AwesomusPrime

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Post Deleted by Moderator_08

[/ QUOTE ]

Bless your devious heart sir! Although ironically, my completly blatent farming mission started racking up badges for play-throughs and positive ratings within half an hour of being published, while my original, story-oriented, extremely challenging arc has yet to be reviewed even once (I have no way of knowing for certain if anyone has even played it). Anyhoo, that little piece of irony not withstanding, I think i will do exactly as you suggest from now on.

[/ QUOTE ]

What a great idea! I'm positive that would work. Once.

As a teacher when someone pulls a fast one on me to circumvent the rules I'm impressed. When they repeat that fast one I'm insulted.

Doing this twice might mean a ban.

A few plays starting to turn up, but still no contest entries. I know it's not a lot of money, but I'd gladly dole it out!

I didn't know there were people offering to do it for real life dollars. Any info on that arrangement? My inf is scarce, and I might be more willing to just pay someone.

In the meantime, play my arcs!

Oh and congrats! My wife thinks she may go before the day is out tomorrow.

/signed

It'll be our second, but I'm also working two jobs now so I can't fathom if It will even be worth keeping the subscription up until after, say September. But I'm stoked nonetheless.

Oh god! He enjoys a different portion of the game than me, and suggests I try something he finds enjoyable! He must be trying to mindrape me!!

Evil Evil Evil!

Snowglobe, and especially Demon-Hunter, you both would be glad to teach him how to build bases, yet you are so arrogant as to be isnulted that he wants to help you enjoy the market instead of hating it. To take your frustration and turn it into enjoyment.

I don't build bases or play the markets, but I am ashamed of this thread as a part of the CoH community.

Contact support. When a mission get's banned, iirc, you get one shot to republish and they'll review it, if it's still bannable then no more slot for you.

This is obviously a giant hole in their system of thinking, since you cannot update from local files to a published file, you cannot to any kind of massive edits in one sitting.

Contact support and let them know what you had been intending to do, everything you told us just now. If they hand wave you, ask that your ticket be elevated. This will get fixed.

I remember when LH quit posting, and I just had to know why and sent out PMs to that effect. The answer kinda bored me, no offense. I just thought it would be juicier for some reason. Don't really remember why...

That's right folks, I've finished my arcs (you were all waiting with baited breath I'm sure) and before I move on to my next idea, have I got a contest for you!

My arcs need posters, and I suck at making them. I could outright pay someone to do it for me, but a contest means more play-throughs. So I give you:

Awesomus Prime's Awesome Poster Contest of Awesome.

From now until June 6th I will be accepting submissions in the form of concepts, screen shots

to be used, and previous work. Please no completed projects, as I do not want you to spend your hard time making me a poster and not get paid. Please do include all three of the above mentioned.

The winners (one per arc) will receive [u]10 million inf each[u] upon my receipt of a finished product.

But wait, there's more, from the submissions I receive, including folks who are not going to make a poster, but just played the arc, [u]I will draw 5, 1 million inf winners. [u]

[u]A total of 25 million in prizes![u]

**All prizes in influence, paid out on Justice server unless a transfer can be arranged.**

The arcs:

181165 - The Case of the Late Richard Faraday - An end-of-the-world yarn surrounding the return of a long passed foe, who brings with him a true recipe for disaster. [Levels 20-50 Challenge: Moderate]

71532 - A Madman's Vengeance - A man pushed to the brink, a not-so-super-villain is foiled one time too many, and plots to increase his power-level and make the city respect him. The dangerous part is, his plot almost went unnoticed! [Levels 1-50 Challenge: Very High]

__________________________________________

FAQ

Q-Why so short a time?

A-My wife is due sometime in the next week or so, after which point I'm gonna be off line for a while, so I want to get this on the go.

Q-What happens if you disappear off the face of the Earth?

A-That's the second reason I don't want finished products sent to me. If I don't come back for a month or two, your efforts will have been wasted, or at least greatly delayed in rewarding. I will judge the contest on the first day I am available after June 6th.

Q-How does one enter for the 5 second prize drawings?

A-Send me a screenie, or post here with your global after having left feedback. Something that can show me you played.

Q-Aren't you buying plays?

A-Nope, I'm buying a poster. If I can encourage people to have fun in the process I'm happy. I'm not asking you rate me highly, or even rate me, to win the prize. The person who 0 stars my arcs is just as likely to win.

I'm with Jetpack, while I agree that Venture does a great service to the community, provides lots of exposure for arcs, and gives some helpful feedback, his tastes are to the player base in general as any other reviewer's taste is to their audience. Drastically different.

