Emnity

[ QUOTE ]
That said, we are all getting a bunch of other stuff. Debt wipe, Prestige and some "secret" feature.
What exactly IS it you're asking for? I just don't get the gripe.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was a simple question about early-buyer incentive that got inflated into a pissing match by posters conditioned to seeing an non-praise-laden post as an assault on NCsoft. It was nothing, really.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So BAB said we're getting full power customization, more Epic Archetypes and they'll be completely reworking the villain Patron powers, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

[/ QUOTE ]

Someday BaB is going to /facepalm and say, "Lord why did I phrase it that way...?" :P

[ QUOTE ]

What I do dislike is all of the [censored] that it hasn't happened. Saying "They are getting something, so should I because I bought it at full price." IS entitalment, in its fullest. You did get something, you got to play the game before anyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not what I said. At all. And I have to say, seeing someone of your obvious intelligence continue to insist that it *is* in the face of my calm correction is rather frustrating. Let me rephrase for you: It is silly not to bait customers into buying early and often. It is silly not to offer incentive to customers to buy early and often. This is why companies do it, becuase it's silly not to. It's why Ex has basically said that *they* are doing it.

If "Getting to play the game before everyone else" were considered incentive (and it's not, because it ignores the other half of the equation: "getting to pay before everyone else"), then Comcast et al would not feature buy early incentives then offer bundled discounts on those same new features down the road. And yet they do. Buying early is not a priviledge, it's a choice: smart marketers encourage the choice which earns them more profit, then offer deals down the road to grab yet more.

[ QUOTE ]
So don't put words in my mouth or assume you kow how I feel.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't twist my words and assume you know why I post, and you'll receive the same courtesy. Until then, get as given.

[ QUOTE ]

Not the way I would put it, but it works.

[/ QUOTE ]

Put it as you like. Opposing buyer incentives is an sensible as opposing customer retention campaigns. It is surreal. It hinders none of the other benefits of the merged game and consolidated cost. To oppose it, especially in the vicious and juvenile terms you are supporting in the post above, is simply beyond the pale. I've yet to see one person offer up a reason NOT to allow a cosmetic nod to buying early at full price, but I've seen plenty of slander and simplistic spin doctoring into something those with the communications skills of your quoted friend above can wrap their vocabulary around. Yet not one person has stepped up and said "THIS is how supporting a buy early model will hurt the other players!" or even come close to epxlaining how a marketing model in use for decades is suddenly "nad for business".

A real reason isn't needed, you see: it more fun to do what is done above and it requires less effort. And let's face it, you guys are anonymous, you can label the other side fools and idiots all day, you can simply restate their case over and over and there are no repercussions. Lack of accountability truly is the lithmus test of the internet.

What kills me is that Ex has already issued a statement which gives a nod to the idea. It's "sekret" but something is in the pipeline... yet the kneejerk reaction continues when the devs themselves support the marketing model. How self defeating.

[ QUOTE ]

Here's a simple-minded generalization for you:

Anyone complaining they're not getting bribed enough to stick with the game at this point is a greedy schmuck.

[/ QUOTE ]

As adept as you are at being simple minded, you should try addressing those who have made such a complaint.

[ QUOTE ]
That should be clear enough, yes? Certainly more honest than begging for "buyer's incentives".

[/ QUOTE ]

Replacing the other side's stated stance with a myopic point of view you are more capable of digesting is no substitute for rebuttal and requires no thought. Your post is a walking illustration of having absoluely no objection to the issue, but being unable to resist a juvenile and anonymous quip. Spin away, I can't help you look more impotent.

[ QUOTE ]
I think alot of those feeling ripped off are the same ones who are angry about vet rewards, or have the entitalment attidue.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Maybe if we just keep chanting the words "angry" and "entitled" it will stick...."

I didn't see what was angry or entitled about supporting buying incentives, especially when they don't in any fashion interefere with any other incentives.

But I think it's cute that people are trying so hard to avoid having to think about it in any terms that don't involve a simple-minded generalization.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't give me that 'customer service' song and dance. It's a bogus argument because it relies on the assumption that NCSoft should 'make it up' to you for doing something wrong or slighting you. They have done neither.

[/ QUOTE ]

Customer service and customer incentives are two different functions.

The continued (and vain) attempt to link past incentives with "entitlement" is a bit intentionally obstreperous. Smarter to focus on the good or bad behind proven marketing techniques. Marketing isn't about entitlement, it's about money.

If there is a downside to long-term customer incentives, if some cosmetic indicator in some way, shape or form hinders new customer incentives, then both I and the good folks in marketing departments across the world would love to hear it, because it's simply going to change the face of marketing.

