rsclark

Legend
  • Posts

    1370
  • Joined

  1. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba View Post
    I'll state it now:

    In this case, getting screwed specifically points at the developers introducing the incarnate powers in the way they did without providing At The Same Time a viable avenue for those that solo/avoid large team content.

    I don't disagree with PvP IOs only being obtainable by going into PvP zones. I wouldn't even disagree with team-only buffs being locked behind team-only content.

    I would, however, and forever will, take issue with character buffs/progress/etc that would aid a soloist being locked behind team-only content.
    I think the other thing to point out is that earlier when you suggested (in a non-serious sort of way) that there be exclusive rewards for solo content, that Arcana took exception with it. It's funny how the exclusive rewards are only a good idea when it benefits the side Arcana is advocating.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    I disagree. This is not just a quibble about semantics. There's a distinction between the person who makes a request about a single piece of content ("I want this single piece of content to have a reward unique to it") and the person that attempts to impose their will across all content for all time with an absolute rule ("no content that requires teaming is allowed to contain a reward that isn't offered in non-soloable content").
    As stated before, this is not a single piece of content. It is the endgame. It is the entirety of post 50 character advancement.
  3. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    "I do not want any rewards at all, without any exception, gated behind content that requires teaming."

    This is an example of someone asking for a game to not include something, as I define it.
    I hope you adequately greased up the English language before you did what you just did to it.
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    I already stated so: hypothetically speaking to ensure people you don't care about but I do are fairly represented in any game I'd have decision making power over.
    But what you continue to fail to address is how allowing people to have a solo path would fail to represent anyone since it would not be compulsory.

    Quote:
    If its still not clear, then I would say its very close to the truth that were I in the position to make the strategic decision, I would care more about players that say "I want X" than those that said "I want to ensure this game does not have Y."
    Yet, seemingly, in this thread, you have taken the exact opposite position. You have been siding with the people who say "I want to ensure this game does not have a viable solo incarnate path".
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Golden Girl View Post
    So far, one of the beta testers has hit +2 in 11 days - that doesn't seem to be very "sucky".
    Compared to the 2 hours you could do it in trials it is. And I don't think it's an accident that you list the number of days instead of the more informative number of played hours.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    The goal would actually be, in all direct seriousness, to offer different things to different players that want different things, and to skew my playerbase in the direction of keeping the players willing to accept they won't get everything they want in favor of the players willing to let other people have some things they want, in exchange for knowing they will get some of the things they want, even if that includes teamed content with content-tied rewards.
    I'm going to begin this post with a parable.

    Timmy and his younger brother, Tommy, are outside playing one day whehn they decide they are hungry. They go into the kitchen to get one of their mother's chocolate chip cookies, but discover there is only one left.

    Their mother, being the progressive sort, asks each child what they think should be done.

    Tommy thinks for a moment and says that she should break the cookie in half and give half to each of them.

    Timmy, being older and wiser, says that his mother should give him the cookie since he is the oldest.

    Their mother, in a desire to teach them about compromise, gives Timmy 3/4 of the cookie and gives Tommy 1/4.

    Most sane people can see the problem with the mother's reasoning, but I get a feeling you don't.

    Quote:
    You think its pissing off an unnecessary percentage of the paying population, but I disagree. I think its trading one set for another set that wants at least some of what you would eliminate entirely. And I would be willing to put my money where my mouth is on that design decision, if it was mine to make.
    You have yet to address how giving a viable non-trial path would eliminate anything entirely.

    Quote:
    I don't think this orphans people who predominantly or exclusively solos. I know lots of those people in lots of MMOs, and at one time I was one as well. I think it pisses off the people who have to have everything their way. A think 99% of all people who predominantly or exclusively solo only need *enough* game to be entertained, they do not need to know that *everything* is designed specifically with them in mind.
    I would call this ridiculous caricature a "strawman", but that would be an insult to scarecrows and other plant based lifeforms everywhere.

    I haven't seen anyone demand a solo mothership raid; although, oddly, you can even attempt that solo if you want.

    What tends to be the central idea in these arguments is the endgame. That's not "everything". That is a fundamental and vital part of the game. It is not different in any meaningful way from saying you can solo to 30, but to hit 50 you have to group.

