Will raiding in MMOs one day be a thing of the past?

[Kaisernick]

For a themepark game like TOR, wouldn't that require a phenomenal investment of money for new story content?

 

Many players that enjoy flashpoints, warzones and operations have shown that they're willing to continue to play the same content (within reason) if it gives incremental rewards.

 

Many players that don't, complain about "boring side quests" and are clamoring for the return of 12x xp boosts.

 

I, for one, would be thrilled if Bioware could supply enough single player content on a consistent basis to keep people happy. But that seems highly unlikely.

 

Money spent on group content isn't as wasted as it may seem -- based on the fact that players continue to see it again and again.

but the big problem especially with TOR is that some story is now locked behind raids.

Hell look at holy than thou WOW any real story and main bosses Kelthas Illidan the litch King are all hidden behind raids which a large portion of players will never see.

SOR however did it right the last fight can be done as a op or after doing a few quests done solo, if content like story is going to be put behind raiding then they need a solo for those not wanting to raid and for those that love it they have it.

[WSRB]

For a themepark game like TOR, wouldn't that require a phenomenal investment of money for new story content?

 

Many players that enjoy flashpoints, warzones and operations have shown that they're willing to continue to play the same content (within reason) if it gives incremental rewards.

 

Many players that don't, complain about "boring side quests" and are clamoring for the return of 12x xp boosts.

 

I, for one, would be thrilled if Bioware could supply enough single player content on a consistent basis to keep people happy. But that seems highly unlikely.

 

Money spent on group content isn't as wasted as it may seem -- based on the fact that players continue to see it again and again.

 

You are equating single player as only being story content, and that just ain't so. Just because content is single player oriented doesn't mean it needs to be continuously story based, per se; or at least not any moreso than current flashpoints and raids are. So there's no confusion here: single player content can be repeatable that gives incremental rewards, just like flashpoints, raids, and PVP do.

 

Furthermore, neither myself nor the article are saying that group content is wasted, we're saying that the current way of building it is flawed. 60 percent, or more, of MMO players do not group up at all. That means only 40 percent are grouping up ever. That doesn't mean that 40 percent raid, because these numbers don't yet take into account those who solely engage in PVP (which by it's nature is a group activity), and those who only group up for small group content (5 man or less). Once you start breaking it down, the number of players who are actually using raid content is probably 25 percent or less of the population of any given game. That is a waste of resources; and it's even worse when it means that you're also locking the majority of your players out the progression that is available to that minority content.

 

Early on in this thread I said that developers should be utilizing instance scaling along the lines as it was done by City of Heroes: there's less scripting and more procedural generation, that makes every instance soloable, but also means every instance can be challenging to a large group. That is a far better allocation of development resources than creating heavily scripted content that will only be seen by a minority of your players.

 

---------------------------------

 

Ultimately, the WoW blueprint for building themepark MMOs has created a transient player base due to it's failure to follow through from the very start on it's original innovation. Blizzard's initial research showed the barriers for many players as being the need to be grouped up constantly in order to level up, so they changed it so players could level up to the max level without needing to be grouped up; but that's where they ended their innovation, and stuck with the same endgame as their predecessors, where teaming up was still not an option. They failed to see what they'd really stumbled onto: people want a shared world experience, but not necessarily a multiplayer experience. People really like the social aspects of the MMO, but not necessarily the co-op and/or competitive aspects.

 

And this is where MMOs should be heading towards now: a non-isolated, single player experience in a shared world, with optional multiplayer content. Honestly, of all the big name MMOs on the market right now, SWTOR is almost at that place already, which is a fantastic spot: the devs just need to take those final steps to eliminating the glass ceiling that exists for the bulk of their game's population in terms of vertical progression. Yeah, it's not going to make certain segments of the player base happy; but unfortunately for them, they're a shrinking portion of the population.

 

Encouraging and incentivizing players to group up is always a good idea, but I just feel that those who don't group up shouldn't be penalized for it; particularly when you consider the fact that those who don't group up still end up paying for the majority of the game's development costs. Wildstar's gigantic faceplant has showed that the "raid funnel" doesn't work in today's modern MMOs, and most developers just have a milder version of the "raid funnel". Most MMOs have already pressed the "F2P" button to beef up their populations, and are still finding themselves struggling to retain long term players: the only reasonable thing left is to start changing the games to better reflect the interests of those who are actually playing them.

