People, what is going on out there? I look down this table, all I see are white flags. Our numbers are down all across the board. Teen smoking, our bread and butter, is falling like a sh** from heaven! We don’t sell Tic Tacs, for Christ’s sake. We sell cigarettes. And they’re cool, and available, and ADDICTIVE. The job is almost done for us!
BR, Thank You For Smoking
In the late nineties, I worked as a Computer Games Tester.
It was good work, all told. Sure, the pay was appalling, and the hours could be long, but it was still little more than “sitting in a room and playing Playstation games.” My fellow testers were a fun bunch, on the whole, and the games I worked on were Triple-A titles. F1 97, Wipeout 2097, Colony Wars and the like.
During my time as a tester, I saw the Games Software Development cycle first-hand.
A game would arrive on our desks for Alpha Testing. The bare bone functionality would be there, with most gameplay elements intact and first-pass final graphics in place. The front end would be working, in theory. In fact, at this stage, the only thing missing would be the Full Motion Video intros and cut-scenes, always farmed off-site and prone to hideous delays. Our job at this time was to play the game, note down bugs, and make gameplay and interface suggestions.
So we did.
Usually, at first, the majority of the bugs were Class A — bugs that caused the game to crash, the machine to freeze, or similar. We’d note them down with diligent recreational notation, allowing the coders to replicate the problem in laboratory conditions.
Then we’d make suggestions for improvement.
Without exceptions, games at this level of development were almost fatally flawed. Problems were diverse, ranging from awful enemy AI or glaring handling problems, to graphical flaws such as clipping or rendering issues. The game engine may be in need of a serious overhaul in order to improve things; the physics engine may be unresponsive or unrealistic, or the gameplay may be missing some integral feature (like the ability to jump in a First Person Shooter, for example).
In the test room, we Quality Assurance guys were the hardcore gamers. We’d arrive early, stay late, and spend our free time playing other computer games. It was 24-7… addiction. When it came to games, we knew what worked. What was fun. We could quantify the magic.
So we’d share our wisdom, and show the developers where things could, and should, be improved.
And to a man, we’d be largely ignored.
We’d ship back Game Version 0.0.1 with a bevy of documented suggestions. They’d range from “The Physics Engine needs a way to portray damage on the enemy spacecraft, maybe with cool exploding side panels and debris,” to “the Options Menu has the ‘Save Game’ option spelled as ‘Saave Game.'” Add these suggestions to the Class A bug list (crashes and hangs), and that’s a lot to take in.
After a few days, Game Version 0.0.2 would arrive. Maybe one or two Class A bugs would be fixed. Nothing more. We’d send back the version with more Class A bugs, our first suggestions, and a host of cool new suggestions for improvement.
Game Version 0.0.3? No changes.
And so it would continue. Maybe by Game Version 0.2.14 we’d have the ‘Saave Game’ option spelled correctly. As for the cool gameplay improvements and suggestions, the new physics engine requirements and top-end overhauls… no change.
“Why don’t they listen?!” we’d rage. “We’re the hardcore gamers… we know Games! We know what’s fun and what isn’t! How dare they ignore our suggestions! Those faceless code-monkeys who do the programming wouldn’t know a great game if it kicked them up the arse! This project is doomed!”
The projects were never doomed, of course. Development would continue, with us poor QA guys passing largely unnoticed as the Alpha test product passed into Beta, into Master, and onto the shelves with little but the surface and superficial being altered. We’d shake our heads in dismay.
At the release party, we’d prop up the free bar and bemoan the chances lost. Instead of the 65% three-star bargain shelf product we’d churned out, we could’ve helped make a truly great game… but no one listened.
After a year in the QA trenches, I was promoted to the position of Games Designer.
The money was better, for one. The hours were the same, but the offices were cleaner and the projects more involving. While the QA guys were there fielding developed projects left and right, we in Development we in the process of Creation! We took a blank canvas, and oh how we’d paint! Whole worlds would spin from our keyboards, full of cool characters and ideas, overflowing with verve and passion and fun, fun, fun!
We’d start with an idea, and run as fast as we could. Each project would run for twelve months, at first… the nature of deadlines would see those milestones spin past quickly. While not every game is a Duke Nukem, a project that made it into Alpha Testing before 24 months was up was a rare bird indeed.
