Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mozilla Releases HTML5 MMO BrowserQuest

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the you-got-your-game-in-my-interwebs dept.

Mozilla 138

New submitter rasmuswikman sends this quote from an announcement at hacks.mozilla.org: "BrowserQuest is a tribute to classic video-games with a multiplayer twist. You play as a young warrior driven by the thrill of adventure. No princess to save here, just a dangerous world filled with treasures to discover. And it's all done in glorious HTML5 and JavaScript. Even better, it's open-source, so be sure to check out the source code on GitHub!"

cancel ×

138 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Visual slashdotting. (4, Funny)

suso (153703) | more than 2 years ago | (#39488895)

I'm waiting to see thousands of new players enter the arena in real time. Should be interesting.

Re:Visual slashdotting. (1)

suso (153703) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489153)

Eh, disappointing turnout.

Re:Visual slashdotting. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39490273)

Eh, disappointing turnout.

I heard from a GM that there are several servers.

Re:Visual slashdotting. (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489473)

Is running VERY slowly with 74 players on the server I ended up at ... and Firefox was complaining about scripts not responding.
Is pretty cool demo, but need more polishing.

Hopefully... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39488939)

Hopefully this will be the first open source game not to suck. Here goes...

Re:Hopefully... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489041)

Haha riiiiight. Open sores turds don't know how to make good games. If they did they'd have a job with a game studio not living in mommy and daddy's basement reeking of B.O. like Jabba The Hutt.

Re:Hopefully... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39490837)

And yet we're supposed to believe that you have a life? Tee. Hee.

Re:Hopefully... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39492201)

And yet we're supposed to believe that you don't suck lots of nigger dicks? Tee. Hee.

Can anyone connect? (2)

iONiUM (530420) | more than 2 years ago | (#39488979)

I cannot. Just says "Connecting to Server.."

Is it slashdotted?

Re:Can anyone connect? (4, Interesting)

suso (153703) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489047)

You'll eventually get in. There seem to be different realms because I have two browsers open with different profiles and I see different players in each environment. But they seem to balance the players across the realms pretty well because the player count is close to the same in each one.

Re:Can anyone connect? (2)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489069)

It needs WebSockets, make sure your browser supports them [wikipedia.org] . I couldn't get it to work from my workplace, I assumed WebSockets don't support proxies or something.

Re:Can anyone connect? (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489119)

Addendum: Though, probably just slashdotted.

Re:Can anyone connect? (2)

Sez Zero (586611) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489195)

Their status page is located here: http://browserquest.mozilla.org/status/ [mozilla.org]

It shows population, distribution of players.

Re:Can anyone connect? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489895)

This is what I see:

BrowserQuest Dashboard
Total players:

Literally. That's it.

Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39488981)

It's a Zelda rip-off, and actually one of my dreams just became true (Zelda multi-player? wow!)

Thanks Mozilla :)

Re:Zelda rip-off (3, Funny)

HBI (604924) | more than 2 years ago | (#39488999)

There's no such thing as a Zelda rip-off. Zelda itself was a rip-off.

Now get off my lawn.

Re:Zelda rip-off (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489095)

There's no such thing as a Zelda rip-off. Zelda itself was a rip-off.

Now get off my lawn.

You clearly have no clue about the history and impact of a game like Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past

Having played it for hours, I can instantly recognize the graphic tiles. At the very least, *those* should have been changed..

I like it a lot, just it would be nice to see some credit to Myamoto..

Even so, I strongly advise you to get a life instead of trolling serious discussion on such a nice HTML5 game..

Re:Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489179)

Having played it for hours, I can instantly recognize the graphic tiles. At the very least, *those* should have been changed..

Or maybe you can't, as they claim to have made all the graphics themselves.

Re:Zelda rip-off (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489235)

There's no such thing as a Zelda rip-off. Zelda itself was a rip-off.

Now get off my lawn.

You clearly have no clue about the history and impact of a game like Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past

Eh, I'd say he does. Consider the Ultima series, for example.

Now get off my lawn.

Re:Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489511)

The graphics are very similar to Zelda ALTTP; you unqualified evolutionary leavings keep trying to hijack topic from "BrowserQuest is a rip-off of Zelda ALTTP" to "Zelda ALTTP is a rip-off of something older": that was not the point.