[Max_Killjoy]

What if all gear, every last piece of armor and weapon, every single item mod, every mount and deco and pet, were available through loot, crafting, and direct purchase on the micro-transaction market ?

 

What would a game with that sort of three-pronged access to "the stuff" be like?

 

Would it be egalitarian and focused on playing the content you actually enjoy, or would too many players rush to buy everything and then stop playing because of a lack of self-awareness as to what they enjoy in the game (the grind)?

[WSRB]

What if all gear, every last piece of armor and weapon, every single item mod, every mount and deco and pet, were available through loot, crafting, and direct purchase on the micro-transaction market ?

 

What would a game with that sort of three-pronged access to "the stuff" be like?

 

Would it be egalitarian and focused on playing the content you actually enjoy, or would too many players rush to buy everything and then stop playing because of a lack of self-awareness as to what they enjoy in the game (the grind)?

 

I'm not certain that themepark style MMOs as we presently know them could handle that, but sandbox games, where progression is more horizontal to begin with, could quite easily do this without many problems in the Western market. In themepark MMOS, this type of model commonly leads to a DCUO/"Asian grinder" style of game development: pay up to get it done fast or else prepare to grind like hell for the next six months or so (which is just in time to hit the release of the next tier to grind out, yay!).

[Khevar]

You are equating single player as only being story content, and that just ain't so. Just because content is single player oriented doesn't mean it needs to be continuously story based, per se; or at least not any moreso than current flashpoints and raids are. So there's no confusion here: single player content can be repeatable that gives incremental rewards, just like flashpoints, raids, and PVP do.

Not sure I agree. There already is repeatable single player content in this game in the form of dailies. And yet, most anyone you ask about dailies talk about how they're sick of them.

 

The people that focus on the single player aspect of the game ask for more story-based content. They just do. I don't know that anything less would actually satisfy that portion of the playerbase.

Furthermore, neither myself nor the article are saying that group content is wasted, we're saying that the current way of building it is flawed. 60 percent, or more, of MMO players do not group up at all. That means only 40 percent are grouping up ever. That doesn't mean that 40 percent raid, because these numbers don't yet take into account those who solely engage in PVP (which by it's nature is a group activity), and those who only group up for small group content (5 man or less). Once you start breaking it down, the number of players who are actually using raid content is probably 25 percent or less of the population of any given game. That is a waste of resources; and it's even worse when it means that you're also locking the majority of your players out the progression that is available to that minority content.

I don't disagree with you on this. But I think you perhaps missed the point I was trying to make.

 

The fraction of the players that are doing flashpoints and operations are spending a disproportionate amount of time doing that content. That small percentage of the population running raid content run those same raids many many times over.

 

The typical player may see a class quest once (or twice if they run an alt with the same base class). But the typical endgame group content player may see the same flashpoint/operation 20 times, or 40 times, or even 100 times.

 

If you multiply the smaller percentage of players that run group content by the number of times they re-ran the same content, the total amount of game time spend inside flashpoints and operations becomes much more significant.

Ultimately, the WoW blueprint for building themepark MMOs has created a transient player base due to it's failure to follow through from the very start on it's original innovation. Blizzard's initial research showed the barriers for many players as being the need to be grouped up constantly in order to level up, so they changed it so players could level up to the max level without needing to be grouped up; but that's where they ended their innovation, and stuck with the same endgame as their predecessors, where teaming up was still not an option. They failed to see what they'd really stumbled onto: people want a shared world experience, but not necessarily a multiplayer experience. People really like the social aspects of the MMO, but not necessarily the co-op and/or competitive aspects.

I've heard this said before. I believe LordArtemis has made this exact point. But I have a hard time relating to it personally.

 

When I first started this game, I saw others running around the same planets and the running commentary in the global chat window. It was interesting, but it paled quickly. It was like having a bunch of NPCs with weird AI. Hardly better than a single player RPG in that regard. In fact, I was happy to play as though it were a single player game.

 

It wasn't until I tried the cooperative and competitive side of this game before I found anything special about the "multiplayer" part of "MMO"

 

But perhaps that's just me.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Khevar

[Criosdh]

Raids going away? I don't think so. Not for a long time, at least. As a non-raider (casual in this context?), I have played my way through and looked at raids as something I would like to do, but really doubt I would ever do, for a few key reasons:

-I don't have my roles down as nicely as they should be.