Two years in development, on average. Two years, four million dollars. Two years, and millions of man-hours. Two years of blood and tears, of dreams and tantrums, of sweat and fizz and KFC, to produce a single gold disc of usable code with which we hoped to bewitch and beguile. We’d bleed for these projects, working twelve, fourteen hours a day, our health and our social lives burning on the pyre of progression. These games were our beloved, our bounty, our babies. Sure, they were ugly in places, and a little needy at times… but when we sent them off to the Big School of Alpha Test, we knew they were ready to be All Grown Up. We’d wave them off with a plastic smile and a lump in our throats, hoping they’d be loved by all they met.
Then, the QA test monkeys would get their hands on the disc. And they’d break our hearts.
“The graphics look awful.”
“The vehicular handling is in no way realistic.”
“The whole front-end needs an overhaul.”
“The game just isn’t fun.”
Our love, our passion, our fire, extinguished by the soda syphon of scorn.
Yeah, the QA reports were helpful. They’d bring up interesting fringe problems, like the spelling on ‘Saave Game’ option. They’d also be great at bringing us real problems, like Class A bugs that caused the game to crash or hang. But alongside this, they’d plague us with vacuous requests that were simply unworkable.
“The Physics Engine needs a way to portray damage on the enemy spacecraft, maybe with cool exploding side panels and debris.”
Didn’t they realise that to incorporate such effects we’d need to rewrite the game engine from the ground up?! That’d take us another two friggin’ years! Had they no clue of the time we’d spent, the work we’d done?! We’d sent them a game that was finished bar the polish, and they sat there and proclaim that our game was terrible! How dare those arrogant idiots tell us that the last two years of our lives were wasted!
Our time wasn’t wasted, of course. We’d work at fixing the Class A bugs, and we’d buff the edges off the fringe problems. The game would hit the stands, and post modest yet respectable numbers. Not as high as we’d hoped, maybe… but not as low as those in QA expected.
At the release party, we’d prop up the free bar and talk about our next project… now that would be a game that’d set the world aflame!
…
Earlier this week, Magic Online Version 3 was finally released. After a stuttering start on day one, Casual Play was soon up and running. Next up, the draft queues fired, and people across the world gnashed and wailed at the heavens while arguing the semantics of the phrase “free.” At the time of this writing, we’re still waiting for League and Premier Event play. The state of multiplayer? No idea, it’s not my bag.
Upon its release, the general opinion was overwhelmingly negative. Version 2.5, it seems, is sorely missed. Complaints over every aspect of the new version, from display to navigation to text size to card issues to playability to chat windows to trade bugs to lag / server issues to new features included to old features excluded to the price of Tarmogoyf to the Pro Player cards to the new card face to the changes to the Pro Tour to the loss of States to the fact that Green / White / Red / Blue / Black / Gold / Hybrid / Artifacts / Lands completely suck… you name it, people complained about it.
I too have a list of things I dislike about Version 3… you’ll be hearing them soon. Happily, my time spent in the Computer Games Industry leant me a modicum of perspective. I know of the Circle of Development, and I know the problems and pitfalls that can occur. I can recognise the complaints that, frankly, aren’t important (of which there are many), and I can recognise the problems that are more significant (and there are a few of these too). But overall, I can see where Version 3 has got things right… and this is an important point to acknowledge.
First up, I’m going to highlight some of the “problems” I’m having with Version 3 thus far. For each problem, I’ll assign it one of the following categories:
Class A Bugs — A problem with the game which physically stops the game from working. Examples of this would be crippling lag, server crashes, etc.
Class B Bugs — A problem with the game which, while not completely debilitating, renders an aspect of the gameplay unworkable. Examples would include trading slowdown and associated bugs, store availability.
Fundamental Problems — A problem with the game that is entrenched in the very architecture, and thus rather difficult to “fix” without a major overhaul. Examples would include unintuitive navigation system.
Fringe Problems — A problem with the game that can be solved with a little polish. Examples of this will be inappropriate text size, weird font selection, unscalable card sizes, lack of pop-up card text.
Disagreements — A problem which is nothing more than a disagreement between the developer and the consumer. A difference of opinion. Examples would include insipid art design, chat window positioning.
Problem 1: Navigation
Might as well start with what I’d class as “The Biggie.” The in-game navigation system is flawed.