A) Encourage customers to hold out on new releases and await discount rates or free releases
or
B) Encourage a buy early/often model for full cost purchases.

Smart marketers pick "B".

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget, Ex wrote something about a reward they cannot share with us yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah as I pointed out, the whole conversation seems moot. I think seeing the "the only reason to object to this is a sense of entitlement" tripe hit my funny bone. Profit > ego.

[/ QUOTE ]

Careful, the most recent member of my ignore list would label you a fanboy for not supporting people's sense of entitlement...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well he or she is entitled to do so...

Oh man. This could get ugly.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget, Ex wrote something about a reward they cannot share with us yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah as I pointed out, the whole conversation seems moot. I think seeing the "the only reason to object to this is a sense of entitlement" tripe hit my funny bone. Profit > ego.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why should there be a customer incentive when they change marketing models?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you being serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes I am, I may not be explaining myself clearly but I am serious. By customer incentive I assume you mean some kind of trinket or gift to those who bought both games before and would now only have to buy one. In that way I dont think that there needs to be customer incentive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that ignores around a century of marketing practise, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
Customer incentive in this move is fully on new buyers and those who only had one of the games which is where it should be in order to gain new revenue. Vet awards in in place as gifts to thank those who have stuck with the company, This move to consolidate the games makes it easier to get into for new players and in many ways they already did that. I believe they stopped production of the individual packs a while ago and just sell the GvE edition of the game which gives both games for less than the price of one. By combining the two and opening everyone up to both games they can allocate greater rescources to both games evenly and provide more content. That is the customer incentive.

In the short term the customer incentive is more players and an overall better experience because of that. Vetrans already have a incentive in the reward system and there really needs to be nothing else.
In the long term the customer incentive to start playing or keep playing is because its fun, and now with everyone having access to both games it opens things up for greater development. The customer incentive is basically a better overall product as a result of this merger. No one loses anything and people in general gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't really address a reason for disregarding non-conflicting incentives. The one does not interfere with the other. A "buy early buy often" incentive isn't a binary thing.

[ QUOTE ]
The only way someone can see a negative in opening up all content to everyone is from a feeling of entitlement and a resentment that someone got something for free that they paid for however long ago.

I have yet to see a reason to hate this particular move to give all players access that was not based in a sense of entitlement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol... trying to assign a motivation on the behalf of those posting is an interesting passtime, but a bit surreal in its purpose. I am going to just steer clear of the ego-baiting and stay focused on NC's marketing efforts for now.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So for the people that bought CoH and CoV what do we get.

[/ QUOTE ]
Debt wipe and free prestige.

[/ QUOTE ]

And for those of us who already have both CoH/CoV, have zero debt, and aren't members of Supergroups?

Out of curiosity, what do we get?

-Buxley

[/ QUOTE ]

Time...to start working on your debt badges, make some friends, and...it's a sekrit!

Ex

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, groovy, as long as those customers get a nod.

I think those trying to poo-poo this is a "others getting something free doesn't equate to you being denied something" are being a bit thick with regard to marketing. You do NOT inform a customer base that buying the product early holds no benefits, and you certainly don't hint that simply not spending the money will see the product acquried for free down the line.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's why I think a badge woudl be a good idea - "Supporter (You have demonstrated your eager support for the game with multiple purchases)". Maybe throw in a costume option or two - a chest emblem, for example. Or echoing the chest emblem to your cape (with new cape patterns, if need be).

Anyone who owns a full GvE edition, or both of CoH and CoV as standalone products, gets the badge (and possible associated goodies) - including in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah that would be perfect. Some cosmetic doodad, even along the lines of the prestige power slide. Something which gives a nod to past loyalty while at the same time allowing new-customer incentives with no conflict. It's always smart to leave the "buy it early, buy it often" bait intact and dangling for future possibly paid explansions or the like.

[ QUOTE ]
It'd be the right thing to do, NOT because "we're owqed" ... but rather, because it woudl be a smarter move in terms of future marketing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad someone is looking at it in terms of marketing and not some concocted effort as personalizing a smart marketing move into an ego issue.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If people can look past themselves for one minute they can see this as being a net bonus towards

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if people could look past trying to link it to ego for a minute and view it as customer incentive, a lot of this would be moot.