-I am not putting in the cash for a new headset just to run a voice program.

-I do not have one of those uber mice with all the abilities I would ever use.

-Lack of general raiding knowledge.

 

These have pretty easy fixes, I know, but that's a slightly different topic.

 

There is also something else to consider:

 

Many people don't raid for the same reason many don't PvP or do large group content. There is a community image of "elitism" in those niches. "You need this build this way, and these abilities, and this gear to function properly here". Of course, there is a reason why those specific builds and such work, but many members of those communities have a " Do it my way, or do it wrong and wipe your group", not "Really, these are better because x, y, z, and then we don't wipe as often."

 

That being said, like any community, those loud, brash and harsh people are just the loudest. And some people need to hear/read things in that way to get it through their skulls.

 

This sorta but for me it's mostly about the time. I love raiding, had a blast in DAoC, and a few other games doing big raids. HOWEVER that was in college when I had more down time. Now days being married with a full time job and 2 kids the only gaming time I see if late at night after everyone is in bed. I simply cannot set aside anywhere from 3 to 8 hours of uninterrupted play time to do something like a raid.

[well]

What if all gear, every last piece of armor and weapon, every single item mod, every mount and deco and pet, were available through loot, crafting, and direct purchase on the micro-transaction market ?

 

What would a game with that sort of three-pronged access to "the stuff" be like?

 

Would it be egalitarian and focused on playing the content you actually enjoy, or would too many players rush to buy everything and then stop playing because of a lack of self-awareness as to what they enjoy in the game (the grind)?

 

GW1 had gear at max level and the only difference was cosmetic basically. Max level was 20. Warriors was 70 Rangers 60 and such but that was it. I played it for 7 years and it worked.

[LordArtemis]

If one person pays a fee of 5 bucks to turn a lightbulb on and off 100 times, that does not make the lightbuib more significant....if you keep the books.

 

Whats likely more important is that crowd of one hundred that pays the same fee....but perhaps only ten of them turn on the light once.

 

Looks like they prefer firewood. I'm not going to keep the lightbuib up for the one guy that turns it on and off 100 times, nor the ten that do once. I am going to get that 90 folks some kindle.....

 

Raids do not fill the seats. They could make a more substantial contribution to the population, but at present I speculate they are less and less relevant.

 

Sure, casuals want story. But they also want appearance, housing, minigames, etc. Alternative gameplay choices OTHER than hardcore end game raiding or PVP.

 

That is why folks might be questioning the relevance of this kind of content at present and in the future...because it is LOSING relevance to the majority playerbase.

 

Either raids have to change or the market with make the change for them. Unless, of course, they get away from the WoW model and start charging 45 bucks a month for a sub.....and someone is willing to pay that.

[Khevar]

If one person pays a fee of 5 bucks to turn a lightbulb on and off 100 times, that does not make the lightbuib more significant....if you keep the books.

This is a poor analogy. An MMO needs people playing the game. The longer someone plays the game, the better for the MMO. Content that people repeat is a worthwhile investment.

Sure, casuals want story. But they also want appearance, housing, minigames, etc. Alternative gameplay choices OTHER than hardcore end game raiding or PVP.

And the biggest release of 2014 was housing, wasn't it?

 

Mini games would be a good thing as well, no doubt.

 

But do you really think that adding mini games and an appearance tab would be enough to satisfy the casual player? Without a significant investment in new story content?

[LordArtemis]

This is a poor analogy. An MMO needs people playing the game. The longer someone plays the game, the better for the MMO. Content that people repeat is a worthwhile investment.

 

And the biggest release of 2014 was housing, wasn't it?

 

Mini games would be a good thing as well, no doubt.

 

But do you really think that adding mini games and an appearance tab would be enough to satisfy the casual player? Without a significant investment in new story content?

 

Yes, I do. But it depends on the quality of those additions.

[Khevar]

Yes, I do. But it depends on the quality of those additions.

Well, fair enough. I find it hard to believe it would be enough, but that's mainly due to the number of threads on the forum clamoring for more (or better) story.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Khevar

[WSRB]

This is a poor analogy. An MMO needs people playing the game. The longer someone plays the game, the better for the MMO. Content that people repeat is a worthwhile investment.