Upon opening the client, we are presented with a pretty (if rather busy) page that offers up the following selection of Big Friendly Buttons:
PLAY
SHOP
DRAFT
LEAGUES
EVENTS
Thanks to the current lack of functionality, the LEAGUES and EVENTS buttons are useless — they take us to the correct room, but the rooms are empty. The Draft button is a simple and direct way to shoot to the Draft area, as is the SHOP button. The PLAY button takes us to the Casual Decks room, and opens a Start New Game window.
On the surface, I’ve no real problem here. Once full functionality is up (with Leagues and Premier Events), then the buttons as they are will be very useful. The only change I’d make is to make the PLAY button open a three-choice window (the choices being “Casual Play,” “Tournament Practice,” and “8-Man Constructed Queue”). The problem I have is dealing with navigating between such rooms.
Version 2.5 had a similar system of buttons to access various areas of the game. Thing is, that version also had a completely necessary Back Button, which aided the navigation process by a factor of ten. You wanna “go back” after misclicking in V3? You need to fiddle with the miniscule “navigation tabs” at the foot of the screen.
Indeed, it seems that these “navigation tabs” are at the true heart of the navigation system. Using them in a menu style allows access to any of the MTGO sweetmeats on offer. Click one, twice, three times, and more, and you can steer your vessel to the desired destination. The tabs are unintuitive… sure, they work fine if you know what you’re doing, but if you don’t? Not a chance. Plus, they’re confusing when you couple them with the Big Friendly Buttons that look like the only way to fly.
The only way to access the Marketplace? The only way to access the Tournament Practice room, or the Multiplayer room? The only way to access your settings? Through the navigation tabs. Yeah, the navigation tabs work just fine… but if you give us Big Friendly Buttons, we should have Big Friendly Buttons for everything.
This “betwixt and between” approach is my main gripe. I personally like the Big Friendly Button approach, as it adheres to the much-vaunted “click and play” ideal that Games Developers proclaim as Gospel (and rightly so), but the menu tab navigation is workable. However, having the most visible navigational tools (the buttons) only able to access a fraction of the content, while the tiny and unheralded menu can access it all? Sorry, that’s simple laziness.
Overall, the whole navigation-by-tiny-tabs system smacks of “My Baby” Syndrome. It feels as if someone deep in the development process decided that “hey, let’s navigate like this, using buttons and tabs!” By the time the problems in such a system were uncovered, there was no time to go back and change things. Either that, or the developer who first came up with the idea clung onto it with ten icy fingers and refused to let it go. Either way, no cookie.
I’m classifying this as a Fundamental Problem, as it’s not one that can be fixed by a cheeky smile and a few lines of code. The graphical interface would need tweaking to add more buttons, especially a Back Button, and the whole structure of the game would likely mutate as a result. I’d say that this problem hurts the new player most of all… once you actually know how the menu tabs and buttons work, it’s fine. So I’m okay, and you’re likely okay too… but in the year of acquisition, such murky navigation is no power to the grass-roots elbow.
And no Back Button? Man, that’s just bad form.
Diagnosis: Fundamental Problem
Problem 2: Trading Bugs
Next up, we have the current Trading Bug problem. At present, Trading is horribly slow. The actual interface for trading seems fine, and the process is almost identical to Version 2.5…. click, obtain, maximum 32 objects per trade. There’s also a problem with some things “disappearing” after the trade is complete. So those tix you’ve just earned by selling your Cryptic Command? Be sure to keep an eye on ‘em.
Yes, these things are annoying, and the disappearing stuff thing is shameful… but this is “just” a problem. In my classifications, it’s a Class B Bug, but it’s something that can (and will) be fixed. I can imagine this bug means it’s a nightmare for the heavy online traders, but it’s not something that requires a huge overhaul to the game’s infrastructure in order to fix. I’m more annoyed that a multitude of Bots aren’t available for me to dump my excess chaff in order to fund my draft habit… but that’s just me.
Diagnosis: Class B Bug
Problem 3: Artistry
I hate the new look of the game.
I know we play a game steeped in fantasy and folklore. I know we attack with Elves, swing with Goblins, cast spells and walk planes. And yes, the card art is beautiful, and a vital hook for new players and aesthetes alike.
But to me, Version 3 looks like an explosion in a hobbit factory.
