really even get into gvg until observer mode came out, where I found out there was actually alot of guilds that played it. There was hardly any promotion of it, and I'm pretty sure Anet could have done alot better, beginning with the box. The potential of the game resided in third party support and heavy promotion of a competitive pvp community involving rewards and etc, which didn't happen at all. Even now most people don't even know you can get real life rewards out of pvp.

Riotgear · Jul 17, 2007, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

Which business model are you referring to?

If GW was about proving what works before investing more money, I think we can expect GW2 to be squarely based in the the free pve grind model. The instancing and streaming downloads and the like are technically significant, I'm told, and free is always popular. On the other hand, as business model based on skill > time and competitive play, GW has clearly failed and I don't expect that to be a focus again.

Instancing and streaming downloads are technical features that have nothing to do with the business model. Okay, instancing does as a side-effect, but they could be releasing patches in installer-based deployments like everyone else and it wouldn't really make a difference from a business perspective.

The business model in this case would be:
- Basing revenue entirely on unit sales and account upgrades rather than largely on subscriptions.
- Reducing support traffic by not adding obscure game mechanics or large amounts of NPC-only skills.
- Outsourcing data centers and reducing the footprint of any given part of the game to facilitate that: Rather than requiring huge amounts of hardware to process a full realm or continent like WoW, GW's instances and districts can be offloaded individually. Note, however, that this is a combination business and design decision.
- Releasing stand-alones instead of expansions.

Granted, the last one looks like it's starting to catch up to them, hence the upcoming true expansion. I think the problem is honestly that too many potential customers simply do not understand that Factions and Nightfall are stand-alones.

Quote:

I want a competitive pvp mmo with skill > time spent. Unfortunately, GW has been moving away from their beginning principles since release.

Skill still is > time spent. The question is more whether or not skill is still > button-mashing.

Tijger · Jul 17, 2007, 03:18 PM // 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

Which business model are you referring to?

If GW was about proving what works before investing more money, I think we can expect GW2 to be squarely based in the the free pve grind model. The instancing and streaming downloads and the like are technically significant, I'm told, and free is always popular. On the other hand, as business model based on skill > time and competitive play, GW has clearly failed and I don't expect that to be a focus again.

Eh, ANet has been very succesful financially with their model, the fact that Blizzard makes more money is irrelevant to the fact Anet has been very sucessful with their chosen business model which has been groundbreaking.

I dont know what business model you are talking about above but I think that exists only in your imagination. The GW business model is simple, free online play after purchase of the game without limitations. There was and is no business model based on the criteria you mention nor was the game specifically designed for either PvE or PvP.

Quote:

As that was what attracted me, and many others, to GW, GW is effectively dead for me. I don't want free grind with lots of cutsey new content, I want a competitive pvp mmo with skill > time spent. Unfortunately, GW has been moving away from their beginning principles since release.

You want Counterstrike

Despozblehero · Jul 17, 2007, 03:56 PM // 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tijger

The GW business model is simple, free online play after purchase of the game without limitations.

Diablo 2 which was and still is free online play came out LOOOOOOOOOONG before GW and is made by (the old team) at Blizzard. The numbers of people who still play D2 probably rival that of GW lol

twicky_kid · Jul 17, 2007, 06:55 PM // 18:55

Yes GW2 will probably start very strong because of the burst of money from the release. As more chapters are release less and less of them will be bought (same thing as GW1) and then you'll start to see support for the game begin to taper.

GW cannot take large risk because it only has so much cash to work with. Where as a monthly fees game has a steady cash flow allowing it to take more risk and experiment.

In the end GW did come out to being just as much as WoW for an entire year. With the character slots and chapters I've bought they came out equal. Over time GW will be a better bargian but only after a few years which by then something better will have arrived and players would have moved on.

I wish Anet would really drop the sales gimmick of no monthly fees. Charge a small fee like $5 a month and get some cash flow to make this a better game for the long haul.

Lodurr · Jul 17, 2007, 08:34 PM // 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tijger

You want Counterstrike

Skill isn't just twitch skill. Being a good whatever in GW is based on the quick decisions you make. There's a huge gap between a good player and a bad player using the same skillbar. You can't say it's simply twitch skill, like CS, or time invested, like WoW. It's just skill. I really liked in GW how bad players got better over time, or how bad players would do better in certain situations. That could never happen in FPSes where a bad player just stayed bad, and if he was a good guy, you had to choose between handicapping your team or booting a friend out of your clan. And it can't happen in games like WoW where a good player has to grind as much as the bad players or he won't be able to PvP.