 

And the biggest release of 2014 was housing, wasn't it?

 

Mini games would be a good thing as well, no doubt.

 

But do you really think that adding mini games and an appearance tab would be enough to satisfy the casual player? Without a significant investment in new story content?

 

You're absolutely right: an MMO needs players to keep it running, but without the "casual" players, there aren't enough raiders and/or PVPers to keep an MMO running. Not at fifteen dollars a month. I suspect that a game like SWTOR would need the remaining players to be paying over sixty dollars a month if all the "casual" players left in order just to keep the lights on, and probably much more than that in order to continue to develop new content.

 

This argument against trying to change the endgame model is solely based on the idea that solo content is only one and done story content, and that just isn't true; or that solo endgame content can only exist as open world daily missions: also just not true. The solo mode flashpoints in SOR show us that solo instances can be done in this game. The fact is that too much resources are being spent on instanced content that can only be run by groups of set sizes, instead of creating scaling content that can be run by groups of any size. The number of posts on the forums praising the solo mode flashpoints, and that practically beg for their widespread adoption shows that there is a real demand for high level solo content that is not just the same old open world dailies; if solo mode flashpoints existed as a regular feature alongside the standard dailies, I suspect you'd see a lot fewer people whining about dailies because solo players would have some real options. Beyond that, it's just about breaking the exclusivity of the vertical gear progression.

 

The idea that those who don't raid or do ranked PVP have no interest in endgame progression is BS. Tons of these players who get to "the end" and leave are doing so because the endgame excludes their preferred play style: solo or in small groups, like how they were able to play during the entire leveling experience. So there is a large number of MMO players who jump from game to game because the current way MMOs are designed drive them away once they get to the max level. MMOs make money best from long term, stable populations and the best way of achieving those stable population numbers is by creating a game inclusive to all play styles, at all levels; not a game that "changes the rules" once you hit level 50/60/whatever.

[LordArtemis]

Well, fair enough. I find it hard to believe it would be enough, but that's mainly due to the number of threads on the forum clamoring for more (or better) story.

 

And I think that is a fair point.

 

It is not an unfounded contention to claim that storyline, and the expansion thereof is likely pretty high on a casual desire list....surely. But, from personal experience, casuals have a wide array of game content they are happy with, and I would say that appearance tends to be right at the top, if not the upper area of the list.

 

Some of things that please casuals, in no particular order IMO...

 

1) Story

2) Appearance

3) Leveling experience

4) Animations and sound, graphics/scenery

5) QoL features and improvements

6) Housing

7) Crafting

8) Minigames

 

Certainly not an inclusive list. But i generally feel this is a set example of some of things that casuals feel important. If you are unable to expand story, any combination of the others is helpful, but the quality is important.

 

I would argue Strongholds and GSF is an example of how you can do wrong and right by casuals.

 

GSF - Arguably not very popular with the playerbase. Certainly likely more popular than the arguably dismal PVE space feature, but generally not designed properly to appeal to a wide enough portion of the playerbase. IMO this was designed as casual bane. The design itself almost assures that it will never catch on with the majority casual database.

 

This was a highly anticipated feature, desired since launch, and arguably one of the biggest disappointments ever added to the game.

 

Strongholds - One can argue this was designed properly, as it had appeal to casuals despite it's shortcomings. As a quality housing system it fails IMO, but as a QoL feature it is a resounding success. Despite it's likely view as a poor design among casuals the QoL part of the feature generally makes up for that.

 

Quality and appeal is the key.

[Jandi]

Shocking that games with horrible raids have less raiders.

 

Also, how many people aspire to raid? More than actually raid, I guarantee you that. If you've ever run a raiding guild with any sucess you know that your officers are PM'd almost daily about raiding spots.

 

If you take raiding out of an MMO you're left with a BAD RPG with multiplayer tagged onto it.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Jandi

[Lacedemon]

1) Story

2) Appearance

3) Leveling experience

4) Animations and sound, graphics/scenery

5) QoL features and improvements

6) Housing

7) Crafting

8) Minigames

 

Can I just say that as a raider some of those are still fairly high up my list, I think it'd be fair that for a lot of my guild they are fairly high up too. For many of my guild members their time in game looks like this:

 

30% Raiding

40% Outfits and Character appearance

20% PvP

10% Other non raid stuff

 

One thing to add however, many of those features look like just that, one off things that you would add rather than "new content per say." What about in terms of actual day to day content?