The client is, in my opinion, stricken with idyllic meadows and filigree. I feel my game has been dipped in pixie dust and thrown to the randy unicorns. The gameplay frames are rustic and ornate, the collection binder is papyrus bound with yarn, and every background is polished marble.
The game has been Gandalfed. Every time I fire it up, Tolkien sh**s a rainbow.
But is this a valid complaint? Hardly. It’s an opinion, sure, but it’s not a problem that demands fixing. One man’s fish is another man’s poisson, after all. My fiancée, who’s spent the last three years sporadically glancing over my shoulder as I draft on Version 2.5, saw me fire up Version 3 and responded with an “ooooh, pretty!”
I might not like it, but who am I to judge?
Diagnosis: Disagreement
Problem 4: Card Problems
In Version 3, there’s something wrong with the cards. They look funny. And, at times, the wrongness can be annoying
First, the default card size in game (and especially in the Deck Editor) is rather large. Sure, they automatically scale and shrink in game if needed, but then the mana costs look weird as they become too large for their positioning. And the font on the cards themselves, while clear, looks cheap and tacky.
Next, when playing a match, sometimes you may require the text of a card that you’ve already cast, or one that’s a few cards down in your graveyard. Yes, you can highlight the card and read the info in the scalable Card Window (like the card display in the top left corner of 2.5, but a window you can close to free up space), but if the text is too small to fully display there then there’s no way of getting a full display without hovering over the card and waiting for the yellow-box popup text. A “click card to display all text” option would be nice.
In game, if you reveal a card from your library for any reason, it appears in the usual pop-up window. Most of these windows can be closed with a click, but the Removed From Game box doesn’t disappear as easily. It simply minimizes into the bottom of your play-screen, which can be distracting.
And the foils? Man, they look awful. Completely hideous.
Again, a number of these complaints are minor differences of opinion. The ones that are genuine problems are no more than Fringe Problems, and thus there is hope for future fixes.
Diagnosis: Fringe Problem / Disagreement
Problem 5: Lack of Functionality
Pretty obvious this, and something we knew from the moment of release and before. We currently have Casual Play, and Draft Queues, but no Leagues or Premier Events.
We’ve currently no timeline for feature introduction, which is a pain… but these features are coming nonetheless. I for one relish the approach of full functionality. While it’s currently a Class B Bug in my eyes, it’s one that has been flagged for fixing as soon as possible.
Diagnosis: Class B Bug (flagged — i.e. promised improvement over time)
Problem 6: Screen Layout
This is a big complaint, and one you’ll definitely have seen if you’ve frequented the howling maelstrom of negativity that is the MagicTheGathering.com forums. Chat in a vertical window rather than a horizontal one… how dare they!
I do empathise with this problem, but only as I see it as a symptom of something more… the general awkwardness of the screen layout in general.
The whole Chat Window thing is annoying. Multiple windows can be accessed by buttons at the base of the Chat Window “column,” and those buttons appear to switch and migrate of their own volition. It’s be nice if the button you clicked that said “Clan” didn’t become “Buddies” or “Draft” with no rhyme or reason. I’m sure there is method behind this migratory pattern, but that way madness lies. In order to minimize the Chat Windows, you have to unattach each one from the “dock.” Then each can be closed and removed from play, as it where. Thing is, should you switch one of the windows back on for any reason, it appears in the “dock” alongside every other chat window, meaning you have to manually close them all over again. Weak.
The Deck Editor now divides the screen into three strips, rather like the German Flag. The top houses the card database, the middle houses the deck, and the bottom houses the sideboard. While each strip can be resized to order, they do remain rather thin when you need to view all three. And using Card View in the deck database is made ludicrous due to the sheer size of the cards.
In game, there are three layouts for the playing interface. Honestly, the only one I can handle is called “Compact,” as the other two (“Big Card” and “Mana Wheel”) are far too cluttered and busy. Of course, your mileage may vary here.
The final quibble I have here involves the Avatar and Table views. They are yet to be implemented. The 3D Avatars can be viewed in Settings, and look cool if rather superfluous. Maybe, once the Avatar and Table views are implemented, we’ll discover where they store the chairs between rounds in Version 2.5.
Overall, these are Fringe Problems or Disagreements. There’s nothing too deadly here, and these things can likely be fixed or improved. My biggest complaint is the Deck Editor “thin strip” problem, but if they sort out the default card size I foresee that problem will diminish.
