Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Generations of MMORPGs?
KithDPine
Member Posts: 8
I have noticed lately that people are talking about 2nd generation MMORPGs when talking about games like WoW, EQ2, Lineage 2. Now my question is wouldn't it be more appropriate to call these 3rd generation MMORPGs? Now then I am excluding MUDs, Mushes, MOOs, in this question, if they were included we'd be looking at calling this next wave of MMORPGs 5th or 6th generations. So just limiting MMORPGs to post UO, we see the first generation of MMORPGs are top down games, with sprite based interfaces, and non-environmental maps, this can bee seen in contemporary games like iRO. The second generation MMORPGs are what most people seem to be calling 1st generation, 3D interfaces, scaled worlds, rendered environments. Of course there is also the question of are we really stepping into a new generation of MMORPGs, or are we just seeing the current generation of MMORPGs maturing?
This isn't meant to start a war, only a question on the language being used. Which I think is important given language is the corner stone of comprehension.
Comments
Let me respond by basically cutting and pasting what I posted in a thread quite a few days ago ( I didn't feel like retyping it all lol )
IMHO, 1st generation MMORPGS were any that were made PRIOR to the year 2000. After the year 2000, a lot of games started comming out and a lot claimed to be the "next generation of mmorpgs" or if you prefer the second generation, I wouldn't count them as 100% second generation, as to truly be a next gen you would have to do something to truly revolutionize the market, none of the games that came out between 2000-2003 did this, sure there were improvements but they all boiled down to the same formula that we have seen all along, I guess the games that came out in that time frame could be called First Generation Part II or First and a Half Gen or something like that heh. This is the year where alot of the games on the horizon seem to have a lot to offer and this could be the true second generation of games comming up only time will tell. So without further ado, I present my reposted time line of the modern MMORPG, complete with my opinion on generation changes.
A Time Line of Modern MMORPGS
Generation 1
1996-
Meridian 59 - 3DO
Kingdom of the Winds - Nexxon ( Korea )
1997-
Ultima Online - Origin Systems
1998-
Lineage - NC Soft ( Korea )
1999-
Everquest - Verant Interactive and Sony
Asheron's Call - Turbine and Microsoft
2000-
Interestingly enough I didn't find any released in this year.
Generation 1.5
2001-
Anarchy Online - Funcom
Dark Age of Camelot - Mythic Entertainment
World War II Online - Cornered Rat Software
2002-
Asheron's Call 2 - Turbine and Microsoft
Earth and Beyond - Westwood Studios
Final Fantasy XI - Square Enix ( PS2/Japan )
Jumpgate - Netdevil
Neocron - Reakktor
2003-
EVE Online - Crowd Control Productions (CCP)
Final Fantasy XI - Square Enix ( PC/USA )
Horizons - Artifact Entertainment
Planetside - SOE (not really a mmorpg, it's a mmofps)
Shadowbane - Wolfpack Studios/Ubisoft
Star Wars Galaxies - SOE/Lucas Arts
2004-
Final Fantasy XI - Square Enix ( PS2/USA )
Possibly the true Generation 2
UPCOMMING:
In no paticular order
Lineage2
Dark and Light
Saga of Ryzom
World of Warcraft
Ultima X: Odyssey
Everquest 2
Guild Wars
City of Heroes
NOTE: Not every game in existance is in this list, I compiled this list from the more well known and popular games out there.
I agree. To be second generation you need to do something to bring the genre to a new level. To me the only real advance so far is the graphics. There are a few new features in the games out there now but they are still mainly rehashes of the older versions. In many cases I believe these games have actually got simpler, been dumbed down for a wider appeal. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
To be classed as 2nd Generation for me would mean new functionality that would make an improvement so big that all new games would follow this mould to be competitive. Let me explain, how many times have you heard "Game x is a clone of Everquest"? If a 2nd Generation game 'S' was released its features would be so vital that in future people would be saying "Game x is a clone of game 'S' ".
Magpie
There are only 10 types of programmers. Those that understand binary and those that don't.
