Another thing I'm reminded of is Greg Egan's Permutation City and the science-fiction question of the rights of downloaded intelligences. It's a seductive, easily believable idea: some time in the future we think we'll understand brains well enough to copy a living human's mind into a computer such that the computer will then be able to act like the human. What, if any, rights does such an entity have? Is it murder to turn off the computer? Is it murder to erase the hard drive? Note that those last two aren't the same question, even though the equivalent questions for biological humans do appear to be the same. Can a downloaded intelligence own property? If I'm married, and am downloaded, then afterwards who is married to whom?

Virtual property, and other complicated social issues relating to the rights status of avatars, is by no means new. It's just that the recent popularity of MMORPGs has made the issues interesting to enough people that now they're a big deal. For something a bit more historical you might want to read the classic article A Rape in Cyberspace, which has been floating around on the Net for a while now. That linked version is a book chapter on the author's Web site and dated 1998, but the Village Voice article (basically the same content) is from 1993. Worth mentioning that Julian Dibbell wrote that, and he's still saying interesting things about these issue; Grimmelmann cites him as "my hero of the conference".

Down near the bottom of the Grimmelmann article there's a sentence which I think opens another whole can of worms, although he takes it in a different direction: "Perhaps you require my avatar to sign a licensing contract that says I'll make myself no more than five copies for personal use -- but I go off and make ten. This time, it's the software itself doing the evading." What are the consequences of contracts signed in game by avatars? Before you say they're valid, consider the game-like aspects of the virtual world. Playing the part of a lying cheating and murderous rogue is standard operating procedure in many adventure games. If players are allowed to kill each other, then we shouldn't be putting disproportionate (and, especially, out-of-game) consequences on violation of in-game contracts.

It all comes down to this. Lord of the Rings Online is the new kid on the block and the MMO that knocked World of Warcraft out of this tournament while Guild Wars returns to the finals after beating the aforementioned World of Warcraft last year. Lord of the Rings Online has quickly established itself as as a top fantasy MMO while Guild Wars continues to be hugely successful without charging a monthly fee. Both games will likely be among the best in the fantasy genre for years to come, but only one can win this tournament and be named MMORPG of the Year for 2007. Without question, this was the closest match that Guild Wars has been in yet.

Guild Wars Free game play after buying the game. Winner of the first MMORPG Showdown. GameOgre.com's Online Game of the Year for 2006. Primarily instanced content. Two successful expansion/sequels. Strong PvP focus.

Heroes are like a little party add-on that everyone can get with the Nightfall campaign. Lots and lots of rare and unique weapons, staffs, sheilds etc. Lots of quest and a solid storyline for each campaign. Also has a great lore. Overall- 9.5/10 Rating: 10 Author: Vandin

Rating: 8 Author: miclee Comment: Just great and true gameplay. The game has very few flaws and looks amazing on DX10 set to max graphics. Gameplay could be improved in some places, like where you can't hit an enemy sometimes. Based on an original series, this game is not a letdown at all. Portrays a great story through Middle-Earth, and is exciting. When I first played it, I was disappointed at the bad graphics because I forgot to set them to max. When I set the graphics to max, I was just amazed and hooked on this game. Final score: 8.4/10 Rating: 10 Author: chopster

This was the match that almost happened in the finals last year, but World of Warcraft barely beat Eve Online in the semi-finals after a recount in voting. Guild Wars then went on to beat World of Warcraft in the final match last year and has dominated every match so far this year. Eve Online stood the best chance of providing stiff competition to Guild Wars since both games have been listed very high on GameOgre's Top MMORPG List and both usually receive good reviews from Review Members. Very few major MMOs are able to maintain a review score of 8/10 or more, but both Guild Wars and Eve Online are currently accomplishing that feat. Other than being two of the best MMORPGs today though, Guild Wars and Eve Online have very little in common with each other. Guild Wars is a fantasy MMO that is very easy-to-learn and does not charge a monthly subscription.

This semi-finals match was very interesting because both games are well-made MMORPGs with great graphics and solid gameplay that were released in 2007. The most obvious difference between the two games is that Sword of the New World can be played for free while Lord of the Rings Online requires a monthly subscription. In fact, each game is currently ranked #2 in their respective category (F2P and P2P) on the Top MMORPG List. Another big difference is the fact that Lord of The Rings Online is based on a world-wide fantasy franchise while Sword of the New World is not.

Players can control up to 3 characters at once. Every player has his or her own family. All the characters of a player are in that family and they all share the same last name. Soloing is a major factor in the game due to the MCC (multiple character control) system. Different combat stances offer different skills and equipment possibilities. Can use experience cards to level up characters. Various forms of PvP such as family vs. family duels, city vs. city PvP wars, and arena style PvP.