Texarkana

Originally Posted by EmperorSteele

Generally, the "timeline" follows the leveling progression. However, given that the Devs keep giving us lower level content that reflects "current" events, it's really hard to make an accurate summation.

For instance, the Admiral Sutter TF is level 20-40. That's a pretty wide range. It ALSO takes place "during" the I-trials, where the level 50 folk are taking down the BAF, Lambda complex, etc (leaving Primal Earth's defense in the hands of the level 20-40 folks). At the "same time", the Praetorian characters are either helping the Resistance or the Loyalists, but there's no sign of Cole's invasion or the Primal's attacks.

Also, Galaxy City is obviously an established area with a history and was "just" destroyed. However, a character will start there, go on the road to 50, and let's assume they're not power-leveled: Prometheus will refer to it as a "recent" event, even though it's been 50 levels and several months to several YEARS based on one's own personal cannon. This "recent" event takes place canonically before statesplate's death, even though everyone in the world now acts like he's dead. But then you do the SSAs and he's alive... until he dies. Which is... before? After? The level 50 arcs.



In other words, don't worry about it too much, it's a mess XD

As for the new stuff:

BAF
Lambda
Keyes
Underground
TPN
MoM
DA Arcs
DD trial
Magistrium

Originally Posted by BadWolf

I don't necessarily need this specific event to keep going, but I want something that had the things I loved about this event. Specifically:

• Very little wait time once queued. I liked the fact that it was four people, so you could just queue, maybe run a mission or two while you waited, and then go.
• Open to lots of levels. The thing I hate about DFB, otherwise a great "pick-up" event, is that once you get past about level 10 you never get to use any of the shiny new powers you get.
• Not too long. I don't really want to deal with the commitment required for a TF; trials are nice, quick, and brief.
• Good rewards. I don't need to powerlevel, but the fact that I could
• usually log in a level 20 character, run one or two BBs, and pick up a level was a nice way of getting some characters that I play infrequently into their SOs.

So if the Devs could keep this in mind while designing non-Summer trials, I'd be happy even without endless summer.

Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy

yea casino was ok. maybe next summer it will be two new movie concepts

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow

So? I fail to see where you're obligated to read it. I furthermore fail to see why you intentionally skip over the substance of what I said to keep arguing your petty point and missing the broader message I'm discussing. I don't want your stuff specifically, nor do I want what's in the DVD Collector's Edidtion. I HAVE what's in the DVD collector's edition because Nuclear Toast had one to spare that he offered to give me. I'm "lecturing" because I have a larger point to make about the nature of status, the nature of collections, the nature of digital distribution and so forth. You're free to ignore that, but please don't try to talk down on me like it what I'm saying doesn't matter. You're not the only person reading this thread and, consequently, not the only person I'm addressing.

Furthermore, you don't get to accuse me of being... What was it?



Oh, right. Yeah, you don't get to make a comment like that and then proceed to snark at me for actually addressing it. If you make an accusation, then you better deal with the reply. And if you don't want to deal with the reply, then don't bring it up. This idea that you can sling insults at people and then proceed to mock them for responding isn't going to fly. If you want to discuss the point, stick to discussing the point. If you're going to character-assassinate people, then at least have the decency to accept the consequences.



Except for the fact that, as of right now, the Paragon Market is selling the Vanguard Pack once awarded as a LOYALTY REWARD that cost those of us who had it prior three months of uninterrupted subscription over the course of the seven year anniversary, the Cape and Aura unlocks that are were and are an in-game unlock which Jack Emmert himself went on a tangent to explain how they were status symbols (hence where "status" comes in) and the Roman Pack which has a whole variety of items normally unlockable via a Cimeroran badge and, if I remember correctly, some normally unlockable via the ITF.