[/ QUOTE ]

So lets look at customer incentive. More people have access to both sides meaning a greater possibility of more players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I fear these are two different subjects. You're painting a picture of why offering post-release items at discount or for free is good new-customer bait. I'm not disagreeing with that but it has little to do with what I am talking about and what I am referring to in no way prohibits post-release new customer bait.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because they have decided to shift how they do business does not mean that they owe you anything at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had resolved to make a concerted effort to simply ignore all the work being done on the "they owe you anything" and "entitlement" spins, but I do want to take a brief moment to point out that they are tangential to the discussion and a value being assigned rather than asserted; never said it, never implied it, but I know why it's being touted over and over and I know why I'll keep seeing it. That's all I'll say on it as otherwise I lend credence to it where none is due.

[ QUOTE ]
Why should there be a customer incentive when they change marketing models?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you being serious?

[ QUOTE ]
CoH still has the best travel system in MMORPGs. CoV has the same travel system, but does not needlessly force you to cover greater in-zone distances and/or zone as much, when you're looking to go from mish to mish. You also tend to get the option to call your contact quicker and so spend less time getting your next mish. I just don't see the downside to this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Precisely. I could not have encapsulated this player-types view of things better. The term "needless" is key, and the more between-combat content which falls under that heading, the less "in between combat" content we'll see introduced in the future due to this mindset, until we've achieve the aforementioned "port from mission to mission" power, which will see any travel between combats as "unnecessary".

The idea that said travel or content is key to immersion is a concept a lot of older gamers are still struggling under.

[ QUOTE ]
It does not prevent you from running/flying/leaping around and enjoying the zone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, yes, but due to the prevalence of this desire for "more compact gaming with less distractions between battles" there is less zone to explore, and such exploration is no longer necessary nor key to progress, much less immersion.

I'm not saying it's good or bad. I personally think it's a shame, but only from my perspective. And in the end, what sells is what wins: if more one-dimensional content packed into 10-lvl zones with minimal downtime between fights is what most players want, that's where the games will go.

[ QUOTE ]

If people can look past themselves for one minute they can see this as being a net bonus towards

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if people could look past trying to link it to ego for a minute and view it as customer incentive, a lot of this would be moot.

(Edit: The use of the term "entitlement" is cracking me up.)

[ QUOTE ]


"Bad design shortcuts" was creating a grand total of 6 zones (Mercy, Oaks, Cap, Sharkhead, Nerva, St. Martial, +1 if you count I7) and cramming those full of important stuff, making the gameworld as a whole feel incredibly small. Why make two zones 2/3s of the size when you could cram everything into one? Except then players always see the same places. How many people actually LIKE spending time in Sharkhead Island?

"Bad design shortcuts" was keeping everyone contained within the same zone for 10 levels a stretch where City of Heroes mixes things up a bit.

"Bad design shortcuts" was adding in twice the story arcs but each a third of the length and each throwing out interesting information only as an afterthought (Oh, before I forget, the Rikti are humans. You learn something new every day!). Good storytelling and good stories replaced by short arcs just so there are more of them, no single one-off missions in addition to that, no hunt missions for those who like them...

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, while I agree with much of your summation, Sam (I love red side but man... one dimensional) you are decrying a trend in gaming in general, not just a poor direction for CoX.

Observe the move from CoH to CoX - it simulated an effect it normally takes a year to see in MMO gaming: when CoH was released, the praise for its zone design and travel system were loud and proud: the travel was labeled the best and fastest thing around, such a nice change from plodding about in other games, and the ease of getting from mission to mission was highly lauded. The *only* challenge lay in getting to lvl 14 with the occassional run through higher level mobs in Sky or Steel.

(And here I was thinking "Lord this game really removes the challenge of travel entirely..." just to show you my mindset - I find odd map corners which are impossibly dangerous to approach without a team and a plan very appealing. No map corners is off limits with our travel powers.)

Then CoV came out with its "Entire 10 level stretches of content packed into one zone and only one zone" design, and suddenly and literally, within a month we had posts decrying CoH's zone design: Suddenly the best travel system around was slow and undesirable, and suddenly the ease of getting from mission to mission was "Why would I want to zone twice blue side when it's all in one zone on red? Blue side travel is lame."

Each successive generation of MMO gamers demands more simplicity in its product, each enjoys a more one-dimensional set up, and each introduction of more simplicity breeds demand for more. Any flavor details which don't contribute to directly mixing things up are unnecessary.

Actually, a great example from Hallow: [ QUOTE ]
Ok, but some of the zones you can choose from to "mix things up" might as well not exist... take Galaxy City for example... the red-headed step-child of CoH.