There seems to be a consensus that Nightfall ruined PvP balance, and Izzy has constantly failed in bringing it back into balance. You don't need lots of $ to keep PvPers happy, it just takes an intelligent skill balancer. If there was a massive skill update that brought the Nightfall skills in line with all the other skills, and got rid of all the obvious gimmicks and passive play skills, I bet a lot of the GW exiles that lurk in the forums would come back and at least give it a shot.

twicky_kid · Jul 17, 2007, 09:02 PM // 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lodurr

There seems to be a consensus that Nightfall ruined PvP balance, and Izzy has constantly failed in bringing it back into balance. You don't need lots of $ to keep PvPers happy, it just takes an intelligent skill balancer. If there was a massive skill update that brought the Nightfall skills in line with all the other skills, and got rid of all the obvious gimmicks and passive play skills, I bet a lot of the GW exiles that lurk in the forums would come back and at least give it a shot.

You can't balance the game with new content being added all the time. Anet's idea of "balance" is to make changes to keep builds rotating in and out of the meta.

Any MTG player will tell you that players will always be smarter than the R&D team.

Riotgear · Jul 17, 2007, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

You can't balance the game with new content being added all the time. Anet's idea of "balance" is to make changes to keep builds rotating in and out of the meta.

Any MTG player will tell you that players will always be smarter than the R&D team.

New content has only been added 3 times, and is only going to be added 4 in total. Balance updates have been significantly more frequent than that, yet lingering problems have taken several updates to properly address, including some (i.e. Expose recharge increase, Reaper's Mark energy decrease, Form recharge time increases) that simply reek of incompetence, as if they know something is wrong with the skill but don't even know what.

If there is a problem with the balance updates, content coming out too fast is not one of them. That may be an issue until the first or second patches, but beyond that, changes should be getting progressively less severe as the heavier issues get resolved. Issues should not be surviving three major balance updates in a row.

sdliddo · Jul 17, 2007, 11:07 PM // 23:07

Honestly... game content wise i am happy with the stuff running around. It's fun and I can play all I want without the serious need to start thinking about costs after purchase.

I think what lured me more was not content nor PVP but simply because its free.

Yes. Free.

Heck I'd add in superior graphics and fun play and less grind for those who truly choose that route in the game. I didn't have to grind 24/7 to get LEET armor and uber LEET gear.

Look at WoW... they got leet gear and stuff but only IF you grind. You wanna beat someone up? Grab leet gear and watch the blood flow. GW never required LEET gear to kick the other guy's ass. You got a level playing field. HP/MP is pretty much the same. only thing that is different is how you build
up your SKILLS.

That's the essence of GW that I like so much. Limited skills slots but unlimited combinations which has created a number of really nutty builds that usually end up getting nerfed.

Yeah i hate the nerf but the PVP-peeps just needed them cuz too many keep crying about it. Heck. Understandable. MMs were the craze then. 55monks heck. whats the newest hippest builds right now?

Don't you guys see.. despite the stupid nerfs people are still finding tons of ways to create interesting build combinations. I dunno how they do it but they do.

In that GW succeeded a lot more than any game i played. It is fun. It's still fun for me. I play it when I want where i want without having to learn everyone else is up to LEVEL 70-80-200 whilst my poor chara is only level 20-30-50.

Look at it this way.. I've never played WoW but it suggests VERY much a fun grind game to which i gotta pay XX bucks to keep playing. Sure. I'd hitch in if it wasn't for the nigh awful graphics that even Diablo 2 has beat. Is it fun for me? No. It did not have the kind of appeal to me that GW have. I got money. I got plastic. But you don't see me playing it.

People have their own kinds of niche and obviously.. despite what many may feel... GW has answered that niche market very well and with great results. I ain't trading my GW for a WoW any time soon.

Sides.. if i were you guys.. I'd stroll in to Lineage 2 and play it instead. Gotta love staring at those lovely elven girls running like that. Those who know what i mean should understand. Gameplay is nice and i do pay for the game. But guess what.. I still like GW.

The only ones I normally see angry at it are likely those who don't like to loose cuz their comfy builds gets shot up to hell PVP or PVE.