The Paragon Market has already demonstrated itself as being the place to retro-actively buy content which was previously unlockable in ways other than money and previously said to be exclusive. Furthermore, the Veteran Reward programme, and now the Paragon Rewards programme, contain the "pre-order sprints" and I believe the "pre-order helmets" which were part of special purchase promotions and were, at least at one point, said to be exclusive. They aren't, not any more.



It makes no difference. Even if this one item remains exclusive, the question of exclusivity in general is moot. Pretty much everything that's been exclusive in the past has showed up in the market and I'm fairly certain that pretty much everything else that's exclusive now (like the Wisps aura) will show up, as well. Maybe not the DVD Edition stuff, granted, but even that's not out of the table. We've gone through a lot of developers in the last eight years. BABs said a lot of things wouldn't happen as long as he worked at the studio, as did Castle. As did Jack Emmert, for that matter.



I'm talking about status. I fail to see where I'm required to wait for you to bring up a topic before I can discuss it. And the reason I'm discussing it is because it's integral to the subject of exclusivity, as well as because it has been a frequently recurring topic of conversation whenever exclusivity is discussed. You didn't discuss it, no. So what? I did, because it's a topic that's interesting to me, because it's a topic that's relevant to others and because, frankly, it's an interesting topic to examine. If it's not interesting to you, that's fine. Don't discuss it. You're not the only person I'm addressing with this, as unless I'm mistaken, you're not the only person reading this forums. Yes, I responded to your post as a jumping-on point, but again - this doesn't prevent me from branching off into subjects that interest me but aren't directly relevant to your post.

Again, you're the one turning this onto a "me vs. everyone else" discussion and either browbeating people for daring to discuss topics you didn't bring up or always trying to bring this back to "your stuff." News flash, bud - no-one cares about your stuff. You can keep it. You can keep it exclusive, and aside from the occasional grumble, nobody is going to care. Because the question isn't and wasn't about that. It's a much broader question about the merits of "exclusivity" in general. If you want to have a grandfather rule for your stuff, fine. Have it, with my compliments. Because this isn't about your stuff, and your stuff staying exclusive is, I dare say, a small price to pay for ending this bad practice of exclusivity of virtual items that can be copied infinitely. If you don't see how that's relevant, that's fine, but there are others who will.

Finally, I bring up the concept of "status" as it relates to the concept of "collecting," which I would wager is relevant to the notion of a "collector's edition." Maybe if you spent less time trying to talk about how much my post doesn't relate to yours - as if that matters - you could actually see the connections and follow my conclusions. But no, you choose to see this as me specifically arguing against you specifically, when I'm not. I'm arguing a point, and it's largely irrelevant who's for or against that point for the purposes of the argument. You're the one who's arguing WITH ME instead of arguing FOR YOUR POINT. And arguing with me is a losing venture because I cannot be convinced by being argued with, I can only be convinced by being given a convincing argument towards a broader point than just "you're wrong, I'm right." I don't care about being right, I don't care about you being wrong.

I care about the subjects of exclusivity, collecting and status, as they pertain to the sale of previously exclusive items. I'll argue about other stuff, sure, but that's not as interesting.



And I agree that all previously exclusive items should be sold in the store. I'm sorry that me holding this opinion offends you, but that's simply what I believe. I don't question your character for holding a different opinion from mine, though I'm sure you'll find some way to claim that as you've done twice before. The "whiner/entitled" argument just seems so alluring for some reason. I'm simply of the fundamental belief that exclusivity cannot exist in a digital medium and faking it is a corruption of some of the medium's greatest strengths. To me, forcing exclusivity on items that can be copied infinitely in order to approximate the exclusivity of limited-edition physical media is no unlike creating a movie that consists entirely of text screens in order to more resemble a book. Yes, you can do that, but it misses the point of creating a moving picture (with sound) in the first place. Granted, I can see the benefit of having something like the Kindle that allows you to read books on a digital device, but that still uses the benefit of the media to its fullest, chiefly that it's a massive space and weight saver.