[/ QUOTE ]

On all my servers, Galaxy is the starting zone of choice for any players that does not want to stare at a mass inane broadcast about sewer trials and costume contest and share the lag of 100 players all dancing under the Atlas statue. To me, it is a necessity: it provides a nice solo experience, there are many willing to team there just for a change of pace. On events such as ToTing and Xmas gift hunts, zones like this save the day. And outside of such events, it offers a wonderful alternative to the same old same old - for the outdated players who find diversity in out-of-combat experience important to game play. But it does not contribute directly to mixing things up and getting to the next mission ASAP, therefore it is chaffe and unnecessary.


We have a slew of gamers struggling along under the mindset of "But all the content and 20,000 villains packed into 6 or 7 zones isn't very realistic or immersive..." and they're a step behind - immersion and flavor content takes 2nd place to mixin' it up.

I guarantee if they introduced a "port directly from mission to mission upon completion" button in the next issue, we'd be hearing how lame it was to have to exit and use travel at all within a month.

This is the direction gaming is going, so we can say it's "bad design" but sadly, in that it appeals to what the next gen of gamers seem to crave, it's not - it gets them money.

It's just that your and my desire for content outside of combat is outdated and passe.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So for the people that bought CoH and CoV what do we get.

[/ QUOTE ]
Debt wipe and free prestige.

[/ QUOTE ]

And for those of us who already have both CoH/CoV, have zero debt, and aren't members of Supergroups?

Out of curiosity, what do we get?

-Buxley

[/ QUOTE ]

Time...to start working on your debt badges, make some friends, and...it's a sekrit!

Ex

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, groovy, as long as those customers get a nod.

I think those trying to poo-poo this is a "others getting something free doesn't equate to you being denied something" are being a bit thick with regard to marketing. You do NOT inform a customer base that buying the product early holds no benefits, and you certainly don't hint that simply not spending the money will see the product acquried for free down the line.

It's obviously in NC's best interest to make those who spend the full dollars upon release feel special, even if only cosmetically - making early/often purchase undesirable the sales equivalent of swallowing draino.

Edit: (As you can see from the post directly below mine, simply writing off any such concerns as "whiners who speak 1337" is far more fun than actually considering customer incentive. Where's the fun in reality?)

[ QUOTE ]
I hope this doesn't sound pessimistic (I have no reason to think this will negatively impact the game), but what do the following parties have to gain from this deal?

[/ QUOTE ]

I hazard:

[ QUOTE ]
NC Soft:

[/ QUOTE ] Control of and future profits from a niche market MMO that MIGHT now have more monetary support behind it's development. From the sound of it, it seems they plan on taking "City of" beyond its comic confines, which the pessimistic side of me sees as yet more watering down of what was, at one point, a "genre". But NC knows that MUO is going to take a huge slice out of the nich market pie, and they're probably banking on a the appeal of the Co* gaming system to bring in more customers IF the game(s) is made more broad in its targeting: fantasy, future tech, etc.

[ QUOTE ]
Cryptic:

[/ QUOTE ] Free up resources to work on the next, bigger title, which will impact the comic market harder because of the massive letters MARVEL behind it. Cryptic also knows that MUO is going to take a big slice out of the niche market pie, and I can only imagine it's a great weight off of them to know that they won't have to support and keep afloat the "last generation" of comic MMOs while developing the next given their limited resources.

[ QUOTE ]
The Players

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh... I dunno, man, on the one hand I'll say "Maybe more content and some of the changes that've yet to come because of 'limited time and resources'".... but honestly what I think they'll get is whatever NC decides needs to be done to keep this game competitive.

I'll tell you this, though, it does seem pretty amazing, on the surface of it, that Cryptic sold its IP, good IP, to another company so early in its life.

Until one considers the things that those at Cryptic might know about MUO and it's market impact: it's quite possible they're looking at the upcoming competition and thinking, "OK, this is a sinking ship, let's foist it off while we can and concentrate on a product with more growth potential."

No offense to any of our fine CoX team. This is a great game. But a business decision like this in any other venue says "this product is no longer high growth", and it likely applies here as well.

[ QUOTE ]
No offense, but I hate all holiday events. I think MMOs could do without them but for some reason they all feel like they need to do something around the holidays.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably has something to do with the overwhlemingly positive customer reactions. Just guessing.

[ QUOTE ]
This was my original feeling, but it went away once I found out they were adding weapon customization.

two dorky looking long swords?
lame fantasy twaddle.

Two player-choosable weapons?
neato mosquito

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually... yeah ok that is pretty cool.

If they'd been dual katanas it would have bothered me more (for design and combat reasons :P ). Also: having weapons from enemy groups in-game be usable goes to along way towards dispelling current fears about game theme dilution.

