Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
MMO's and Oversimplification
Lawlmonster
Member UncommonPosts: 1,085
Originally posted by SuperXero89Simplicity is good. In these themepark games, it seems that there's always a clear and definate "best" in terms of the stats you need, so there's little reason to fog up the path between a and b behind complex math and by forcing me to visit forums for hours rather than spend time playing the game.
I would agree with any other genre than MMO's, the one place where comlex games should be flocking and multiplying, because it's the only space that truly allows world-like games to be built on the scale they can be. Say what you will about wanting to have a fun, easily accessible experience in a multiplayer environment (which is grand, I love it too), but there are multitudes of other gaming genres and titles specifically which already cater to this. When you think about the tech obsessions of previous decades, virtual reality is one such gimmick that an entire culture based movies, books, and television shows. In many ways, the MMO environment is as close to virtual reality as we'll ever come, though we had envisioned something as close to life and as realistic feeling as possible. So why do MMO's have to be easy and over simplified as well? Why can't the MMO genre continue doing what they did best, that is to create deep, virtual worlds, and leave the mash-a-button, one path gameplay to environments more suited for that experience, like the console?
I mention this in regards to the comment I copied alone, and really has nothing to do with TOR aside from the fact that it may fall into the themepark, over simplified classification of games for some (and that the quote comes from a TOR thread titled "TOR even simpler than WOW"). Rather, I'd just like to see some opinions or answers to the questions I posed, because I think the MMO media space is interesting and diverse, obviously with many different perspectives, and am curious as to why other people might feel that easily accessible, over simplified games are better for the genre than deep, complex virtual worlds.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Comments
Wasting your time and energy trying to get most of this new generation of MMO gamers to understand there are different genres for a reason.
Mainstreaming MMOs of course is what threw the genre under the rails. Society caters to and promotes the ADD mentality, so how can MMOs not follow suit?
I don't want to get into the complex and seemingly prejorative issue of the average adult IQ, but I will say that catering to the masses promotes simplicity versus intricate content.
I'm not sure its a waste of time trying to understand the perspective of other human beings, though I will admit that I expect most anyone who would post in this thread to reply somewhat like you have (not that its a bad thing, but you could provide an opinion to add some weight to your statement).
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Hi,
First of all, I'd like to differentiate between difficult and complex. For this example, lets compare Rift and WoW. Rift gives each class access to 5 skill trees -- three of which can be active at one time. On top of that, planar attunement functions as a sort of alternate advancement system to provide additional stat bonuses. In addition, you also have items that you can attune to certain gear slots to increase stats. In WoW, each class has 3 skill trees, only one of which can be activated at a time. Rift is higher in complexity because there's a lot more you have to take into account when building a character. In WoW, there's not a whole lot you have to think about other than which tree to put your points in. A newbie in Rift may become overwhelmed by the sheer variety of skills and abilities available, and without a strong knowledge as to what those abilities actually do especially in combination with one another, that newbie is liable to make a lot of mistakes when building the character unless that person spends a lot of time researching class mechanics on a web forum. In WoW, it's less likely to totally gimp yourself. The problem with complexity at least in the two games I mentioned is the fact that there's alway's a "best spec" and aside from that, there's just multiple ways to really screw yourself up, so it becomes a game of who is closest to the mark of what that perfect spec actually is. In WoW, you just pick a build and go. Some people don't like that each spec pretty much has a pre-defined build, but they do because there's less options for each build in WoW.
Rift seems like a perfect game for theory crafters because there's always a lot of debate on which spec is best for which situation, how many points to put into a certain skill, what skills to use in a rotation, etc that you just don't find in World of Warcraft. Not everyone's a theory crafter though. I know I personally don't enjoy spending time thinking about math equations trying to figure out what gear I need or what stats I should focus on. Thanks to warcraft hunter's union, I learned that all I needed to do for my hunter in WoW was stay above my hit cap then use whatever gear had the most AGI or Crit, and that was that. The point between A and B is a lot foggier in Rift. Again, some people like that but it's not for me. I just want to pick the best spec and go with it. Of course, that doesn't mean I don't like multi-classing. I loved it in Guild Wars, but I don't think it was implemented as well in Rift.