Well like I pointed out before it is generally accepted that up to AC is first generation.AO to DAoC is 2nd generation and AC2 above that is 3rd generation.
Thats how it been perceieved by many game sites and a popular gaming magazine like pcgamer .
The other time line posted got the dates of release correct but I never heard of a game been 1.5 lol.Thats a new one for sure.
Start a trend who knows 1.5 might actually pick up but until then I stick to the more popular classification not that it matters really.
AC2 third gen over DAOC? no way
gfx are on the same level
DAOC gameplay is way better than AC2 so i'd call them both 2nd Gen (actually third gen as everquest&ac1 are 2nd gen over ultima since we're not speaking over things before '99 here)
Have to agree with Helldog here. Personally, I don't think GFX is a significant enough departure to really define whether a game is next Gen. Or to be more accurate, the GFX didn't revolutionise the genre.
A simple example would be FPS: Doom (if you ingore, Castle Wolfenstein) was one of the first FPS to emerge that revolutionised the genre through atmosphere (especially the sound), feel and multi-player option. This was my first graphical multi-player FPS game that I played on the Pc.
Quake revolutionised the genre - pushing it forward - on technical expertise through the graphics engine, by truly being able to revolve 360 degrees. This had a dramatic effect on gameplay and heraled a new game engine.
Halflife was a real revolution in terms of a cinematic experience actually having a real affect in gameplay. For once the story took centre stage and was superbly implemented that cannot be over-stated enough. Absolutely ground-breaking, pushing the genre forward.
MMOG's? (I refuse to use RPG's). note: I am a rather casual game player and am not a hardcore MMOG player. I've only played EQ and Eve and have to say based on 2nd hand evidence that aside from graphics, most of these next gen games have been more 1.5 than 2.0 i.e. more of an update of existing features rather than a whole new game design.
DAoC seemed interesting because PvP was an integral part of the game rather than a PvE MMOG with a PvP element tagged on (EQ).
Whilst MMOG's will push technical expertise (hem hem) further - or rather, help propel chip makers and graphics card makers to make bigger chips and cards - I'm not entirely sure if we've witnesssed truly a next gen game yet.
Also, does it really matter? Judging by the number of big games that appear to be have rushed (i.e. should still be in beta judging by comments) shouldn't the question we be asking is for games to be released with the features on the box i.e. what we have been promised? For companies to treat the customer with respect and actually provide decent CS (of course, you get what you pay for ...)?
I personally, am not looking for something truly revolutionary but for common elements in one package that actually are greater than the sum of their individual parts. I don't want to see MMOG's sold on just one feature i.e. PvE, PvP, crafting etc etc - I come to [i]expect[/i] that from games - but rather how these features are [i]implemented[/i] to have an effect on gameplay.
Regards,
Riotgirl
"she's like this cleavagey, slut-bomb walking around going 'oh, check me out. i'm wicked cool. i'm five by five'."
"If you think I'm plucky and scrappy and all I need is love, you're in way over your head. I don't have a heart of gold or get nice. There are a lot nicer people coming up. We call them losers."
Let's come up with a concensus on an answer for this question and post it as a sticky so we don't have to answer this question every 4 days.
Also, we need a sticky titled "What game should I play now", so we don't have to answer it 2 or 3 times a day.
Someone posted in one of the other threads a link to a very good article on the history of MMORPG's. If that old thread were found, then that link could be reposted.
And... why isn't there a search function on thie message board?!?!
Edit: Well, I just realized the Search doesn't work too well.
As I stated last thread, if you class UO as first Gen, EQ goes with it. Just because EQ came out later doesn't mean it wasn't in design far before UO came out.
Anyway, Thhe new generation of MMO's is the third generation, as the first generation ended with AC and the second generation is classed as the games that rode the coattails...they improved the original product but didn't add anything new.
WoW, EQ2, UXO, COH...all of these should be classed as 3rd gen MMORPGs.
Socializer 73%
Explorer 66%
Achiever 53%
Killer 6%
Killer 100% Socializer 40% Explorer 33% Achiever 27%
All mmorpgs since the beggining has almost the same basic combat, trading etc systems. From this point of view you can say that all mmorpgs are still in 1st generation.