My point is that the rocks and grass and cliffs are very similar and there is no mention to prior art that could have *inspired*, that's it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Legend_of_Zelda_a_Link_to_the_Past_Screen02.png

Now get off my lawn.

Re:Zelda rip-off (1)

chispito (1870390) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489921)

Sorry, but you are not legally (or, some would say, morally) obligated to cite inspiration.

Re:Zelda rip-off (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491167)

you are not legally (or, some would say, morally) obligated to cite inspiration.

There are in fact laws requiring citation of sources. On the U.S. copyright registration form, for example, the author has to declare any "Material excluded from this claim (Material previously registered, previously published, or not owned by this claimant)". Trademark law likewise has a concept of "reverse passing off". Foreign trade law has country of origin labeling requirements.

Re:Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39492513)

oh who gives a crap.

If you want to bitch about zelda ripoffs, bitch about the one that shamelessly outright stole the zelda graphics before modifying them (I forget what it's called, suffice it to say I think it's been wiped form the net,) oh but here's yet another one: http://www.solarus-engine.org/

Likewise there are pokemon ripoffs out there too. See http://www.monstermmorpg.com

Re:Zelda rip-off (1)

Requiem18th (742389) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490947)

I know the ZLTTP tiles to heart and I can absolutely say these aren't the original tiles. I absolutely agree with the "inspiration" part, the "look&feel" is similar, but the tiles are original artwork.

Re:Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491051)

Yep, you nailed it. That's what I meant (original AC here).

Having played the former Ultimas as well, I didn't get any "looks like Ultima" balloon when looking at it

Re:Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489523)

Ultima? I can't think of one that was anything like the original Zelda.

Re:Zelda rip-off (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490065)

The previous AC was talking about the third Zelda in the series.

Re:Zelda rip-off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491963)

You would have loved Graal back in the day. It was multi-player link to the past with mounts and all sorts of fun. The scariest thing was getting in and out of the bank. Mad camping was going on there.

Nice job on the https link (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489011)

Nice job linking with https to hacks.mozilla.org.

Firefox immediately starts whining about it.

Glorious Javascript (-1, Offtopic)

Crasoose (1621969) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489061)

I don't know how related Javascript is to Java but the last Java game I played was Minecraft and the performance wasn't so glorious.

Re:Glorious Javascript (3, Insightful)

dccase (56453) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489089)

Four of the letters in their names are the same.
That's about it.

Re:Glorious Javascript (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489099)

I don't know how related Javascript is to Java

No relationship whatsoever beyond an idea to jump on the Java-bandwagon dreamed up by a marketer.

Re:Glorious Javascript (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489105)

I don't know how related Javascript is to Java.

Who the fuck let you in here?

Re:Glorious Javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489181)

"Slashdot: News for Programmers" Right?

Re:Glorious Javascript (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489115)

I don't know how related Javascript is to Java but..

They are not related at all. The only similarity is that the performance of Javascript is not good either.

Re:Glorious Javascript (4, Funny)

OakDragon (885217) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489231)

I don't know how related Javascript is to Java but the last Java game I played was Minecraft and the performance wasn't so glorious.

Prepare for an assault on two different borders! ;)

Re:Glorious Javascript (5, Funny)

IAmGarethAdams (990037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489243)

They're about as similar as a Car and a Carpet

Re:Glorious Javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489431)

Why would anyone want a pet car? Normal people keep fuzzy pets that have teeth and claws and poop in your yard.

Re:Glorious Javascript (4, Funny)

IAmGarethAdams (990037) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489765)

Ok then, they're about as similar as a Hamster and a Ham

Re:Glorious Javascript (2)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489823)

They both taste good when fried and chopped up in an omelet ?

Re:Glorious Javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489959)

Ugh... keep your ham away from my eggs, you disgusting freak.

Re:Glorious Javascript (1)

kungfugleek (1314949) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489571)

Especially if the carpet is cut out to look kind of like a car.

Re:Glorious Javascript (1)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489641)

And then sold to you in that shape by a salesman who is certain it's the right shape for your square room.

Re:Glorious Javascript (3, Funny)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489723)

Especially when it is carpet that uses dynamic variants and prototyping instead of strongly typed references and class based inheritance... am I doing this analogy thing right?