A game can give players tons of options as to how to progress their characters, but none of those options have to be very complex. For this I compare Skyrim to Daggerfall. Daggerfall gives players a LOT more options in terms of how to progress, and the game was much more complex. Skyrim, on the other hand, is about as simplified as you can get, but which game feels more like a cohesive world? A game can still be simple yet feel like a virtual world, as I think it's more about the number of options one has rather than the depth of each individual option.
Difficulty is more along the lines of, for example, raiding. The endgame raid bosses in Rift and WoW are all difficult until you learn the fight mechanics. This is completely seperate from the differences in terms of how you build a character in both games. You can also have a very difficult game with relatively simple mechanics.
I would agree with this, personally. I definitely think it's a social issue, but that's why I was asking for differing opinions. In general, this is a difficult thing to judge. Is the population of gamers who really want easy access, mash-a-button games truly larger than those of us who want complex, virtual worlds? Are they just louder? I imagine they have good reasons for wanting games to be created in this manner, that is to say oversimplified, though I also imagine many of them would take some form of insult at saying that what they liked about easy games is their oversimplification.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
When you consider MMO to be a platform rather than a genre, it's much easier to see that level of complexity is an independent factor. I'd venture to say that 'this new generation of MMO gamers' has a much better understanding of that than the rest. The don't have a preconceived notion of what an MMO supposedly should be.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
That's an interesting way of looking at it, though I would have to wonder if this is a shared mindset within the development community. The reason I mention this is that a very particular type of game has flourished almost without competition in the MMO space for nearly five years now. It's not to say that differing products aren't released, and right to mind springs Vindictus, Darkfall, or APB, but there is a very dominant force in the MMO space that developers don't often stray from.
I would mention that I never really thought of the MMO space as a platform, but I suppose that's certainly the direction in which its heading. There are definitely some interesting projects on the horizon, and some that already exist, but would say that there is enough variance amongst the genre to really call it a platform thus far, as compared to those that are already in common use (the consoles particularly)?
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
I think it's more an issue of developers pandering to their financial backers. MMOs tend to be rather significant projects in terms of cost, so the promise of profit is understandable.
They're probably looking at what sells (WoW of course stands out like a sore thumb in that department). The IDEAL formula would be an enhanced WoW, with insertions derived from current and prior member feedback. The need for simplicity is not expressed verbally but instead through dollar signs. Niche games (like Eve for example) are what I would consider to be a heavy risk that not many backers (especially in this financial context) would be willing to venture in.
Straying from the standard is just too big a gamble I suppose. There is little room for error.
Definitely, I think the two may even be closely related; that developers are pandering to financial backers, which may as well be a symptom of catering to a simplified base, much as we've seen with other media outlets such as television and film. It's true that we can see the "sell what sells" mentality in most first world countries, I know it's prevelent in the United States and would assume its probably similar in other capitolist nations. Minimalizing risk for safe products is a large part of that, as so to ensure the greatest return for the smallest investment or effort. "Straying from the standard" is a great way of phrasing it.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Not everyone has 100 hrs a week to spend studying up on everythign to in an mmo. Lets face facts mmos are games. Games should be first and foremost fun and enteratining.
They shoulnt force people to have a math degree from columbia university to figure it out.
Stats shouldnt be so convoluted that it takes a masters in math from harvard to figure otu what stat is best for what spec or class.
I find ot many times when people say games are to easy ro simple what they really mean is games today are easier to get intot and play and have fun in so now instead of mmos being a niche part of total games the mainstream gamers can play and the elitist out there cant stand that.
Games may not have as much complexity in terms of stats and stuff but u can tune dungeons and riads to be harder by adding hard modes while allow a casual player who doesnt have 150 or more to play in a week to experiance all there content they spend millons of dollars making.