On the other side we have 2D mmorpgs mostly made in 19s and 3D mmorpgs made in early 20s. Here we can make 2 different generations.
I think that we are still in 1st generation of mmorpgs but we are getting very close to 2nd generation. I agree with KithDPine that upcoming mmorpgs like WoW, EQ2 and DnL could be next generation.
∙name: EViLD0G
∙clan: [EXE]
∙playing: EQ, SIMS, AC, AC2, DAoC, FFXI, AW, RS
∙planning: SoR
1st generation - Static Virtual worlds with static spawn locations (creatures, items, etc.). An example would be UO
2nd generation - Static virtual worlds with dynamic spawn capabilities (event driven spawns). An example would be DAoC.
3rd generation - Dynamic worlds (new virtual game areas created just for missions or existing virtual game area being altered by players' actions). An example would be CoH.
The thing is, there are developers out there still making 1st generation MMORPGs.
Edit: This is just a basis and not a hard rule. In UO, housing could been considered as altering a virtual game area. Neocron's apartments can be considered dynamic areas seperate from the rest of the game's virtual world. But neither one of these will do as much as what you will see in the 3rd generation MMORPGs.
Truth is there is no real classification for generations of mmorpg.
Just opinons.
∙name: EViLD0G
∙clan: [EXE]
∙playing: EQ, SIMS, AC, AC2, DAoC, FFXI, AW, RS
∙planning: SoR
Fair enough. There is a lot of questioning about this subject. One of the most well known MMORPG game DEVs wrote an essay about it too. It works very well in grouping the generations of MMORPGs.
Basically to define a generation involves these things, in this order of importance:
#1. The technology used to make the gameworld/game engine.
#2. The time period the game came out in.
#3. Making a Judgement call (for example Shadowbane used the same/simular technology as EQ to design its game engine, but it was released during the time period of newer generation games. The judgement call factor would place SB in the same generation as AO, DAoC, even though it is an older game engine.)
FIRST GENERATION MMORPGs:
......Yes one can say MUDs, etc... but to keep this discussion more focused, this is about MMORPGs released after the advent of widespread public access to the internet. AKA from 1994 and afterwards ......
- Meridian 59
- The Realm Online
- Ultima Online
- Theoretically every browser-based MMORPG that came out during the time period of these games.
[New technology permited the creation of graphical Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games. Aka worlds in which massive amounts of gamers could play together in a graphic-based game world. The graphic-based games were at the forefront of the MMORPG industry. Any text-based MMORPGs that came out during this time period were in it, but not at the forefront.]
SECOND GENERATION MMORPGs:
- Asheron's Call
- EverQuest
- Lineage
- Runescape (first version)
- Astonia I, Astonia II
- Every browser-based MMORPG that came out during the time period of these games. (like Utopia, Star Kingdoms, etc...)
[NEW and IMPROVED technology permited the creation of NEW and IMPROVED game engines for the MMORPGs that were at the forefront of the MMORPG industry. New and entirely different MMORPGs than before were now leading the way. Were at the forefront. New games released during this time period using older technology are placed in this generation because of the #3 Importance Item.]
THIRD GENERATION MMORPGs:
- Anarchy Online
- Dark Age of Camelot
- Shadow Bane
- EvE Online
- Runescape (newer version)
- Astonia III
- El Karidian
- Final Fantasy XI
- The Sims Online (many say its not a true MMORPG LOL!
)
- Planetside
- Earth and Beyond
- World War II Online
- City of Heros
[NEW and IMPROVED technology permited the creation of NEW and IMPROVED game engines for the MMORPGs that were at the forefront of the MMORPG industry. New and entirely different MMORPGs than before were now leading the way. Were at the forefront. New games released during this time period using older technology are placed in this generation because of the #3 Importance Item.]
FOURTH GENERATION MMORPGs:
- Asheron's Call 2
- Star Wars Galaxies
- Horizons
- Runescape (heheh.... the newest mega updated version.)