As I said before, I'm OK with you keeping your misbegotten DVD Edition stuff. That's not a big deal. Even though my fundamental belief goes against it, I'm not that much of an extremist to be unable to make an exception. Fine, keep it, it's not a problem. So long as it's that one thing, it's fine. So long as it's an exception to the rule, that's fine. It's practically impossible to shoot for 100% consistency in the results of our beliefs and I'm more than willing to accept this as the exception to my rule. Nobody's going to steal your stuff. Don't worry about it. Yes, people are going to occasionally make that comment, but so long as you keep in mind that "people" can't enact development rules, you're safe. I see no reason why you can't simply state your disagreement and leave it at that. What is this need to talk down to people who disagree and demonise them as you have? What do you gain by this, aside from people angry at you?



The question of "status" goes beyond just exclusive items. It's why I brought it up. Capes were never "exclusive," but needing to unlock them led to some people interpreting them as status symbols nonetheless. Some held having a cape as a mark of superiority. "See, my character is level 20 and yours isn't!" I heard a lot of arguments for why capes should remain locked to 20 that went along just this line, and I saw a lot of arguments that insisted we need "status symbols" in order to "show character progression." I argued then as I do now that character progression is a meta-game concept that's built into the actual game side of City of Heroes that doesn't need to be extended over the cosmetic side of it, citing customization and identity as one of the chief strengths of the game. I cited, further, that if people wanted to show progress, the costume editor fully allowed them to do this by choice via updating a character's costume to be "better" every few levels to simulate the acquisition of loot.

I know you'll cut me off and say "But I didn't say that!" and you didn't. I know you're not talking about capes or visual cues for levelling up or status symbols. Again I refer you to my "So what?" point. To me, the concept of exclusivity has direct correlations to the longstanding debate about "Capes at 20" and the evolution of it through the years up until putting cape and aura unlocks in the Paragon Market essentially ended it. These days, I'm the only one who still brings it up because it's done. It's settled. It's a non-issue. But to me, there are still lessons we can learn from "Capes at 20" both in terms of going forward with future content and in terms of how people react to costume pieces when they start to become seen as status symbols.

Here's how it all relates together - I don't want to see people using a specific costume piece because it's seen as prestigious in cases where it really doesn't fit the costume. Back in the "Capes at 20" days, I saw many people wearing capes over costumes that REALLY didn't work well with them. I get that capes are a big thing for tights super heroes, but I saw them used on virtually everything whether it looked good or not. To me, this is the ultimate corruption of what should be the game's central point - we create our own heroes. To give a costume piece extra weight by giving it some sort of "status" either by being exclusive or otherwise, to me, is to corrupt the whole system where our looks are separate from the game's mechanics. The whole point is that there are no game-side factors which force a certain look on us over another and we're free to choose based on taste and preference alone. You go back on that by attaching status to pieces, and making them exclusive is a form of attaching status to them.

I also have the inverse argument, and I'll give it with an example: I HATE Super Speed. I always have. It transpires, however, that I don't so much dislike the power or even the concept behind it (Saints Row: The Third did super running right) as I do the running animation we use with it, especially for women. In City of Heroes, run animations resemble slow jogs, so when you have a character slow-jogging at super speed, it turns my throat inside out. My solution? Find a power that swaps the running animation. That power? Well... Pretty much the only one which does that AND is usable with Super Speed is... Prestige Power Slide. Yeah, you can see how that goes. So I lamented on the forums that I didn't have that and how I couldn't buy one when I got a PM saying "Hey, I have one. Do you want it?" So now I have one.

But here's the thing - I don't really want any of the "exclusive" stuff. More specifically, I don't want any of that stuff because it's exclusive. I don't want Prestige Power Slide because it's exclusive. I want it because it's the only power that alters running animations. If, one day, we were allowed to customise the animation Super Speed used and a sliding or floating type animation were part of the choices, I'd stop using Slide immediately. It's clunky enough to toggle on and off as it is. Yet here I am, paying the price of exclusivity for an item that I don't really care whether it's exclusive or not. Because what's "exclusive" explores a side of the game that no other power does. It puts me in the position of wanting an exclusive item not because of its "collector's edition" status which is its key selling point, but because of how it works.