Re:Glorious Javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491481)

Difference being that you wouldn't lick a Car.

Re:Glorious Javascript (1)

dccase (56453) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491751)

A car can have a carpet. They are less related than that.

Played it just before /. entry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489129)

I played it just before it arrived on /. I wanted to try it in Safari as well, but couldn't understand why it was suddenly so slow. "Seems like it's slashdotted or something."

Mozilla shouldnt waste resources (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489139)

How about Mozilla focus their resources on projects more to their core and worthwhile. I couldnt care enough to open this link I just dont care. However perhaps firefox market share wont slide so much if I dont know... maybe they android version of firefox wasn't a slow resource hog.

Plenty of other products needing a bit of love, Thunderbird has "indexed search which is useless, try Outlook search, and then try Thunderbird you quickly see how slow, and pathetic it is.

Re:Mozilla shouldnt waste resources (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489527)

How about Mozilla focus their resources on projects more to their core and worthwhile.

Why bother focusing on pointless browsers and mail clients when cancer is still uncured, killing thousands? Seems awfully selfish and inconsiderate to piss away ones time with these pointless endeavors when we still have AIDS, cancer, and other diseases. Who knows? Perhaps we could have had a cure for one or more of these if open-source efforts had been directed toward medical research.

Of course this would require you to actually think about someone other than yourselves.

AC shouldn't waste resources (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491235)

Why bother typing that message when cancer is still uncured, killing thousands? Seems awfully selfish and inconsiderate to piss away ones time with these pointless comments when we still have AIDS, cancer, and other diseases. Who knows? Perhaps we could have had a cure for one or more of these if your time taken to type that had been directed towards doing medical research.

Of course this would require you to actually think about someone other than yourself.

Re:Mozilla shouldnt waste resources (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489703)

How about Mozilla focus their resources on projects more to their core and worthwhile.

Mozilla is kind of like Congress. It's nice to know they're spending time specifying a National Hamster Breed or color for the Senate carpet instead of spending time screwing up important stuff. When Firefox and Thunderbird got Good Enough (TM), programmers had to justify their jobs, so tons of terrible features got shoved down our throats with no option to disable some of them. Now Firefox is bloated like Mozilla (Seamonkey) was.

Gotta love all the references. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489229)

Portal, Matrix, Mario, they've done it like a boss too!

This was a test (1)

crawly (890914) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489281)

Mozilla's way of massively load-testing their servers. Now damn it let me play!

WebSocket (1)

JcMorin (930466) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489341)

In my opinion WebSocket is the real technology we are waiting for building stuff on the internet that make people collaboration or play together. Having the ability of the server to push data to the client without having to get a pooling every x seconds or so is a big plus. This game give us a great example of simple communication using WebSocket, too bad it not yet available on all major browser (IE).

Re:WebSocket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489521)

By my last count, WebSocket was just missing from the one major browser you mentioned. Really, if games like BrowserQuest work on Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, Safari Mobile and Firefox for Android that's close enough for me

Re:WebSocket (2)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489589)

IE 10 PP5 implements the websockets RFC.

IE 10 requires Windows 7 (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491217)

But then most IE users who bought their PC before the fourth quarter of 2009 are left out because IE 10 requires Windows 7. So one either has to upgrade to Windows 7 or switch to Firefox or Chrome. The latter is cheaper, but which happens more often?

Re:IE 10 requires Windows 7 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491575)

At this point, why would anyone use IE unless they had it forced upon them? I upgraded to Windows 7 a few months ago. The first thing I did before anything else was install Chrome.

Re:WebSocket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489671)

/Itoo bad it not yet available on all major browser (IE)./I
that's not a bug, it's a feature.

Re:WebSocket (1)

lennier (44736) | more than 2 years ago | (#39492099)

In my opinion WebSocket is the real technology we are waiting for building stuff on the internet that make people collaboration or play together. Having the ability of the server to push data to the client without having to get a pooling every x seconds or so is a big plus.

So basically, we've moved boldly forward from the bad old 1970s client-server days of raw TCP over IP, to the glorious new Web 3.0 days of TCP over HTTP over JavaScript over HTML over HTTP over TCP over IP. That's a.... win?