 

I do have a few questions as a raider to those who are not raiders or big on raiding; forgive my curiosity as someone on the "outside."

 

1. What to do you guys do day to day in game

2. What would be your preferred type of endgame content or is endgame content for most non raiders leveling alts?

3. Would those things be on your list still if you knew that they had come at the expense of something else (like say more solo or small scale group content)?

 

 

While as a raider I really like raiding, I would love to have more PvE content outside of raiding to do (not group stuff nesscierly). I love story, hate side quests so dailies are a chore for me and I am sure I am not the only raider who feels that way.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Lacedemon

[LanceCorporalDan]

Shocking that games with horrible raids have less raiders.

 

Also, how many people aspire to raid? More than actually raid, I guarantee you that. If you've ever run a raiding guild with any sucess you know that your officers are PM'd almost daily about raiding spots.

 

If you take raiding out of an MMO you're left with a BAD RPG with multiplayer tagged onto it.

 

Not entirely.

 

It really depends upon the MMO and what their target audience is. For example if it is an open world sandbox/PvP MMO, I doubt raiding would be high on the list. This isn't to say raiding has no spot in the game genre, but a reduced pedestal IMO.

[asbalana]

You're absolutely right: an MMO needs players to keep it running, but without the "casual" players, there aren't enough raiders and/or PVPers to keep an MMO running. Not at fifteen dollars a month. I suspect that a game like SWTOR would need the remaining players to be paying over sixty dollars a month if all the "casual" players left in order just to keep the lights on, and probably much more than that in order to continue to develop new content.

 

This argument against trying to change the endgame model is solely based on the idea that solo content is only one and done story content, and that just isn't true; or that solo endgame content can only exist as open world daily missions: also just not true. The solo mode flashpoints in SOR show us that solo instances can be done in this game. The fact is that too much resources are being spent on instanced content that can only be run by groups of set sizes, instead of creating scaling content that can be run by groups of any size. The number of posts on the forums praising the solo mode flashpoints, and that practically beg for their widespread adoption shows that there is a real demand for high level solo content that is not just the same old open world dailies; if solo mode flashpoints existed as a regular feature alongside the standard dailies, I suspect you'd see a lot fewer people whining about dailies because solo players would have some real options. Beyond that, it's just about breaking the exclusivity of the vertical gear progression.

 

The idea that those who don't raid or do ranked PVP have no interest in endgame progression is BS. Tons of these players who get to "the end" and leave are doing so because the endgame excludes their preferred play style: solo or in small groups, like how they were able to play during the entire leveling experience. So there is a large number of MMO players who jump from game to game because the current way MMOs are designed drive them away once they get to the max level. MMOs make money best from long term, stable populations and the best way of achieving those stable population numbers is by creating a game inclusive to all play styles, at all levels; not a game that "changes the rules" once you hit level 50/60/whatever.

 

Right on the money. Many players leave MMOs because they are solo or small group players and have no options or chance of progression once they reach cap. They can reroll and level another character, but that leads to the same dead end. So it is off to the next game.

 

PS - The solo flashpoints were much enjoyable to me and my wife and we would like to see more.

[Damask_Rose]

I do have a few questions as a raider to those who are not raiders or big on raiding; forgive my curiosity as someone on the "outside."

 

1. What to do you guys do day to day in game

2. What would be your preferred type of endgame content or is endgame content for most non raiders leveling alts?

3. Would those things be on your list still if you knew that they had come at the expense of something else (like say more solo or small scale group content)?

 

1. I rotate through my small army of alts and either work on leveling them, do dailies for coms & cash, or chip away at achievements.

 

2. Personally I would love to see solo progression. Solo shouldn't mean easy, there should always be challenges, and rewards for those challenges. Right now, if a solo player wants to challenge themselves, they can only do so by soloing group content. Fun as that is, some group content has mechanics that require at least two people to complete.

 

3. Depends on what was being squeezed out.

[Khevar]

Some of things that please casuals, in no particular order IMO...

 

1) Story

2) Appearance

3) Leveling experience

4) Animations and sound, graphics/scenery

5) QoL features and improvements

6) Housing

7) Crafting

8) Minigames

All of these are fine ideas, and would please more than just casuals.

