ShadowMoka

Originally Posted by Test_Rat

I won't buy TW until there is a stalker version.

Untill then I am settling for staff, IF THEY INCREASE THE RADIUS OF EYE OF THE STORM.

Originally Posted by Stupid_Fanboy

Is that a picture of the funeral or an advertisement for all the new costume sets?

Originally Posted by Trickshooter

Also, is Desdemona wearing the Praetorian Vanessa DeVore mask there?

Originally Posted by Golden Girl

That's quite possible - although one of the zones that they're probably most likely to look at for a co-op revamp is Boomtown
But if they decided to destroy, say, Skyway City as a result of the Admiral Sutter TF, and turn it into a co-op zone, there there's no reason they couldn't create a mission arc where red side players set up the alliance bewteen the loyalists and the Sky Raiders, and then help them wreck the zone as the finale of the arc - completing the arc would then unlock the first new story contact in the revamped zone.
Even though the Sutter TF would mean that their loyalist and Sky Raider allies had been stopped and defeated, it'd still let Villain players feel that they'd manipulated 2 enemy groups into forming an alliance to do their work for them, and had caused some permanent damage to Paragon City.
To give a further evil boost, it could even be set up that the Villain player was intending to betray their allies anyway, once they'd served their purpose, which would mean that even the Heroes' victory in the Sutter TF would actually help the Villains.

Originally Posted by Dante

I think players who want to be more villainous are being poorly represented in this thread. Not every villain wants to rule the world or destroy it. Wanting more villainous content does not mean every arc has to have the possibility of devestating vast tracts of land or ruling a pile of rubble. Sometimes it's as simple as the way other villains address you or getting away with a big pile of cash.

Look at Dean McArthur and Leonard's arcs. In both of them you are the big shot, dangerous person who gets to be nice or nasty to them. They are your lackeys, doing what you tell them to do. Plus you get to finish Leonard's arc with a big sack of cash. Equally, as has been said earlier in the thread, after you finish a patron arc, the patron effectively concedes that you are their equal (most times) and decides not to cross you. Even Recluse agrees not to try and abuse your power after you prove how much of a badass you are to him.

Villains are about gaining power. But a lot of the time, the arcs we have simply cast us as lackeys and mercenaries, never wanting to gain much for ourselves other than getting paid. Things are improving though. Tips are an excellent source of villainy and thing such as making the Mortimer Kal introduction into a tip mission was a stroke of genius. So kudos for those, we need more of them please!

But co-op content is a nightmare. Co-op stuff always seems to be heroic in nature, mostly because there seems to be this fear that if there was a co-op task that required heroes to be less than whiter than white, no-one would play it. So it's always the villains that have to put their personal issues aside and play pretend hero. The opening to Redside New DA even makes a joke about it! Although I appreciate that co-op content is a cost saving measure, it's been used too often over the past ten issues to the point where if I see the term 'co-op', I immediately want to go and play something else.

The writers have proven that they're capable of this. So it frustrates me no end when I see the cheap and easy way being taken every single time and just expecting villains to like it or lump it.

Originally Posted by Redoptic

You..

Originally Posted by Egos_Shadow

You can roleplay whatever you want, but the point where you start expecting the game mechanics to support totally arbitrary characterization is the point where you become incorrect. You're not going to be allowed to press the button. If you feel that's out of character for you, don't play any arc where the button is within arm's reach. Thus is happiness maintained.

But expecting other people to respect your desire to destroy the world - with the expectation of actually getting to do it! - is incorrect, in the same way that showing up to a card game and demanding to burn the deck is invalid. You can't burn the deck. The rest of us are still playing with it. Complaining about this fact is incorrect.

Originally Posted by Haetron

Every game has rules. Breaking those rules is effectively "playing wrong".

In CoV, the setting is what provides the rules. Basically, every player villain starts out fairly small time, and ultimately, gets a small taste of possible epic villainy, but can never follow through, because doing so would break the game experience. Nothing in CoV supports the idea of the player ever being an immortal god king that could destroy the universe then escape safely to their home dimension. (Yes, Im taking into account Praetorians, and even they never have the power to pull this off.)

It's like complaining in a baseball game that you can't just hit the ball wherever and the other team has to go make a play on it regardless of where it lands. (IE, a foul ball) Lines and rules exist in all games for a reason. Choosing to ignore those things then complain the game doesn't turn out the way you expect is just folly, and effectively, yes, playing the game wrong.

Originally Posted by Lothic

But wait... I thought the Devs hated the redside...

Originally Posted by TwoHeadedBoy

Hey, can you blame me for wanting to like my Peacebringer?

Originally Posted by Lothic

Trying to claim players are "playing wrong" because the game won't let them play the way they want is absolutely ridiculous.