Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-04-2008 @ 10:52AM
Mimic said...
I disagree that coordinating a human team is more difficult than coordinating multiple characters from a single person. While coordinating 2/3/5 people is not an easy task by any means, a multi-boxer is coordinating 2/3/5 characters by themselves. Multi-boxing can make PVE much easier, especially from eliminating PuGs, but playing 5 characters simultaneously against 5 other human players is no easy task, even with the "skilled programming" you speak of. Learning to react to PVE mobs that have a set limited set of abilities and do not move when you engage them can be a fairly easy programming project, but trying to design and code a system for PVP is a completely different ball game. Players move and react to your abilities, which makes anticipation and coding so much harder that it's pretty much not worth it. While on a 5 [human] person team, at least each person is capable of adjusting to the opposing team. Coordination for a human team is merely speaking in vent, or (I hope not) typing in party chat.
Don't get me wrong, I play one character at a time, but I would almost prefer to play an arena match against a multi-boxer, unless this person is some sort of programming and multitasking god (go ahead and flame for wanting the easy match occasionally :P). The programming does give the 4 other characters a slight edge over regular PVE mobs, but it basically comes down to playing an arena match against one person and 4 improved AI PVE mobs.
With that said, I'm still on the fence about multi-boxing. The game was not designed to accommodate the practice, but it's in a geeks blood to think outside the "box" (haha) and use games/gadgets/etc for things other than their intended purpose.
Reply