This argument against trying to change the endgame model is solely based on the idea that solo content is only one and done story content, and that just isn't true; or that solo endgame content can only exist as open world daily missions: also just not true. The solo mode flashpoints in SOR show us that solo instances can be done in this game.

I agree, the solo flashpoints were very well received. Many people found it easier to see the parts of the story in those flashpoints.

The fact is that too much resources are being spent on instanced content that can only be run by groups of set sizes, instead of creating scaling content that can be run by groups of any size.

This is an interesting idea. If done well, I could see this being a very good thing.

Beyond that, it's just about breaking the exclusivity of the vertical gear progression.

Here's where the current implementation of "solo mode" endgame content falls down.

 

The ONLY thing it is good for, in my opinion, is to allow people to see the story. The GSI super droid moves the gameplay experience in the direction of a spectator sport. It's just too powerful.

 

If you're wishing that Bioware would add a viable alternative to group-based vertical progression by having solo modes that drop real gear, then I firmly believe it should be in a more sophisticated implementation than what was introduced with 3.0.

[LyraineAlei]

I do have a few questions as a raider to those who are not raiders or big on raiding; forgive my curiosity as someone on the "outside."

 

1. What to do you guys do day to day in game

2. What would be your preferred type of endgame content or is endgame content for most non raiders leveling alts?

3. Would those things be on your list still if you knew that they had come at the expense of something else (like say more solo or small scale group content)?

 

While as a raider I really like raiding, I would love to have more PvE content outside of raiding to do (not group stuff nesscierly). I love story, hate side quests so dailies are a chore for me and I am sure I am not the only raider who feels that way.

 

1. Dailies, Rep Grind for kicks, playing/leveling alts.

2. I would like something akin to the scalable raids mentioned earlier in the thread, with the reduced rewards to keep the multiplayer part more valuable. Or just more planets with more dailies so it isn't the same *quick count* six- no, eight now planets, which is fun even if dailies are few in number. Or fun, repeatable in a random sequence, questline (multiple, with group as an option for more rewards).

3. Variety in repeatable content.

 

I also admit, if I had a group of people I knew -at least online- to do large group activities, I would do group activities and the like. And the actual ability to group and be a decent group member (lot of self doubt, I know, but still).

[Stormwatch]

Why should raiding be a thing of the past in the world of MMO's??

 

It should be really up to the individual person and guilds to decide whether they raid or not, I personally don't raid for such reasons that run from the attitude of the person in charge of the raid down to a lack of time.

[Drockter]

Why should raiding be a thing of the past in the world of MMO's??

 

It should be really up to the individual person and guilds to decide whether they raid or not, I personally don't raid for such reasons that run from the attitude of the person in charge of the raid down to a lack of time.

 

I think the point of the article is that, like yourself, many players aren't raiding. However, the raids are some of the most expensive content to make.

 

The question posed by the article is whether or not game developers will continue to invest in long raids, when (it would appear) that raiding is not the primary reason a majority of the player base plays... or even uses. Would their time/resources be better spent on the areas of the game that get the most use.

 

I am not saying I at all agree that raiding should be removed (or resources shifted away)... I love team based (trinity centric) raiding. Closely followed by the mini-raids (Flashpoints).. again, team/trinity based.

[Preston_Violent]

SWTOR is still an old-school mmo by design. It was developed by people who were part of that "we like to hardcore raid" breed and who somewhat failed to foresee that soon raiding will be of interest to far less people overall, with their numbers getting thinner every year and focus switching to casual sessions without commitments to raiding schedules and "owing" time and online activity to guilds.

 

I bet that next BW mmo, whether it's a star wars mmo again or, maybe, a mass effect or even dragon age one, will be focused mostly on solo activities and activities that do not depend on a minimum of 8 ppl. and that "be geared - know tactics - link achie" BS

[Aries_cz]

I bet that next BW mmo, whether it's a star wars mmo again or, maybe, a mass effect or even dragon age one, will be focused mostly on solo activities and activities that do not depend on a minimum of 8 ppl. and that "be geared - know tactics - link achie" BS

 

That "BS" is for a reason. Nobody likes to die over and over because somebody does not know left side from right side...

[Preston_Violent]

That "BS" is for a reason. Nobody likes to die over and over because somebody does not know left side from right side...

 

That was hardly the point