This is a social issue but its more of one that those that played eq and uo and stuf liked when mmos were a niche branch that the main stream didnt know about . They liked when there were maybe 500 k players in a game and that was considerd a huge population
wow brought alot of new players into mmos and the truth is alot of the old timers hate this. They blame it for ruining community in mmos to the downfall of the us economy to the earthquake in turkey.
Really its time to realize that mmos are games and as such companies want as many players as they can get and that means making games easier to use and understand .
im sorry u lost your community and such but the truth is wow took what worked in mmo polished it up make it so it ran smooth and got alot of players because of it.
U gotta remember games are a buisness and makeing something so that it takes a genius to play it keeps your playerbase smaller and limits the profitibility of that product.
Theres ways to makes games hard and fun at the same time without forcing players to have a 150 iq to play them.
Over simplification is better for the pool of potential gamers and money for the developers. I don't think people say that "over simplification is better for MMO's" rather Simpler MMO's allow more people access to these types of games.
I see many arguments stating that these types of simple games leave less room for the complex and deep games to be developed and to that I say, bullshit. There are just as many deep and complex games being developed or out today as there were a decade ago. People want big money thrown at those types of games but the gamers aren't there to offset the costs of a big budget production of that type.
It's just like the argument that pro-Sandbox people make. They hate that games are too linear and narrow progression then complain when they get into a Sandbox game and it's boring and they feel useless.
You can't make a deep and complex game that will appeal to such a wide range of wants for such a small group of gamers.
To me, the words 'deep, complex virtual worlds' refers to the lore of a game. But I think you want to discuss about combat mechanics when you are referring to 'mash-a-button'.
I don't really see a tendancy of simplification in games. Some games are more complex than others. Dungeon & Dragon Online is complex, while Aion is extremely simple. But, while the combat mechanics of Age of Conan are more complex, it is much harder to achieve a leadership position in both PVP and PVE in World of Warcraft. I remember playing PVP and PVE (I only played before Cataclysm) and we had to read a lot about Best in slot, use tools to compute a perfect rotation with perfect crit/haste/int/wis/hit numbers, or train a lot with my buddies for our 3v3 by reading up on what to do, which spells/abilities to use and when... That turns any simple games into a very complex one.
Though, there is one thing that I get worried about. The UI improved greatly between 1999 and 2004, turning a simple spreadsheet of talents into a 'tree' was an excellent idea. But now, I see some games wreck the usability of their UI to 'support' a console handheld. That makes everything look more complex than what it really is.
Hopefully Skyrim will show game developers that you can make a game hard, and it'll still be popular. You just need a great story! Although I replayed most of the game on easiest setting, and it's so easy, hard difficulty ftw. I know alot of people hate the UI in Skyrim, or don't like it, but it harkens back to the old days of rpgs and MMOs. You don't get some stupid minimap telling you where to go, you get a general bearing of where you need to go, you have to find a way around or over that huge mountain standing between you and your goal. The world map and fast travel I could've done without though (I only used fast travel a couple of times, most of the time I just walk/ride my way there).
It's one of the reasons why I play Rift still. It's hard. Now, leveling 1-50 is extremely easy, but the raids and end dungeons are hard. You expect to die in a raid in Rift. In other games (WoW comes to mind) you expect to complete a raid without dying, and if at all maybe a couple people die.
Depth is good.
Complexity isn't. (but simplicity is.)
A good game isn't a dizzying array of complex options, it's a clearly-presented narrow set of options whose usage is layered and deep.
The rules to the greatest games of all-time tend to fit on a single sheet of paper (Chess, Go, Poker). These games are great because their simple rules create emergent depth.
As with most other forms of design, the simplest solution is usually the best one.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I know some very smart people who play MMO, one guy who worked as an engineer was horrible at the game, he could try to understand it if he wanted, but it was just a game to him so he didn't care. He left our game for a much simpler game, and he's right, because his game was much more fun. I don't play games because I want to be challenged, I don't care, I want to have fun! that is all really for me
If there's challenge or difficulty that's fine, but I don't go look for it. I played EQ by accident more than anything, I never enjoyed the challenge, I enjoyed the world and the people. I never went like this: "I have died 10 times already, this game is awesome". I would have had my fun without dying also.