- EverQuest 2
- The mighty VANGUARD
- World of Warcraft
- Guild Wars
- Dark and Light
- Tabula Rasa
- Wish
- Face of Mankind
- Dragon Empires
[NEW and IMPROVED technology permited the creation of NEW and IMPROVED game engines for the MMORPGs that were at the forefront of the MMORPG industry. New and entirely different MMORPGs than before were ARE leading the way. ARE at the forefront. New games released during this time period using older technology are placed in this generation because of the #3 Importance Item.]
======= SIGNATURE =========
Personal Website (work in progress):
http://www.geocities.com/xplororor/index.html
MMORPG games I've played:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor
Star Wars Galaxies:
http://community.webshots.com/user/capt_xplororor
More games:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_archives01
EVE Online !!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives01
DAoC (coming soon)
The truth, as it see it, is that the whole "generation" thing is BS. It's a marketing buzzword made up by game publisher execs to make their new game sound like a revolutionary step forward in the genre. There haven't been any "revolutionary" MMORPGs released in a long time (since the very first MMO's) . Every step forward the genre has made has been evolutionary in nature. By that I mean, there havn't been any games that have broken all the rules to make something that is both truely new and yet still a MMORPG. DAoC is just EQ with some refinments and a change in focus to PvP. AO, Shadowbane, Horizens, City of Heroes, Asheron's Call & Asheron's Call 2 are all basically the same sort of game that EQ is. Each has their own special touches and areas of focus, but none takes a signifcant jump forward from it's predecessors. Star Wars Galaxies is, at its core, a more advanced retread of Ultima Online as are, in completely different ways, the Sims Online and Lineage . Even the upcoming blockbusters, World of Warcraft and Everquest 2, are basically enhanced versions of games that have come before. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with this... the genre is slowly improving. Each new game (or the better ones at least) have profitted from the mistakes of the older games and have borrowed the best of what made the older games fun. But it's impossible to draw a line and difinitively label one game as Generation 1 and another as Generation 2.
There have been attempts at revolutionizing the genre but all of them, in my opinion, were failures. No current games are borrowing heavily from such failed experiments as Motor City Online or There. NCSoft is trying some new stuff with Tabula Rasa and Guild Wars... it's possible that, 10 years from now, we'll all be playing games derivitive of these titles. I have my doubts though. In all likelihood, the MMORPGs of the future will look and play like enhanced versions of the current crop, as will the games to follow. In the meantime, don't let yourself get caught up in the hype of "next generation."
Ok, truth of the matter is. AC1 and EQ1 were both like UO, with EQ seemingly more so.
EQ1 went the route of high-fantasy. With a caveman style fighting, tons of expansion packs, hate for their customers, etc etc.
AC1, well, they didn't have superb customer support. But at least they didn't drain you like a stuck pig for new content. That and its fighting was less caveman, more control over it, and it made up its own storyline. None of this high-fantasy overused crap. Was a fresh change of pace.
My opinion though. All new games are a joke. They're usually one way or another a clone of another one. Seemingly enough, very few vets are entertained by the new onslaught of MMORPG's. Why? Because you've done it before. If you wanted DejaVu, just go play EQ, UO, Meridian 59, AC1, or whatnot.
I played World of Warcraft. It was seemingly fun. But it was going to get boring after awhile. It was the samo samo. Instead of campin good hunting spots. You sometimes had camped monsters or quests. Instead of overabused slaying of monsters. You had overabused quests.
Go kill 5 so and so, bring me back their heads.
Now go kill 5 of the same so and so, make sure they're different, geomancers, scouts, defenders, blah blah blah. And bring me back 7 of this, 8 of that, and 2 of that. Ok. Now go back and do the same, but bring me their bosses head now and I'll give you a dagger that'll hold ya off for the next 3 levels.
Then the crafting system, I thought, hey, this is pretty good. Pretty new. But then I think, it about has the exact same crafting system of UO almost.
Sort of sad, its all the same rehashed crap. And people still buy it.