And to my mind, that's just wrong. It's like buying an entire for the sole reason of using its wheel rims on another car you'd rather drive and then doing nothing with the new one. I don't WANT a whole car, I just want four wheel rims. I don't even want the tyres. THIS is where the Paragon Market was supposed to shine - it was supposed to let me have just the stuff I wanted and none of the stuff I didn't want. Obviously, the Super Packs more or less went back on that idea completely, but even so - I don't want exclusivity. I want "stuff." Thus, making stuff exclusive just means people who need it for the "stuff" can't have it because that would ruin those who have it for the exclusivity.

The only way I can see this working is either with "commemorative" items that don't really explore a new concept (like the custom Arachnos logos, those are a great idea) or otherwise non-costume-related items like special titles. Really, if I could get Prestige Power Slide without going through the whole DVD Edition pack, I would have. Now because I can't, your items are one person less exclusive. And I haven't even used any of the others.

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow

Really? OK, let's break it down:



What I say here is that it's easy to devolve into the usual argument of "spoiled brat" vs. "elitist jerk" that you're clearly trying to start, but it's an argument that has no winner at the end of it. It's mudslinging for the sake of mudslinging and never accomplishes anything. The point of the Paragon Market - as described to us by the developers - is to give people the option of what they wanted to buy, as opposed to offering things in bundles or locking them in-game or barring them in other ways. It's supposed to be the one-stop-shop solution to content distribution (now there's a slogan for you) that replaces all other forms, if only you consider the Paragon Rewards system to be part of the Market. Which it is.

That's all I'm saying - everything that was attainable in other ways was supposed to then migrate to the Market. I know City of Heroes is still pretending to not be just a very, very expensive F2P title, but at the end of the day this is a business, and they've been milking us for cash in every way they could. It makes economic sense to sell the things people are repeatedly asking for, as opposed to trying to swindle us with gambling packs.



This one's pretty straightforward. I've argued the point of "status symbols" many, many times before. I argued it when capes were locked at level 20 (unlocked via Paragon Market), I argued it when Epic ATs were locked at 50 (now 20 or Paragon Market purchase, I believe), I argued it before. It is my passionate belief that this game will do better without symbols of "status," because I find "status" itself to be a corrupt idea, lending one faux respect based on external factors. I've always believed that if "status" is to exist, it should be based on a person's actual achievements, accomplishments and work. Arcanaville has status across the community, but this isn't for an exclusive purchase or a chance find. It is for continued work with the community. Samuraiko has status across the community, but this isn't for having something we can't. It's for doing something with the tools available to everybody, it's for work and dedication.

When I run into someone in-game, I'm not impressed that that person bought something eight years ago that isn't for sale now any more than I'm impressed someone went to a convention and came back with a dragon hat. What I'm impressed with is a costume that makes me stop, go back and have another look. What I'm impressed with is a character description that makes me go "OK, I want one of those, too!" What I'm impressed with is a person who can quote, off-hand, a build which would be superior to my own yet still attainable by my own rules of character building. What I'm impressed with is someone who can tell me about canon I didn't know about, or set me straight on a plot point that I would have otherwise seen as stupid. What impresses me is people who show skill, creativity and curiosity. What DOESN'T impress me is people waving around exclusive items.

Swag does not make a person. At best it's a kitsch. I don't hate people for having it, don't misunderstand, nor am I jealous of people who have something I don't. Life's too short for that. But I'm still determined to make sure everyone has access to the same "stuff," such that the most meaningful difference between people is the difference in what they express, rather than the difference in what they own.