Not a bad proof of concept, but... (1)

Millennium (2451) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489405)

Interesting use of Web technologies. But as a practical matter, isn't storing user progress data on the client side a really bad idea from an anti-cheating standpoint? How long until someone releases an editor?

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489563)

There's a guy running around with a nyancat avatar already.

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489759)

There are various suits you can get off monsters... one of them I got was a temporary fox suit that made you extra dodgy I think.

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489915)

I found the foxy one too (and only that one after exploring every place etc.), but is was temporary, that guy stayed like that all the time.

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (1)

thereitis (2355426) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491557)

The nyan was an NPC. You can find this in the world_server.json:

"nyan","28357"

Also:

"rick","33544"

Not sure what the number means yet, but I'm going to find out!

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489665)

Interesting use of Web technologies. But as a practical matter, isn't storing user progress data on the client side a really bad idea from an anti-cheating standpoint?

Not necessarily.

Storing it on the client and sending it back from the client to the server and having the server trust the client is a bad idea from that standpoint, but just storing it on the client isn't, as long as it is also stored on the server and the server doesn't get it from the client. The description isn't clear on the exact role of the client-side store in this regard: if its kept on the client just so the client never has to round-trip to the server to get it, only getting push updates as needed, there's no problem, its just a performance optimization.

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489797)

A simple hurdle for those wanting to hack... the client could send the server a hash of the local data, and compare it to the server hash to detect "cheating." Of course, you'd have to send the hole binary blob up to the server to do it so the client couldn't just fake the hash. On second thought, it sounds like a PITA. Just let them hack saves for a tech demo.

No, it isn't (digital signatures FTW) (1)

F69631 (2421974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490045)

It's possible to use the client for data storage but sign and/or encrypt all the data so that you know the client hasn't modified it.

This approach has actually been gaining momentum lately. For example, everyone knows that cookies shouldn't be used for storing important data (such as whether the client has logged in to a web service and what his user id is) so the traditional method is to store session data on the server and just store the session id in the cookie. However, play! [playframework.org] (a framework that finally makes java web development tolerable) aims for more stateless architecture and stores all the session data on the client and just uses digital signature to make sure that the data client sends to server hasn't been tampered with.

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491261)

Chrome developer tools allows you to manipulate the Local Storage. I did this and unlocked all achievements but you can also change your weapon, armor, etc.

Re:Not a bad proof of concept, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491749)

It's just to show off HTML5. It's such a trivial game there's no point cheating. No point in anyone caring about anyone else cheating either.

Cute, but a demo (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489429)

I beat the final boss and got 17 out 20 achievements in about 15 minutes. I wasn't going to stick around to take 5000 damage or find the two hidden achievements.

Re:Cute, but a demo (1)

timothyb89 (1259272) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490629)

They only took about 10 minutes for me to find, and both are (spoiler-ish) fairly blatant meme references like many of the other things in the game. I'd love to see this developed more as it seems to run pretty well and could have some real potential. I've half-assed some JS RPGs myself and its always nice to see it being done "right" and with a playable final product.

Re:Cute, but a demo (2)

thereitis (2355426) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491511)

Check out the source code. Sounds like you need to find a "Rick" NPC character to talk to: if(npc.kind === Types.Entities.RICK) {
this.tryUnlockingAchievement("RICKROLLD");
}

Ironic. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489435)

BrowserQuest: The quest for a better browser. (Here's a hint, it's not ConstantUpdateFox)

Re:Ironic. (1)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491141)

BrowserQuest 2: The Search for More Money

the famous last words... (1)

sick_soul (794596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489593)

When you start to play, your browser opens up a WebSocket connection to one of several load-balanced game servers.

I guess they are all VIC-20s then, given how fast they got slashdotted.

Re:the famous last words... (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489853)

They're running NodeJS.

NodeJS: letting everyone write their own servers in Javascript like that's a good idea since whenever the hell it came out.

Server Load (1)

Drago3711 (1415041) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489595)

You can also look at their servers as they load balance: http://browserquest.mozilla.org/status/ [mozilla.org]

Re:Server Load (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489771)

Oh geez, even /that/ appears to be broken.

Mystery Achievement (1)

bobaferret (513897) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489637)

Does any one know what the 'Mystery Achievement' is? I've got 19/20...

