Johnny_Velocity

Is that anything like the stubbornness and false sense of entitlement of the rabid unique name advocates? Yes, I think it is.

Since those terms can be applied to either side of any internet argument, you are being non-unique. Be moar creative, plz.

Merry Christmas!

IIRC, the "Unknown" appears when there are too few people on the server to register a blip. I remember that being explained a loooong time ago. You will occasionally see it on the live servers right after the servers are restored from an outage.

Regarding thematic coherence, don't forget the sometimes-overlooked fire elemental shield costume option for SD.

I'm strongly considering FM/SD as my encore to my Elm/SD that just dinged 50. Shield is a great set. I've spent a lot of time with FA on a Brute, and while that journey was fun (DM/FA), I'll probably not repeat FA again. It's different, but squishy/unforgiving. I prefer more fire-and-forget sets these days so I can focus on offense. (On the other hand, if FA wasn't somewhat squishy, you'd never get to use Rise of the Phoenix, one of the coolest powers in the game...).

Actually, that was my way off throwing out another idea.

Marietta here, btw.

A lower merit-cost truly random roll, including randomizing the level of the recipe? I'm for it.

In my opinion, holding a unique name on a server not only has zero value, it has negative value in that it can serve as a barrier to people who might want to join in the fun and support my MMO of choice. (But then, other people place a different value on unique names. They call me uncreative; I think them selfish. But it boils down to what you value about the game.)

I also think that what my character is named is more valuable to me than what names you have to see on other avatars is to you.

I further hold the opinion that encountering similarly named avatars is currently very rare in this game. Under a non-unique naming situation, I think seeing avatars with the same name would be similarly rare, and very little of an issue.

To the extent duplicate naming is an issue and might "confuse" people who are otherwise seemingly intelligent enough to type and use computers, I think that using the currently existing name-coloring system (check your options tab if you haven't enabled it) is one way to alleviate any such confusion and allow said intelligent people to continue to communicate effectively.

But again, these are merely my opinions, and I am well aware that there are some vocal advocates of the opposite position. Hopefully, if this idea is considered, market research of some other type than polling the forums or a room at Hero Con would be used to determine which is in the game's best interest.

Just wanted to offer my personal thanks. Yes, I tossed in extra (I had two very lucky reward rolls in the past few days). This influx of prestige got me past a very boring hump - upgrading from the startup control room/generator to a proper control room and separate generator room. For a 2-man SG (for about a score of alts) this was a really big deal. Now our next upgrade can be for real functionality (TP room)!

Thanks Fulmens!

I wholeheartedly agree with the OP's request for non-unique naming. I, too, am disappointed with the crowd's reaction. However, I hope the devs realize that the people who go to Hero-Con are not exactly a cross-section of the player population.

For me, nothing breaks immersion more than not being able to name your character what you desire. Imagine playing an RPG with a DM who will only let you keep your name if you rolled a 20 on a d20 roll. How long would you stay with that GM? Sticking with an archaic software limitation seems just as arbitrary, even if the limitation served a purpose at one point.

IMO, global naming and UI advances have matured this game past the need for unique naming, as has the simple passage of time. I think the UI could be advanced a little more to accommodate this feature and also be aesthetically pleasing.

Disagreeing with the author by calling him ignorant and a jerk, etc. IS an attack. Either you did not bother to check what I was quoting, or you have a far different definition of the word "attack" than I do.

That seems like an attack as well, because that goes after the person and does not address the person's points. You see the difference?

Hopefully, you are just having a bad day.

I realize that, among other things that happened in the buyout, NCSoft "cut out the middle man." But they had to purchase the IP and license the engine - it other words, it cost them some money. Amortized over the next x number of years, that sum took up some of the extra you are talking about.

On the Cryptic side, you are assuming Microsoft and Marvel contributed nothing? That Cryptic took out no loans or took on no new investors? That Cryptic is headed by financial geniuses that were basically fleecing NCSoft before NCSoft wisely bought them out?

You further assume that a 100,000 subscriber game can self expand with relative ease? If that is the case, why isn't CoX the standard NCSoft business model, rather than the repeated trying-for-WoW-numbers approach that they they seem to take?

Best case, NCSoft is forgoing profit to produce GR. If the end result after GR is the same steady-state subscription numbers, I wouldn't be pleased as an investor. (I wouldn't give a flip as a player, and I'd be thrilled that the game lived longer and expanded, but that's a different issue.)

You are welcome to hold any opinion you like. I just have a different one. I think "reinvesting in a franchise" carries a financial risk If the desired results are not realized, NCSoft's track record shows they will cut bait at "some point." I don't think any reasonable person would disagree with that basic assessment. And UnSub merely stated that he thinks that "some point" is sooner rather than later. It's perfectly fine to think that the "some point" isn't that close yet.

I was under the impression that there was a relatively recent and significant ramp-up of of 30 or so professional staff. I'd hardly call that a pittance. But perhaps my information is wrong. It's possible. But I think my opinion is closer to the truth than yours.

If you think NCSoft can produce an expansion at roughly the same cost as using Cryptic as a development studio and letting them produce "issue" updates, while at the same time continuing to produce "issue" updates...well, I just don't find that believable.

Besides, our developers have repeatedly referenced the fact that NCSoft is reinvesting in the franchise. I think that more than implies additional money being spent.

Y'know, I don't remember any of the rah-rah crowd complaining about this same author when he blew the whistle on Cryptic trying to recruit CoX SG leaders into CO beta. (Which, as we all know, is the greatest sin of all time, next to being Jack Emmert hizownself. ::rollseyes:: )

He calls it as he sees it, and IMO he got more right than wrong. He certainly got a response, which speaks volumes.

Instead of attacking the author, your energy might be better spent helping to shape the GR expansion. Even if it isn't as financially important as UnSub thinks, its probably the best opportunity for growth we will see for a while.

And this, more than anything else, argues for the fact that something (maybe GR) needs to increase revenue somehow. I presume those people aren't volunteers. They draw salaries and need expensive things like computers in order to be productive.

If you listen to the conference calls with investors that are released in conjunction with the quarterly financials, it is pretty clear why they pulled those numbers. The chief concern of investors at that time was whether Aion, then in Korean launch, was going to leach subscribers from the two Lineage games - in other words, investors were concerned that the company would have fewer net additional subscribers than forecast. As you said, it had nothing whatsoever to do with CoX.

I personally thought it was a disservice to investors at the time. However, it does put them more in line with the industry norm. Very few companies give out real numbers.

The best someone could manage at this point is to average out dollars spent per subscriber during the period they did release numbers, and come up with a subscriber equivalent based on today's revenue stream. It's a bit more complicated than that since you'd have to account for a slightly different revenue model (more costume packs now) and you would have to adjust for a wildly fluctuating S. Korean won rate (and basically ignore the fact that Euros and pounds contribute as well as US dollars, since the sales aren't broken down within those regions).

Still, this quarter's results aren't encouraging, even considering that the won was getting stronger. Sales are, unfortunately, down. This in the first (partial) quarter with direct superhero competition. Down, but not disastrously down.