Continual insistence on deionising the attitude does nothing to help your case. We're not asking for these items because we're some kind of greedy bastards who can't stand to not have anything that other people have. Take a stroll around the community here and you'll realise that we, to put it simply and bluntly, don't put much stock in "collectable" and "exclusive" items as a general concept. That's not to say people here aren't collectors. This is the game that pioneered badges, after all. What that IS to say, however, is that people only care what THEY have, not what other people have. By this, I mean that your average City of Heroes "collector" is only interested in what he has, but derives no real satisfaction from others' not being able to gain the same item. I know it makes me sound like a jerk to say this, but you really won't see much support for the attitude which puts value on things specifically because other people CAN'T have it, simply because that translates into intentionally wanting to deprive others of what you have.

In a digital world of infinite, no-cost replication, I see no reason to cling on to exclusivity. With physical items, I can see taking pride in possessing THE ONLY specific item in existence. I even support it. I have an old Sad Sam stuffed dog which used to belong to my brother and must be 30-35 years old at this point. It's older than me and I cherish it very much because I know for a fact no-one I know ever had one, or will ever have one, especially one this old. I get it. But this simply doesn't apply to digital distribution items. In the real world, you can have pride in having something other people can't have because only one person can have "the only" item of a certain kind. That's a physical limitation. In terms of digital distribution, however, there's no such thing as "the only" and there's no such thing as "limited availability." The only reason you can have pride in having something other people don't is because whoever is distributing it essentially chose to NOT give it to other people, and that's artificial.

Personally, I highly dislike artificial boundaries and manufactured scarcity. I dislike bringing real life physical item distribution gimmicks into a digital market place. I dislike rooting the market of the future into the limitations of the past. I dislike treating virtual goods like physical goods. I'm not one of those people who insists on having a physical CD of a game so I can bang it on my head while I play my game from my purely digital copy of it. I don't have a problem with publishers selling me a "license" to their software rather than the software itself. I have no problem paying for ideas and services. I like the virtual world where nothing is finite, nothing is physical and what sets people apart is their actions and creativity, as opposed to their physical possessions. I like that anyone can be a star if only they find a way to express themselves, and this is what I wan to support moving forward.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone should have a shot at every costume piece that exists at the game. Let everyone have a shot at everything, and let's see what people come up with. If you come up with a costume that blows me away, you already has something that no-one else can have - an idea that you brought into the world. Even in a world of infinite replication, THAT is something no-one can take away from you. An exclusive item, though? Yeah, that doesn't impress me.

Originally Posted by Snow Globe

Yeah, you sound plenty entitled, so I have to agree.

How about practicing what you preach?

I have most of the exclusives, and I do NOT mind in the least other people getting them. As to your "going back on their word" argument, that doesn't hold water either, as all legal notices say that things can change without notice.

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow

Nice straw man, but what you're hearing is actually a consumer mentality - I have the money, let me buy what I want. And I, for one, approve.

If I wanted to stoop to your level, I could throw around words like elitism and jealousy, but it really doesn't come to that. These are simply people willing to use the Paragon Market for what it was designed - to buy things they would previously have had to unlock in other ways.

Personally, the fewer our "status symbols" became, the happier I'll be. Uniqueness should come from what a player has created, not what a player has bought, hence why I'd rather let everyone buy everything.

Originally Posted by Codewalker

As long as the system has the right version of .NET it should work fine.

It's fairly self-contained so if you put it on a USB stick the only thing you don't get versus having it "installed" is the file association. I.e. you have to open up Mids first and then open a build instead of just double clicking on the build file, but that's not a huge burden.

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow

Why does a character with water powers have to have a synonym or metaphor for "water" in their name?

Originally Posted by Rajani Isa

Bartender who gained super powers - Aqua Vitae - WB/Poison.

Originally Posted by DarkGob

Supergroup colors?

Originally Posted by DMystic

Well badges didn't exist at launch so there wouldn't be any for joining the game then.