    Demanding a viable endgame is not the same as demanding every bit of content be available and claiming otherwise is being intellectually dishonest.

    Quote:
    The obvious answer to your question of how this is a compromise is that some people like content-coupled rewards and teaming, and some don't. This is a compromise between those two groups. You think the first group is inconsequential or simply wrong, so you do not believe their interests need to be represented in any compromise. I don't agree. Unless absolutely necessary, I don't decide who's worthy of the game and who's not. And in this case, its not necessary. I've already decided that anyone who draws a line in the sand is going to have lower priority than everyone else. Having made that first decision, I don't need to make an additional value judgment here.
    And then we get back to Timmy and Tommy.

    At least I can understand Timmy. He's a jerk, sure, but he's just being greedy and selfish, and we can all relate to that. He's not actively trying to take cookie away from Tommy, that is just a side consequence of wanting more for himself.

    But the people against solo content don't even have that weak excuse. How would a pro-trial person be harmed by the DA rewards not sucking quite so hard? Even in situations where company resources must be directed to produce the soloable content, we have this amazing scaling technology in the game. Every bit of solo content they create is also group content, so the group people lose literally nothing.

    They are essentially saying "look, I gain nothing by denying this to you, but the important part to me is that you don't get it", and that is the attitude of an *******. And when deciding how to measure a compromise, I think you should side against the ********.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Golden Girl View Post
    What Trial has 30 players on it?
    What player demands solo only content - good/goose/gander
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Oedipus_Tex View Post
    I thought the original shard system was more or less reasonable. It did take a while but it was doable. Task Forces made it faster. The trials probably made it too fast, in the sense that they pushed a trial-trial-trial agenda that wore people out quickly. So the issue might really be that the trials just handed out too much.
    Just look at the relative rewards.

    Run the correct TF and get the reward you need? Good job, you saved having to earn 4 shards.

    Run the trial and get the reward you need? Good job, you saved having to earn 150 threads and several hundred million inf.

    For all it's problems, at least the shard system didn't jump an order of magnitude outside of reasonable.
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shadow_Kitty View Post
    I'll gladly team up. I just won't trial up.
    Amen.

    4 people > 30 people
  10. Quote:
    Originally Posted by DumpleBerry View Post
    I can't disagree with that. But you can probably see how it is a deliberate pack incentive for income.
    Yes, it will make them plenty of money. It is a very effective technique. You know what else is effective? Cold calling people and pressure selling them crap they don't need. "Listen up Gandma, go get your checkbook and write what I tell you."

    If I'm allowed to hate the people who do that, I see no reason not to extend it to practices like this. Profitable doesn't automatically equate to acceptable.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by MajorDecoy View Post
    I don't really see how it's different from the pre-order arachnos helmets.
    A. The pre-order arachnos helmets did not come after the justifications for Freedom of allowing players to only purchase what they want
    B. The pre-order arachnos helmets were part of a straightforward sale of goods and not part of a scumbag gambling money grab.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by New_Dark_Age View Post
    3: 8-Ball is evil cause he makes money selling crack to children.......................................... ............ (Actual bio of a former player on Champion)
    Villain or not, shouldn't 8-Ball sell cocaine to children instead of crack?
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aggelakis View Post
    Lies and damn lies! A good third to half of my characters have Empathy (or Pain, since Corr/MM can't get Empathy) and they are *loved* on teams. Fortitude and Adrenalin Boost is WHERE IT'S AT! The chorus of "yay fort!" when I join teams always warms the cockles of my heart.
    So, the 1-3 people you can put those powers on say "yea", what do the other 3-6 people say?
  14. rsclark

    Paid For Powers?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ridia View Post
    The powers that you must pay for from the market are, in my opinion, much better with cooler animations thn the standard offered sets, which makes sense since you did pay real money for them and thus should get something a bit better for that cost.