Re:Mystery Achievement (1)

bobaferret (513897) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489697)

don't answer that....

Re:Mystery Achievement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489873)

There's a maze of caves off on the right hand side of the map somewhere, try exploring them...

Re:Mystery Achievement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39490107)

Go to the cave north of the castle that's a maze.

isn't stuff like this (2)

sdnoob (917382) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489647)

supposed to be posted early in the morning, instead of at the end of the work day?

Built on bleeding edge technology (4, Funny)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489801)

Threads, networking, sound, graphics...
What next?

Maybe someday, web developers will be on par with applications developers from the 70s!

Re:Built on bleeding edge technology (2)

Shadowhawk (30195) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490139)

I know I'm feeding the troll here, but what application developers has access to threads (or sound or graphics even) in the 70s? First reference to threads I can find is SunOS 4.x, which came out in 82. The 80s is also when some sounds and graphics became available on many computers (Commodore Vic-20, Atari 2600, IBM PC, Apple II, etc). There might have been specialty computers that had those features, but nothing available for the average application developer in the 70s.

Re:Built on bleeding edge technology (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490713)

UNIX had multitasking since the 60s or 70s.
Granted, that's not exactly threads, but the difference is sufficiently small for it to matter.

My original statement didn't mean to be accurate anyway.

Re:Built on bleeding edge technology (1)

dzfoo (772245) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490717)

You know that application developer does not necessarily mean "PC" or "microcomputer" developer, right?

Re:Built on bleeding edge technology (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490959)

All threads are essentially are lightweight processes (some times they are even called LWPs). What a thread exactly is depends upon the implementation, sometimes it is shared memory, some times it is not, etc. Basically most operating systems before the 70's implemented processes that very much looked like what we'd call threads today.

Re:Built on bleeding edge technology (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491377)

It's bullshit like this that drove me (a former Netscape developer from the 90s) away from Firefox and over to Chrome. Instead of focusing on stupid bullshit like this, they should be improving their browser's stability and memory management.

war is ta unit test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39489871)

Where is the unit test? How can they push out code and have no unit tests?

Does it have... (2)

jonadab (583620) | more than 2 years ago | (#39489997)

Does it have a cheap plastic imitation of the Amulet of Yendor? I'm not interested if it doesn't have a cheap plastic imitation Amulet.

turtles all the way down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39490131)

Great. Now I can get a virus inside the game inside the operating system inside the sandbox inside my browser.

When we finish bootstrapping everything again, can I have control of my desktop and the extra CPU cycles back?

Really -- I don't need anyone with the ability to take out a banner ad to be able to fork bomb my browser.

Seriously, browser apps are great. But I don't want every fuckwit advertiser on the net running sites that will crash when I delete their local storage, rewrite the browser to deny them a canvas or deny them 3d processing.

In fact -- I don't even want my browser using webgl. Ever.

But can I please, use your website without it?

Re:turtles all the way down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39490527)

No. [mozilla.org]

NoScript (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 2 years ago | (#39490783)

Noscript for Firefox will provide you the necessary protection against any unwanted scripting (be it canvas, webgl, or whatever) from any non-white-listed website.
Alternatively, AdBlock will block interactive content from blacklisted providers (most ad servers).

With both, you get a nice clean Web 1.0. And activate the fun Javascript+DOM+CSS+HTML5+WebGL+Audio+LocalStore+... only for the sites you trust

Won in about 30 minutes (1)

n1ywb (555767) | more than 2 years ago | (#39491139)

Well that was kind of fun for about 30 minutes, by then I'd gotten the Ultimate Sword and the Golden Armor and I demolished the Skeleton King and then there wasn't much point to keep playing.

Sheesh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491371)

Wow. One click auto-attacking rats on the very first screen (in a town, no less), and achievements that pop up every other second... SIGN ME..... RightTheFuckOut.

Q: How do I kill other players? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491451)

This fails as a MMOG. There doesn't seem to be a way to kill the other players. All you can do is pick up easter eggs.

chromium crasher (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491551)

stupid game. one of the rare sites that causes chromium to crash

Impressive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39491471)

This puts the horrible CNC Alliances to shame. That game can break a 7990 and a dual 6-core Xeon with hyperthreading

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?