I play games to get rid of stress, not to add stress, you know.
If I want a bowl of chili as an appetizer, a rack of ribs and fries as the entree, a piece of blueberry cheesecake for dessert, and a Guinness to drink while eating...
If the woman I'm there with wants mozarella sticks as an appetizer, a bacon wrapped filet and a baked potato as the entree, a piece of chocolate cake with vanilla ice cream for dessert, and a sweet tea to drink while eating...
...we do not go to a taco stand.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Yep, different people enjoy different things. I like the colors red and black. Does that mean I should go around and paint everybody's car red and black...or perhaps, should I just when buying a car - get one that is red and black?
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
HAH good call.
Sandbox gamers expect fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget. The numbers just dont support spending TOR money on an Uncle Owen snooze fest. It chaps their arse, and why we are constantly bombarded with these posts on the forums.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Note that you didn't list a meal with 30+ types of food. Every type of food you listed was there for a reason. Each food you list served a clear, strongly-justified role.
You listed exactly as many types of food as were needed, and no more. You didn't overcomplicate things at all.
Ideal design is as simple as absolutely necessary, and no simpler. Each element is strongly justified, or it doesn't exist. Much like your meal.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The trend of the gaming demographic is one of younger players getting older and wanting more than the simple pleasures of their teen years. Ten years ago we had those more complex games, we had somewhere to go. Now increasingly we do not, the gaming market is being increasingly shaped to suit its youngest members who buy more.
These younger gamers will get old too, but even without having our experience of a more complex gaming environment they do start to feel they are outgrowing gaming. But there are always more preteens on the way to make up the market loses so gaming companies are not worried they lose older players, many more are just starting to buy.
This business trend of aiming for the younger market has been going on since the sixties. Business realised how much parents are prepared to spend on their children, which is more then they will spend on themselves. So clothing, films and so on have been increasingly aimed at the younger generation. Gaming had a unique history, first aimed at children then at adults but finally being marketed to the big spending demographic, teenagers.
Also women will pay more once they feel engaged in a given leisure area. This was why gaming companies are so keen to address the ‘problem’ of their not being enough women gamers. The real problem in their eyes is that they are not able to sell gaming to women and that meant a lot less revenue. Girls don’t just buy cosmetic items in MMO’s but without them I am not sure that side of MMO revenue would have ever got of the ground. Think about WoW’s first item, a fairy tale Unicorn mount I think it was, do you think that was designed with guys in mind?
So this is how gaming has come to this point, it has been shaped to be more appealing to those who spend more, maximising revenue has replaced the gaming ethos of old. And as I always say it does not end here. Business and social trends never do, they go on until something balances them. I have mentioned before how the new frontier for gaming is to combine social media with gaming. Steam and the like have already taken us down this road. Rift has Facebook links built into its UI. Secret World will have Goggle functionality in game. Just like consoles changed gaming social media has and increasingly will.
I went with common meals - it does not mean those are the only choices. A person could start with dessert, have a salad, and go. There is a variety available - a complex selection. Even in the way the meals are prepared - how is the steak going to be cooked - how is it going to be seasoned - what side will there be? Even the baked potato - plain, sour cream and chives, cheese, brocolli, etc, etc, etc.
I used to go to Olive Garden... I did not order anything standard - I customized my selection, although the items were not listed on the menu in the way that I ordered them - they were available in the way I ordered them. Those options would not exist if I were to go a taco stand. The taco stand is very limited. It's meant for a quick grab of a meal, not unlike the hot dog cart, etc, etc.
Different people are looking for different things. In general, one used to be able to assume that those looking to play MMORPGs were looking for something. That has changed over the years as people have come into various restaurants so they could order off the taco stand menu...
...it's not considered a good thing by those that used to enjoy the genre for being what it was. The people that are more than happy to eat from the taco stand everywhere they go might appear happy with it - but in general, they're not the people that stay around in a MMORPG anyway - they move along to the next taco stand.