Honestly.. never did play PVP simply cuz i got no time for it. But i've play guild VS guild and its fun. My guild don;t really care much about loosing and such but we're mostly casual players truth be told.

I'm still having fun with all my 8 charas. I'm saving up gold for 15k armors. I play all my charas as much as i can. I AB cuz its fun to play it with my sin.

Shrug. I like the simple stuff. I'm not pressured to level up to XXX levels. I don't need the leet gear to beat the shit out of someone in AB or PVP.

GW is a success in my book. I can't say the same for the XXXX millions playing WoW. Though honestly.. you'd think for something thats raking in millions a month they'd find some frigging way to improve the damn graphics. Seriously.. thats a real turn off especially after having played Lineage 2.

Ya want your elves and drows? Lineage 2 gives me more visual appeal than the crap they used on WoW. Still.. it isn't all in the graphics but i dunno.. but part of the fun is what we look at all the time.

Ugh. I'm wandering here... need sleep. Nite guys...

Just remember... you got a choice. GW aint the be all end all. Don't like it... i can't help you there.

DreamWind · Jul 18, 2007, 12:05 AM // 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiard

Actually, as I wrote about earlier, I think GW was pretty much about proving that the business model would work before throwing more money into the franchise. I expect that there will be more dev and marketing support for GW2 than there was for GW (some evidence of this already with recent ANet hires and pretty constant recruiting they are doing on their site). In addition, they have already learned a lot, so the same people should actually be more efficient than before. They mentioned this at the Community Day I attended - there was a huge learning curve for Prophecies and Factions, but they were able learn a lot from that so Nightfall was a lot smoother for them. I would hope the same would apply to GW2.

They may have learned a lot, but I honesly think they still don't understand how a competitive game works. I think most of what they learned is that the business model they have chosen rewards them for pumping out content to PvE grinders, which will severely impair their PvP game. Hell, thats how Blizzard does it with WoW. They pump out PvE grind content that people eat up (and even pay monthly for) while having a pathetic PvP game.

I have a very bad feeling that Anet is going to move in that direction. I'm not going to sit here and say I have hard evidence, but I just have a feeling given all the information I have right now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yue

I can't really agree with that. Anet hardly marketed Guild wars as a competitive MMO. Just look at the box.

You have somewhat of a point. The game technically wasn't marketed as a competitive no grind pvp game, which is one reason why nobody I know realized Guild Wars has PvP in it.

I think what pisses people off though is that there IS evidence of Anet devs saying that Guild Wars was built from the ground up to be a no grind competitive PvP game where skill was greater than time spent. Unfortunately, those statements were lies. Anet lied. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

Skill still is > time spent. The question is more whether or not skill is still > button-mashing.

Skill has never been greater than time spent in Guild Wars due to unlocks existing. Unlocks=Time. If you don't have unlocks, I don't care how skilled you are but you won't be able to compete with people of equal calibur. Not only that, but unlocks and additional content HIGHLY prevented newbs from entering PvP on any normal level. I have so many friends I wanted to get into this game so I could PvP with them, but I knew they would never buy 3 chapters and grind for skills in order to play.

--
I think Guild Wars attracted many types of people, but two in particular stand out in regards to this thread. The PvE players who desire new content and some desiring grind (among other things), and the PvP players who desired their already good game to simply be tuned and supported. The two simply can't mix. You can't give excess new content and grind to most PvP players, and you can't simply make minor changes to most PvE players. Both communities require their own special needs in order to function.

Anet tried to fulfill the needs of both, but failed and they know it. Hence Guild Wars 2. The problem is that all indications and evidence from GW1 support the idea that PvE is going to be massive in GW2, and PvP is going to placed on even more of a back seat than it already was. Anet can say whatever they want about PvP in GW2, but they still haven't acknowledged all the issues with PvP in GW1 yet. I still honestly do not think that Anet realizes the TRUE thing they did wrong. I think they are "fixing" something that PvP players didn't want fixed to begin with, and instead, have completely broken what could have been a legend without even realizing it.

And they don't realize it, because they will follow in the footsteps of WoW and get their money from the PvErs with the attraction of no monthly fee. All the magazines and articles will yell in joy that Guild Wars 2 is a massive success. All the while, none of them realizing that PvP in Guild Wars 1 could have been an incredible legend that lasted ages, that died because of a company that chased the cash and left the real dream in the dirt.

Sorry my post went on this long. I am really tired atm and it sounded epic at the time of the posting (though it may not be).