    My question is- do you think that in the future they devs will polish up the good ol sets that we all love to give them new animations, updates, etc, make them on the same level as the paid ones (StJ, TW, KM, SF etc...)
    Since there are already mechanics in place for using alternate mechanics, there is no reason to "polish up" the current powers as opposed to offering alternatives. This is especially true since there is no consensus that the paid sets actually do look or perform better (see DP).
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zwillinger View Post
    Facebook is a great way for us to hit people who don't regularly hit the forums but check FB daily. We definitely appreciate the enthusiasm you are all showing for these weekly Q&A sessions, just remember that they're more focused on answer questions for people new to the game or who may be interested .
    Quote:
    Mike Tuffley: After the Diabolique trial, will all Incarnate Trials going forward require multiple teams, or will the "Emperor Cole" trial (for example) have the option of being done with a team of 8?
    To repeat - how about actually answering the questions that were actually asked, then instead of evasive non-answers?
  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Golden Girl View Post
    All the Trials are already set for 8 or 12
    And your comment is about as relevant as their answer. Since the question is about what will happen with future trials, what leads you to believe that making your statement about all current trials is a meaningful thing to say?
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kheldarn View Post
    Mike Tuffley: After the Diabolique trial, will all Incarnate Trials going forward require multiple teams, or will the "Emperor Cole" trial (for example) have the option of being done with a team of 8?

    City of Heroes: There will be Incarnate Trials that you may want to have multiple teams on.
    And... CoH displays amazing dexterity by deftly answering the exact opposite question to the one actually asked.

    I give it a 9.5.
  18. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    I get the point. I believe it to be false.
    Which part? The easily observable fact that games are moving in the direction of less large group content or the easily surmised idea that a game never known for large group content might have fewer people who enjoy it than other games that have always provided that form of content?
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    Well if that was what I was talking about then there should be no problem at all. The next time someone feels they are being made redundant in content, just tell them to increase their difficulty slider.
    The biggest place to complain about being redundant is in Itrials. No where else in the game does a player matter less than in an itrial.
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    The only way we could have followed the trend of making content that required less hardcore play and less numbers of players was for the developers to start making content that could be played by unconscious players and half of one player.
    You are missing the point entirely. Those other games aren't moving towards some idea point - at least not intentionally. They are moving away from something that wasn't working. Those 20+ man raids aren't getting enough players involved in them to justify the effort that goes into making them, so people aren't making them any more.

    That's why it's strange that this game is putting the effort into making them. Given the history of this game, I find it hard to believe that this game has a higher percentage of people who want to do that stuff when other games have been trying to pull those people in for years.. If it's not worth it for other games to produce this type of content, what makes this game special?

    And, really, it seems pretty clear that it isn't worth it in this game any more than it's worth it in the others. If it was worth it to produce and there was this hidden demographic that desired that content, then the DA revamp wouldn't need such abysmal rewards to (effectively) bribe people into playing the raids.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    The difficulty slider has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
    The ability to have your character be important by increasing the difficulty to the point where failure is possible vs not wanting to make it so hard as to drive people away?

    That sounds like exactly what you were talking about in that post.
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Devlin_Quaid View Post
    For clarification, I meant the high-collar mantle.

    The High collar mantle pack costs 440 points, while the magic bundle costs 400

    That is why I asked.
    It's one of the many traps that exist for no other reason that to prove that people who make marketing decisions tend to be jerks.
  23. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
    This is a problem without a solution: you can only be important on a team if it needs you, and it can only need you if failing to have you caused a negative outcome of some kind. You can pick a spot on the dial from A to B, but whatever spot you pick you will annoy a large number of people who will think your selection is obviously stupid.
    Oddly, in the rest of the game they circumvented that problem by actually giving us the dial (in the form of the difficulty settings). For some reason they chose to ignore that successful aspect of the game when it came time to designing the trials.
  24. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Silver Gale View Post
    Running Trials is definitely mentally exhausting for me.

    But you know what? Swimming is physically exhausting, and I still enjoy it.

    A good Trial run, where the leader communicates clearly and everyone's on the ball, where I really feel like part fo a greater whole - it can feel like getting a new best time on 50m crawl. I feel exhausted but also accomplished, and happy. The Merits and Threads and reward table are almost an afterthought.
    Personally, I'd compare it to a particularly rough prostate exam.
  25. rsclark

    Botched ritual.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SwellGuy View Post
    So if the bad side is this debuff, what do you get if you don't mess it up?
    Normal mission complete XP.