Diagnosis: Fringe Problem / Disagreement
Problem 7: The Little Things
Rounding out my complaints, there’s a selection of tiny niggles that evoke emotions from a miniscule headshake to a frenzied howl.
Number One: Why in hell is there no Round Timer in drafts? In the Event Lobby (see below) there’s a “this round will end no later than blah blu-blah blah blah” announcement, but that’s simply not enough.
Number Two: Online and Offline player lists are hard to understand. In my Buddies list, my online buddies are bolded while my offline buddies are plain text. In my Clan list, everyone is bolded whether online or not… the only way to tell if they’re online is if they appear above me in the list. And in the room windows? Everyone is online, and bolded. No synergy.
Number Three: The Classified window (previously the Buying and Selling windows) has so much dead space. On a full screen, I get something like ten or fifteen Classified ads. Sorry, but it’s ugly and unnecessarily empty.
Number Four: At present, you cannot ID and split the finals of 8-4 Drafts. This is annoying, as I often draft 8-4s when I’m strapped for time, knowing that it’s unlikely I’ll be playing more than two rounds of Magic whatever happens.
Number Five: Did I mention that the foils look terrible?
I’m sure there are more disagreeable quibbles I may have, but they come under the “that reminds me…” banner. Either way, these things are not life-threatening, and most can be fixed without too much hassle.
Diagnosis: Disagreements
Reading all these problems, one might think that I hate Version 3… truth is, it’s fine. It’s not world-shaking, but it’s not a turd on a plate either. When we break down the complaints I’ve made, we get:
1 Fundamental Problem
2 Class B Bugs (1 Flagged)
4 Fringe Problems / Disagreements
The Class B Bugs are the ones we will see fixed. The Fringe Problems and Disagreements will be tackled with luck, and are little more than niggles in any case — maybe with enough voices, such small changes for the better will be made. The Fundamental Problem (Navigation) is one that I can’t see being changed, but it’s also one that will diminish as we become more accustomed to the system, and one that won’t seem as jarring once the client reaches full functionality. As for Class A Bugs, the real problems… not a one.
So that’s the downside… is there an upside? In think there definitely is. Let’s investigate some of the successes of Version 3 thus far…
Success 1: Server Stability
This was by far the biggest problem with Version 2.5, and it was the one thing that Wizards vowed to get right with Version 3.0.
So far? Success on all counts.
I’ve rumbled in the Version 3 Draft Queues for quite some time since the release day, and I’ve suffered no lag and no unexpected crashes. The gameplay has flowed, and the only server downtime I’ve seen has been flagged beforehand for scheduled maintenance. I expect there to be a maximum amount of scheduled maintenance at present and the Development team iron out the Fringe Problems and the Class B Bugs, but this is necessary and will diminish through time.
While there have been complaints aplenty about the interface, and the functionality, and the text and trading bugs, and the myriad of tiny problems that beset both development and release, hardly anyone has mentioned that Wizards appears to have conquered the very beast they vowed to attack. The server is up, and it is stable, and while the Negative Nelly in me wants to add “but for how long,” I’ve gotta give credit where it’s due.
One important point to consider here, however, is the impact that full functionality will have on server stability. Thus far, we have Drafts and Casual Play. We don’t have leagues, or Premier Events, nor do we have a plague of trade bots sapping server strength like so much cheap kryptonite. While things look good at the moment, this issue cannot be marked as fully resolved until we’re full steam and fighting.
Even so… thus far, there’s no more crashes. No more lag. I for one intend to enjoy it.
Success 2: Draft Experience Improvement
The total experience of Drafting has improved a great deal. With the exception of the missing Round Timer clock (which is a pretty big annoyance, I admit), Wizards have made some cool new additions to the Draft Experience.
Now, whenever a draft fires, the eight players are “transported” to an Event Lobby, in which the pairing (and eliminations) are displayed. The draft players can chat here between rounds, and it gives the event a focal point. There’s also a handy game-by-game breakdown of the round in progress, and a list of the eight players in the event at the foot of the box that alters in increments when someone is eliminated. Nice touches, all.
Hopefully, these pleasing polishes will appear throughout the client, in both Premier Events and League Play. I’m intrigued to discover more such tiny yet thoughtful advances… as long as they bring back my Event Timer as soon as possible.