No doubt the developers invited all these folks to come play - no doubt as the years have progessed - they've designed and redesigned to attract them.
Does not change that some of us do not want to eat at taco stands...
Even going back to your example of Chess. Yes, somebody can go to the dollar store and pick up the game. They can go home and play it with their significant other, their parents, kids, friends, etc, etc. Just a little friendly game. But you also have local Chess clubs. Additional features/systems are in place. It is more complex. You have school tournaments, city tournaments, state tournaments, regional tournaments, national tournaments, international tournaments... each increasingly more complex because of the additional requirements/features/systems.
The MMO was on the far end of the spectrum in complexity for computer gaming... now, not so much.
They were virtual worlds - complex systems. Now they're little action game lobbies.
I find it odd that you point the simplicity of the rules for Chess, when it is considered a very complex game. Sure, there are only twenty first moves, but there are well over a thousand common openings. The manner in which you can move those sixteen pieces, where there are six different piece types - is a complex system.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
I'll just be repeating myself for the umpteenth time, but...if you insist.
I always see the debates on here between the two different groups. Those who have played MMORPG's from the beginning (UO/EQ...or even before this with Meridian 59 and other MUD's), and those post-WoW.
Those that started at the beginning were mainly those that played MUD's and pen & paper RPG's such as Rifts, D&D, etc. MMORPG's were a very small and niche community. Sub numbers were considered successful when in as low as the 150K range. However, the communites were pretty tight knit. Sure, there were some idiots, but most straightened up failry quickly because the community sat them straight. They would adjust accordingly or be blackballed off the server because they couldn't get groups/Guilds, etc. People were helpful and friendly. Most kept to names that fit with the world in which they were playing, and RPing was even MUCH larger than it is now (also brought on by the fact the large % of players again were from P & P games).
The worlds were open for exploration, quests were quests (Especially EQ Epic weapon quests) where they were LONG and took you to multiple places at times to complete. There was no world AH, very little instant travel, no stat boards, and as far as I personally could see from most...no rush to get to "end game" (A term that didn't even exist then). it was like escaping reality and living another life, in another world, in another time period. Even if only for a few hours a day, and it was a BLAST!
Now mind you I WILL say, even as an EQ player, that EQ DID usher in the beginning of easy-mode via the Planes of Power expansion. With it it introduced a hub to travel to multiple locations nearly instantly and shrank the world size significantly. Even with EQ's world being HUGE as it was. HOWEVER...
The drastic shift towards easy-mode, and the all around extinction of what made MMORPG's stand out as a genre all of it's own was the introduction of WoW. Yes, I played WoW....from release up until the Burning Crusade's expansion. At that point I had played EQ for 5 years and was ready to try something new for a bit. I will say, it was fun...hence I wouldn't of played it as long as I said I did. But over that time playing it, I could see an obvious push more and more towards dumbing it down to push the sub numbers. And with that push, could see the decline in the quality of the community...which is what lead me away from the game in the end...along with it getting seriously boring because of the lack of a challenge. Anyways, that is a little background.
MMORPG's were first created to be live action pen and paper style RPG's for players. They were all of the things stated in the first paragraph. THIS is why they had monthly subs. They took time, effort, and team work. It is what set them apart from console gaming.
MMORPG's now are super fast paced. You can cap in a month, sometimes less, then sit in a capital city spamming for raid groups and/or complaining there isn't enough content. Instances nearly dominate the worlds and instant travel is common...shrinking the world and making some areas useless or ghost regions void of nealry anyone. World AH's also shrink the world, making manual travel nearly pointless. Emphasis on stats seems to make a lot of players elitist psychopaths...or for some reason stuck up (Thinking they are better than other players), souring the communities.
Just WAY too much emphasis on, and a mentality of "GO GO GO! NOW NOW NOW!". This isn't what MMORPG's are suppose to be about. Again, it's why they had monthly subs...they took time. And again, this is what set them apart as a seperate genre from console gaming...where fast paced instant gratification was the design model from the beginning. Yes, I am aware things change...but MMO's are dying due to the sweeping changes taking place now, not changing them simply to be a better, upgraded version from the previous one. They are becoming console single player RPG's more and more, and less open worlds with teeming economies and communities that interact.