The annoyance Venture expresses at minutiae is vastly overinflated in comparison to what your average person would express. It's why we love him. We love to see him rip into something we hated, and we love to hate him for ripping into something we love.

Meta-entertainment at it's finest.

Venture, I hope you take this as a compliment, the line you walk is not a simple one. You do good work sir.

Edits made, removed the PPD hostages all together.

Oh and in case you've any suggestions, the PPD hostages were supposed to be named "Future test subjects" and all be swat guys, but they keep spawning as awakened. I had to axe the dialogue for space costraints but wanted to beef up the last missions enemy count to show that this is a hub of activity.

I'm going to tone down Armington and the Alpha Drones will be moved to minions. Also I'm going to reduce Ally O'Leary to a boss. Once i15 goes live I'm going to tailor alot of the missions 'signature characters' to have more specific powers and I'm going to set the range as a level 45-50 TF.

You're right, Dt. Morgan is AR/SR so I might change him to AR/Regen or AR/WiP if he dies too much.

As for the signal triangulation I did handwavium that as "we can't find the source", but you're right that there's no good reason.

And thanks for the name of Excelsior, couldn't find it anywhere and it was driving me nuts that I didn't name the drug.

Thank you for the excellent review, I'm going to make some edits now before other reviewers hit it. Feel free to play it again sometime to see if you like the changes. I really appreciate the kind words.

For anyone who read my criticism guide, yes I did violate my own suggestions.

[ QUOTE ]
In general, the idea behind steam in these instances is that some brilliant-insane person has discovered a way to get it to work in impossible ways according to conventional belief.

Yeah, we get that, I just don't buy it.

It could be like the clockwork king with psionic puppetry dressed up, it could be magic, it could be the reality bending madness of the creator.

Not only are none of these tropes invoked, as you allude to do so would be to repeat the Clockwork King. Do we really need two brains-in-a-jar riding around in brass robots psychically animating other brass robots? I don't think so.

Annilation of antimatter with matter to power a craft amongst the stars that can push itself apparently across the galaxy by using a warp field to reduce its mass, does not come across very different to me.

All that uses hypothetical physics that doesn't really exist to the best of our knowledge, but it's easy to suspend disbelief to accept that it could be science we just haven't discovered yet.

Steam engines, on the other hand, are something we know really, really well. The theoretical limits to the technology are understood and extremely strict. Believing in Nemesis' technology is tantamount to belief in magic, and if that's the way they want to go with it why the facade? Declare Nemesis to be a technomage who likes steampunk and have done with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the MA is for non-canon stories... why isn't it ok for someone to non-canonically declare the steam-nonsense to be something more sensible? Just because it is believed that Nem's tech is steam in the in-game lore doesn't mean that can't be based on misunderstanding. Just like most folks in-game believes Silos to be up to no-good.

To say that you have to stick with canon, and then point out canon's flaws doesn't make sense to me. I mean in my opinion that's reason to ignore canon right there, and I view all MA content as elseworlds. Strictly my opinion mind, so to each their own.

[ QUOTE ]
Excuse me, there's not enough Issue 15 in this thread.

Döööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööööm

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey look, Doooooooumlauts!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please note, the legitimate character deletions/account bans were for people who grossly abused an oversight in the MA that let them go 1-50 in single digit hours.

Some in less than a handful of hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's been mentioned that this isn't the place to talk about this, and I agree. But it's important to remember we're not talking about legitimate exploiters, they deserved the ban stick, we're talking about the innocent affected.
People, generally veterans, who have two accounts and level pact between them. That's not exploiting, that's twice the risk. So to watch them lose perfectly legitimate characters on account of the developers actions is frustrating to say the least, and should have any sane player asking if the same could happen to them.
That's all.

Now can we talk about the awesome new features that are coming?
The new I15 taskforces perhaps?

[/ QUOTE ]

The sane player should note that the devs have indicated that this undertaking was an accident. The people handed the instructions on who to ban didn't take level-pacts into account. IIRC anyone who petitioned had/will have the issue rectified. Now anyone who does nothing but complain... probably won't get noticed by the devs lol.

Anyway new issue on test within possible days/week, new expansion coming out, several planned free issues beyond that. Awesome time to be subbed.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The "you'll get banned" thing is crap. Nobody I know has gotten banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh well hey then, it's all good!

*rolleyes*


to OP:
the game's a lot like it ever was with some incremental improvements.

If you liked it before, you'll probably like it more now. If you didn't' like it before, I doubt anything they've done will change your mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, this.

There have been bans based upon how fast one has leveled using the MA system, but your chances of getting booted are still relatively low. If you hit 50 within two daysof rolling the character, you might want to be a bit cautious, regardless of the fact that you couldn't have done so faster outside of MA.