Maybe the underdogs will come through, Mourning, GuildWars, Dark&Light, Darkfall. Maybe one of those will be innovative & fun.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Greyfacw, and Finwe, your points are valid. But you both are using just 1 item as criteria. Game features and only game features. If one were to go only by that, and just by that, then there have never ever been a single new computer game since roughly 1989.
Metal Gear Solid is a joke since everything it has was long ago done in Infiltrator. Every new cosole game, PC game, is a joke since there are no new game features.
Grand Theft Auto is a joke since everything it has was long ago done in Autoduel.
Ultima Online, AC1, EQ, are all jokes since every single thing they have were already done in Ultima, Bard's Tale, Phantasie. With the only difference being the number of players able to be in the same gameworld.
I agree it can be argued there are no new games since "new" games have features already done in games from 15, 20 years ago. BUT that is only if one uses game features as the only criteria.
I am bringing attention to the definitions in my first post above, definitions used by the major game DEVs, game magazines, use many multiple criteria to define which generation a game is, how new a game is. -> One of the most major criteria is use of new and modern technology in making the new games. The world, game engine, database of UO is a vast improvement over the world, game engine, database, of Realm Online and Meridian 59. The world, game engine, database, of EQ is a vast improvement over the world of UO. The world of SWG is a vast improvement over the world of EQ.
That along with other more minor criteria including game features, time period a game came out in, etc... Not just 1 sole criteria.
======= SIGNATURE =========
Personal Website (work in progress):
http://www.geocities.com/xplororor/index.html
MMORPG games I've played:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor
Star Wars Galaxies:
http://community.webshots.com/user/capt_xplororor
More games:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_archives01
EVE Online !!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives01
DAoC (coming soon)
Xploror, your use of examples is flawed. You give examples of games like AutoDuel (Which I believe was for the Atari?) to comparison of Grand Theft Auto, and when you can't even play it on present machines (Unless you really wanna hunt for an Atari) and the graphics are done from like 16 colors to 32bit (True Color) then its not even on the same category. I'm really surprised you'd give an absurd example like that. And ultima, Bards Tale, and one other, which I've never even heard of. The differences?
Well, you said it yourself, the only difference is the amount of players being able to play together. And that is a very big difference. That becomes a whole different genre altogether. It goes from an RPG, to a MMORPG, or just a MMOG.
It uses a whole different technology. Its almost like saying, there is really not much difference from a small lan, say between a household of computers, and the World Wide Web.
Example of a Genre that even though has had many games in the past with rehashed idea's, but finally came out with a innovative game that differed from the rest and ended up being dubbed by Gamespy as the best game of its Genre. Genre is RTS, game is Total Annihilation.
The game was similar to RTS's, but it added something new and different, it didn't use the same type of formula, but yet it was still part of the Genre. But even something even more different and is going more away from the pact of RTS's and into its own category is a new game coming out called Evil Genius. Still an RTS, but is something seemingly new and different. And thats what the MMORPG genre needs.
MMORPG genre, EQ, DAoC, AO, SWG, even WoW. What do they do? Sometimes they add more content, sometimes bigger worlds. But usually the pull is just etter graphics.
DAoC drew a little away from the pact with adding realm warfare. But all of these games, the majority of what you do, is grind, grind, grind, grind, loot, loot, loot, grind, camp camp, grind grind. Heck, even the combat systems don't seem to change. They seem to stay like that caveman, very little control. Sit back, and press a couple of keys when your special moves recharge. And then just lazy about again until the monster is killed. Then rest for 5 minutes.
It's almost like they're the same game in comparison of games like Diablo I, and Diablo II.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
No no no, I think you missed my point. I'm not saying that any particular game is a "joke" because it is derivitive of earlier games. All I'm saying is that, to date, there have been no MMORPG that is so ahead of its predecessors that we can say that the game truely represents the "next generation." The games are definately improving over the years - anyone who says otherwise is just burned out on MMORPGs (or is a troll). But the improvements are by small measures, not by the huge leaps that one could rightly characterize as generational.
You yourself say that "I am bringing attention to the definitions in my first post above, definitions used by the major game DEVs, game magazines...." This is exactly what I was saying - the concept of "next generation" is one deliberately cultivated by the developers, publishers and the gaming media (which, sadly, is often a simple mouthpiece for the industry. How else can you explain the reviews Black & White got?