Success 3: The Store
For the new version, The Online Store is incorporated directly into the client. And it rocks. The purchasing system seems quick and painless, and the delivery appears to be much quicker than before.
Of course, the real test will happen when the Premier Events are online… in Version 2.5, my product for the 10pm Premier Event would always arrive at 10.02pm after an agonizing forty minute wait.
Success 4: The Little Things
Just as there are a host of minor irritations with Version 3, there are a handful of joyous “squee!” moments to be had…
Number One: When you join a draft queue, it fires as soon as the queue hits eight players. No more waiting for a random three minutes, fingers crossed in the hope that no one leaves. Of course, be sure you want to play if you join a draft. I was wavering on whether to draft the other day… I clicked on the list to join before I’m fully decided what to do, and BAM! I was making my first pick. Thankfully, I won that one.
Number Two: Setting swathes of your collection as tradable is much quicker than before.
Number Three: In the Deck Editor, when browsing your Standard cardpool (for example), it now shows you all Standard-legal cards regardless of their set. At last, my Seventh Edition Brushlands have come in from the cold!
Number Four: You can switch off the profanity filter, allowing forthright debate between consenting adults. I spent a good two hours in discussion with my friend Mark Voisey, calling him such gems as ****, ****-******, rancid ****-bucket, ****-faced monkey-****, and of course the old classic, ****. Good times.
Number Five: Did I mention the foils look terrible? Okay, this isn’t a positive point, but it does bear repeating.
…
As I’ve said, I believe there are positives and negatives to be taken from Version 3. Some things have changed for the better, and some for the worst. Some features are missing, and a lot of things need a spit and polish. However, the Elephant in the Room — server crashes and lag — appears to have been slain, at this stage at least. And while the differences seemed major and insurmountable at first, I’m enjoying the new client more and more with each play.
As a breed, we Magic players are quick to complain and point the finger. Look back over the furore concerning the new card face, or the Pro Player cards… storms in a teacup. Indeed, here’s me bemoaning the New Card debacle back in PT: Chicago, pulling my Beaker Face. People fear change in all its forms.
This article has been an attempt to put the problems in Version 3 into stark perspective. There’s nothing here that’s unfixable. Most of the things I’ve mentioned aren’t even “bugs” in the strictest sense of the word. You don’t like the new look of the game? Hell, you’re in good company, but it’s not something that needs “fixing.”
There ARE problems, and there ARE bugs. Most of them WILL be fixed over time. The big problem of 2.5 appears to have been resolved, and at this stage of the process, that’s enough for me. There are things I don’t like about the new version, but a lot of that stems from my (our) refusal to embrace change. And the things I dislike may be the very things that other players see as advantages.
Questions can be raised (and will be raised in the forums, no doubt) about the manner of the release, about whether the game was ready to be unleashed when it was. Questions on the nature of the information released by Wizards and the way various aspects of design, development, and delivery were handled by the Powers That Be. I believe these questions are divorced from the fundamental nuts and bolts behind the new Version, no matter how pertinent they may seem. Complaints of that nature should not impact on our perception of the actual product, nor should they stop us from enjoying what’s there.
As a man who’s worn a number of Games Development hats, I can see why things have taken so long. I can see where mistakes have been made, and I can see where problems arise. I can also see the strides toward improvement that have been made, the passion behind those who believe in the game, and the light at the end of the tunnel. I know firsthand that these things take time, and I also know firsthand that such problems are eminently fixable. At present, Version 3 may not be everything I’d hoped it would be. Given time, I think it will be a great improvement on what has gone before.
You may disagree. Your experiences with Version 3 may have been much more traumatic than my own. Even so, I’m not willing to proclaim that the sky is falling just yet. It may be overcast at times, but the air is fresh… and the sun is peeking through.
Until next time…
Thanks for listening.
Craig Stevenson
[email protected]
Scouseboy on Magic Online
PS: No, I’m not being paid by Wizards for my opinion.
PPS: You know what would be great? Allowing Cube Drafting on Magic Online! Let people create their own Cube with the cards in their collection, assigning their 70 White, 70 Blue, 70 Black cards etc… then let invite-only folk draft with the cards! It’d drive card collections, with folk looking for the perfect Cube cards, and it’d prove a cheap and fun alternative for those looking for Limited play.