[/ QUOTE ]


Thought I'd fix the hyperbole to reflect the reality.

The system really is an interesting example of new media. That's why I love to watch this board, as the community for this new facet of the game grows and develops.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You'll be Paula if I say your Paula. Also I'm going to start reviewing. I'm the Dog guy, Randy? Yeah I'm randy. that's right I didn't capitalize.

[/ QUOTE ]
I will fight you.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you will fail.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not if I use my superpower... A GUN!

[/ QUOTE ]

Bullets! My one true weakness!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You'll be Paula if I say your Paula. Also I'm going to start reviewing. I'm the Dog guy, Randy? Yeah I'm randy. that's right I didn't capitalize.

[/ QUOTE ]
I will fight you.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you will fail.

You'll be Paula if I say your Paula. Also I'm going to start reviewing. I'm the Dog guy, Randy? Yeah I'm randy. that's right I didn't capitalize.

Thank ou for the time to review my guide. Actually that would be a nice addition.

A Guide to Reading, Writing, and Responding to Criticism.

So, my fellow posters, I have lurked hardly noticed here under three different names for 5 years and now I shall contribute something hopefully both memorable and helpful. I give you my guide. Please enjoy responsibly.


The purpose of this guide

I have read the review threads floating around for the last month or so in an effort to gleam what it is my audience is looking for, and in doing so I’ve noticed something. People in this community, as a general rule, aren’t accustomed to criticism personally affecting them in their daily lives, and being a part of critical review is not as natural as one may think.

I want this guide to explain a little of the theory behind the kinds of criticism, and the most productive ways that the criticized can react to criticism.

My experience in this area is as a playwright. I am trained; I have a bachelor’s degree in English, with specialization in dramatic literature and a certificate in theatre arts. I also have a BUS certificate in Secondary Education and teach drama and creative writing as a substitute currently. I say this not to brag, but rather to make evident that I have background in the theatre, I’ve written and produced eight short plays, and had my work criticized professionally on more than several occasions. I provide this advice as nothing more than advice and information from someone in the field of entertainment (as sideline as theatre has become in this last decade) and as always ymmv.

You may have noticed my grammar is not flawless, among other flaws in style etc. I never said I was good at what I did, only that I had experience in how it was done. I like to think I’m good, but I’m not pompous enough to believe I’m great. You know what they say about those who teach.


Types of Criticism

In terms of theatre there are two main types of criticism that one sees regularly. I believe this model of criticism works with the MA because it is very relatable to a sort of interactive theatre. Those types are Dramaturgy or Editorial Criticism and Reviews or Journalistic Criticism.

Hopefully the names are self explanatory, but here’s an overview. Dramaturgy is intended as a method whereby the author can improve his/her work. Often the author will seek out a peer, or preferably someone the author considers more successful, more accomplished then themselves, and ask them to review the work. The results will hopefully be largely style and choice based, and more often than not is composed of more questions than suggestions. These questions are not intended to be responded to, although some dramaturges (this type of reviewer) welcome open discussions. It’s a choice of the author and the dramaturge together whether or not to enter into a discussion and it should always be more comparable to therapy than to debate. The author should not be trying to defend his choice, but rather be trying to examine whether or not he/she has actually made a choice, and not taken an action without cause.

This type of criticism is not something that is occurring here, although I have seen one such post and have made one myself the majority fall into the review category. I would like to see this happening, but proper dramaturgy should precede the publication of a work, and this milieu does not encourage such.

The second and more prevalent type of criticism found on these boards is review criticism. This type of criticism is often provided for entertainment purposes, purports to be objective in a way, and comes after the publication of a work. It is often unsolicited, although it can be argued that the very publication of a work solicits review. Review criticism, in many media, can be critical for a work’s success.


Writing a Critical Review

For the most part I’m seeing good things on the board here. People generally conduct themselves professionally as reviewers. There are a few points I’m keen to expound on however.

.: Reviews are subjective. They are. As a reviewer you are being subjective, and that’s ok. There is a reason critical reviews are in the entertainment and editorial sections. You cannot objectively give an opinion; to do so is to suggest that everyone holds the same opinion which is patently false. I see a lot of reviewers claim objectivity, or an effort to maintain objectivity, who are then accused of not being objective enough, when in truth they should not even be trying to be objective.

What you should try to be is subjectively objective. Take a position that you feel represents a demographic and be subjective from that objective point of view. Many people are successfully doing this while pretending they are not, so as not to offend. Offend, it’s ok, you’re expected to, unless you are a dramaturge. See above.