Of course though...I am sure this is (In my own speculation and opinion) a product of the difference in the times as well...
Then?: The internet was in it's infancy and most of us played EQ/UO on dial-up. MMORPG's were new too, so they were very crude (To today's standards). Again, most players were pen and paper types, so travel,quests, etc taking time didn't bother us much. patience was much more common.
Now?: We live in a rat race world full of instant this and instant that. Not to mention a massive technology boom. So, MMORPG's reflect that with the GO GO GO! NOW NOW NOW! mentality. Funny enough though, those that complain about people like me wanting it to shift more back towards more open world travel, WAY less dumbed down features (Give it challenge), longer quests that chain more, less instancing and instant travel, no world chat, and regional bazaars, etc are the same people (For the most part) that complain that they level too fast and have nothing to do at their beloved "end game" lol. Know why most post-WoW players don't want monthly subs? Because they don't want to pay a monthly fee to sit in their cpaital cities screaming their isn't enough to do for $15 a month!
I guess this is all in trying to say, YET AGAIN, that MMORPG's were a different genre from console games for a reason. And now they are nothing more than glorified RPG console games.
P.S. A response I see a lot, and even see in this thread..is "People don't have a lto fo time to devote to games liek this. They want to have fun with the time they do have." I can understand this...but um...then WHY aren't you playing console games? Where quick fun is the common goal? MMORPG's were meant to take time.
Another difference I guess between me and the larger majority fo the community. I find even the little accomplishments gratifying and fun (Gaining half a level, killing that tough mob, traversing a dangerous area unscaved)...where as most now need big shinies right away with as little effort put forth or they feel they have been slighted.
It's easy to get deep and complex mixed up, but there is a difference. Being deep means your game has some merit to it, but it doesn't have to be difficult to follow. The drive force of most MMOs should be the story (=deepness, meaning), and an MMO should aid the player, much like a storyteller, into its world through quests, what have you, a simple formula that has worked for games since the very beginning. It seems easy, but there are so many roads you can follow. A complex system is hard to understand. Just because something is hard to understand does not mean it is bad, but we're talking about a big group here. The MMO market is there for everyone and we can all agree that most people are dumb/do not care, therefor a ''complicated'' game will not do, at least not for the bigger crowd. The only way a system can get people to care, is by doing the actual work, and letting the players simply enjoy the adventure (=escapism). Which I honestly believe is not bad, because you are infact paying for the entertainment (or use Torrent, jerks). Sooner or later the player will realise where he/she's at and either love or hate the game for it. Take Minecraft for example: a brilliant, but very simple idea. An idea you can make thousands of different variations upon that keeps people busy. Much like Chess.
Since MMOs are a type of game people play a long time you can easily make it more complicated than other genres.
But a perfect MMO is simple when you start playing and get more and more complicated the further and more experience you get.
I think a MMO should be like chess. It is easy to learn the basics but it takes many years to master it perfectly. That way it wont turn away the noobs but still give the complexity a MMO should have.
I just don't see the modern gamer getting a game that takes a long time to even start playing, as not were uncommon in the 80s. But I also think that most MMOs makes the mistake of letting the endgame be as simple as the noob game (the first 20 or so levels). Players aren't stupid even if their attention span sometimes is low, if you add complexity as they play it will work fine.
To an extent, that is a great way of putting it. The increasing complexity would satisfy many that are looking for increased complexity.
You start off - you have access to basic systems. As you advance - you have access to systems with greater complexity. As you advance further - you have access to systems with even greater complexity.
Because you the complexity increases as you advance, even though the end systems might be very complex - you have been eased into them, so they will not be as complex as they would have been had you been introduced to them from the start.
Basically, if they were like most things - you learn to crawl before you learn to walk, to walk before you learn to run...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%