). It's a marketing gimmick to portray one's game as "Next Generation." It implies that your game is cutting edge and that those playing other games are holding on to yesterday's technology. But that's just not true. For Joe Gamer actually playing these games, there isn't a radical or significant difference between one year's releases and the next year's. But there sure as heck is a difference between the games of 1998 versus the games released in 2004. And that difference isn't 100% technological either. Bump mapping and texture shading isn't enough to declare a game "next generation," at least not when it comes to MMORPGs. The true advances come in game design and perhaps network code, not the graphics engine. And on that front, the improvement has been so gradual that there is no way to draw a clear line between generations.
Anyway, it looks like you want to use one type of definition to define generations of MMORPGs (or any other genre of games). And if one were to go only by your definition, I would agree with your definition.
I am using a definition different than your definition. And this different definition shows there are different generations of MMORPGs.
Heck, maybe we can use BOTH definitions? Maybe state it like:
- "Finwe's definition of what defines a new generation is a MMORPG that has new, and different, game play than past MMORPGs. If one were to use Finwe's definition then there are only 2 generations of MMORPGs. Game play, and game features have not changed much."
- "The definition XplOrOrOr is trying to bring attention to, to define a new generation of MMORPG, is one that uses new, improved, available technology in its game engine, and database. If one were to use this definition then there are 4 generations of MMORPGs. Technolgy to make game engines, and game databases, has changed very much."
What do you think about applying both ways of defining MMORPGs?
======= SIGNATURE =========
Personal Website (work in progress):
http://www.geocities.com/xplororor/index.html
MMORPG games I've played:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor
Star Wars Galaxies:
http://community.webshots.com/user/capt_xplororor
More games:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_archives01
EVE Online !!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives01
DAoC (coming soon)
I will agree that if you base it on technology. There are many different generations. Truthfully though, almost every game that comes out would be next generation because it usually uses more superb coding among other things.
What I'm trying to define generations by, is something that takes a large leap in technology. Examples, EQ and AC1 from UO, the realm, etc. I would say that they were the first to go from 2d to 3d for an MMORPG, but I believe that honor belongs to Meridian 59.
These new games that come out, they're using better technology, better graphics engine, coding, etc. etc.
But, I think they'd still be in the same generation as EQ and AC1. I think that so far there is only two generations. Truthfully, I haven't really felt that much difference between EQ, DAoC, AO, with only very few differences, you got more polished games, (well, not less buggy polished, but take an idea and try to improve upon it polished.). What I think maybe should define a generation rather then better coding, but something that makes the game stand out from the games of yesteryear.
I'll tell ya, when I see a game that isn't so EQ clone like, then I'll say the next generation has come. Add something very largely new to the type of game. Example, going from say, Baldurs Gate to neverwinter nights (even though I liked BG better). I'd say though that NwN was the next generation, it was alot like the RPG's of yesteryear, but it offered something new, and it offered alot more.
Personally though, I think that mainly the use of the word generation to describe MMORPG's as somone already said to an extent, is just a marketing ploy by developers. To make their new game look like hot stuff, gotta buy it, newest thing on the market. And I swear, I can't even keep up with these so called generations. I mean what is there, like 5 so far? Its absurd.
Its almost like every two years they slap a generation on it. UO, The realm, meridian 59, first generation. AC1 EQ. Second generation. DAoC AO, third generation. etc, etc, etc.
Maybe the problem is the whole thing of saying one thing is one generation, another is another generation, is just plain out absurd. I'd prefer to judge a game about being the next step of gaming. Rather then just the same old crap with better coding.
I said it earlier in my post, and i'll say it again. I'm not going to say an MMORPG is the next generation until it goes away from the overly abused idea of EQ, and comes out with something new, compelling, and not so redundant and boring.
You want to judge a games generation by the year, or new technology of graphics or coding, thats fine. But I have a feeling of what I'll consider the next generation will be about...Generation 10 in your book.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979