.: Reviews should be well thought out, final words on the subject they are reviewing. As a reviewer you should stand by the opinion you have made, and doing so is to not let yourself be drawn into debates. The proper response to a disagreement with one of your reviews is to simply state “I’m sorry you disagree, I stand by my opinion.”

That said; don’t be afraid to admit when you’re wrong. If you made a heavy handed comment, or overlooked something simple, make a retraction. You’d ask the same of someone else.

You’re decision whether or not to retract should be made by yourself, not through public debate. Public debate weakens your position with your reader, as invariably you will be drawn into personal conflict.

.: Some people are [censored]. It’s ok. Personally I’m an [censored]. The only [censored] I don’t respect, is the one who pretends he doesn’t know he’s an [censored], that [censored] is more likely to screw up your day.

If you want to be harsh, be harsh. But don’t pretend you aren’t harsh. If someone calls you out for being harsh, and you were harsh, admit it and stand by it. You chose to be harsh, so own it, there’s no shame in it. If someone doesn’t want to be reviewed by you they’ll tell you, and there are thousands of other arcs to be reviewed.

If you didn’t intend to be harsh see above.


Responding to Critical Review

There is only one way to respond to critical review. This will raise hairs, people will disagree, but from a theatre perspective if you don’t play this way you won’t be reviewed again which is worse than a bad review.

The only way to respond to a critical review is “Thank you for taking the time to review my work.”

No more, feel free to say less.

Now before you say I’m wrong listen to, or rather read, why. Reviews are subjective, (see above) they have to be. Arguing with a reviewer who didn’t enjoy your work isn’t going to change his/her mind, but it may change the mind of someone thinking about playing your work. What is more, it is impolite. Whether they enjoyed it or not, someone has taken the time to publicize your efforts, and at the very least disserves to be thanked for that.

Now if that person flies in the face of the above, and is clearly not showing respect as a reviewer, (ie being a jerk and pretending their objective, or claiming you’ve presented malicious content when you haven’t) then you are morally obliged to engage them and have a flame war should you desire, that is the subject of a whole other guide.

You may feel free to respond to comments by readers on the review, as my reviewers, but keep these guidelines in mind when doing so.

Remember, as many people will play your arc because a Simon Cowel-ish reviewer they hate (Venture) rated it down, as will those who play your arc because a Paula Abdoul-ish reviewer (…LaserJesus?) rated it up, so don’t let every bad review get you down, or feel you have to defend your position.

Also, a good metric is if the audience didn’t get it, you didn’t say it right. This is not always true, but good to keep in mind. I once wrote a play about quantum mechanics, the math professors who came with the head of the philosophy department of the local community college on opening night loved it, but everyone else thought it needed work. It didn’t, it was for them. I said “Thank you for your review.” I never explained myself to anyone.


Reading Criticism

Feel free to comment; don’t expect people to violate the above. Debate is more fun when someone isn’t popping in providing concrete answers, then we can start deconstructing the social meaning behind MA Arcs.

Hey, I said this guide would also be about reading, and I really had so little to say on the topic, sue me.

Finally, enjoy. Enjoy or I’ll kill you in your sleep. Jokes.


Conclusion

Everything in this guide is a suggestion, but I hope they are suggestions that are taken with some thought. This review community is starting to sprout some wings, and with a little civility and decorum, it could be an amazing thing.

I look forward to reading and participating in many more reviews, even if they do devolve into debate once in a while.

Having worked professionally as a writer for the theatre, I'm going to post up a guide soon to writing and responding to criticism. I may not be the best writer, but I have learned a thing or two about how not to do what's going on a lot around here lol.

[ QUOTE ]
and that his technology is highly complex and not entirely understood even if it is archaic in appearance. Explain, for example, how entirely mechanical Jaeger Automatons in the 1820's can actually sense the presence of a target at range when vacuum tubes were not even invented until the late 19th Century and electronic sensing devices not invented till the early 20th Century.

Here's the explanation: it's really bad writing. Nemesis' technology is taken to work as a genre convention, just like superpowers in general. Yes, this strains disbelief well past the breaking point but some people, the ones who run this game among them, just don't care.

[/ QUOTE ]

This, unfortunately, negates any point you may have Venture. You cannot acknowledge that it is acceptable to strain disbelief in the comic genre, while simultaneously berate someone for doing just that. It's a shame because you had some good points.

The in-game explanation for the MA is that the stories are else world in nature, made up by the city's denizens, and therefore subject to faults and whims of fancy. By Canon, non-canon stories are cool.

Now if their poorly written, which you say this is, more than valid crit.