[ QUOTE ]

I have never seen "setting" used in this sense, nor do I readily find such a definition for it. In discussing literature, "setting" generally refers to the time and place of the action, and that is the way I have used it throughout this discussion. If you want to discuss style or artistic environs, feel free, but kindly refrain from confusing the issue by calling it "setting".

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't find 'setting" in refering to the style of manga or what have you as a large stretch of the language. You'll just have to work around it, I suppose.

[ QUOTE ]

The point of discussing a theme--the essential subject or character of an artistic representation--is to address it in isolation. In an attempt to pursue this, I isolated the most fundamental subject of superhero comics--not "western comics" in general, as that incorporates the pulps and such, which have different subject matter.

If instead you prefer to discuss broad sweeps of artistic style, story, politics, and morality, so be it. How, exactly, does the introduction of new power options--drawn and animated by the same artists who set the style for the rest of the game--dilute these factors?

[/ QUOTE ]

I already answered that:

[ QUOTE ]
Adding new abilities may not dilute that. If they do, it will be by straying from the theme the game is built around.

Heroes in western comics used swords. So much so that nearly 40% of scrapper primaries feature them? I dunno about that

[/ QUOTE ]

The "broad sweeps" you refer to were a descriptive response to your phrased encapsulation of western comics, not a comment on new powers speicifically, obviously. The general complaints I've seen seem to center around atmosphere, the artistic and atmospheric setting of the game - a pretty miasmic quality. Different for a lot of players, but then all of this is a discussion of perception and opinion on artistic issues.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heroes in western comics used swords. So much so that nearly 40% of scrapper primaries feature them? I dunno about that.

[/ QUOTE ]
What does the percentage have to do with anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously it affects certain player's perception of the overall flavor of the game, else we'd have no complaints.

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't even necessarily correspond with the percentage of scrappers who use swords in-game. It's a percentage of the options.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, we come down to players making of the available options what they choose--which you said is not your primary concern. The question of how the availability of those options interferes with internal consistency remains open.

[/ QUOTE ]

By that logic, the further addition of chisakatana, chokuto, dotanuki, hachiwara, shinken, nagamaki, o-katana and shin gunto to the game wouldn't affect the overall atmoshpere at all as they only existed in the costume designer as options. I think it's unnecessary to point out why this wouldn't be the case, or even why the current ratio still has someone disagreeing with you. It seems items within the character designer affect some player's perception of the atmosphere of the game. While I can appreciate that perhaps you think this is unwarranted, it never the less exists.

[ QUOTE ]
This has been commented on before the new sword set. It's being commented on again. Obviously, people perceive a theme in this game (I assume it's the game the game states it was built on) and some of them see Cryptic as straying from it a bit - I imagine there's a reason behind that perception.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i]Ad populum[/i]

[/ QUOTE ]

Fancy! However, an ad populum appeal refers to an individual claiming a concept as truth because many feel it. I simply state that "the perception exists", which is a forum fact as demonstrated by the existence of this and past threads discussing worries over the flavor of future items and how they would affect the game's setting. We had some great manga discussions when shoulder pets came out.

[ QUOTE ]
-and without even demonstrating that the majority share that perception

[/ QUOTE ]

I never stated "the majority share the perception" - my actuall wording is a few short eyewidths above this paragraph - check it out. I fear you're looking for a tiff that's not there. This was an interesting chat on player perception, not a grass-roots game-change movement.

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there are people who claim such a perception. Some of them even claim it honestly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that's interesting; what drove you to imply that someone is being dishonest is stating their perception of the game? What would the motivation be for such a thing? That's seems unnecessarily combative.

[ QUOTE ]
That does not mean the perception is correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perceptions are, by their definition, entirely reliant on the obsever - so, naturally, people having them doesn't mean they are "correct" - why you would think that needed to be asserted is beyond me. This is a discussion, it's not a sales pitch.

No offense, but your tone seems to be growing a tad irritated - this is a discussion forum, wherein folks present their "perceptions" and discuss them - no need to drag out the debate-101 latin and try to concoct a more hostile exchange than is necessary with implications of dishonesty. I'd say we sufficiently covered our points of view in any case. Good discussion. Cheers!

This is semantics, friend, and it's not really relevant to our disagreement. Genre, originally a term only applicable to literature, can now be stretched to refer to a "group" within any subset, but I prefer a more proper usage, which is to refer to subcategories within literature. It can be said that manga is a genre of comics - to my mind, that's not proper usage, but this is english and meanings change as fast as folks can use them in new ways.

[ QUOTE ]
"Manga" is not a setting. Manga is a stylistic category, and a fairly broad one.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be an interesting dicussion to wrangle over - you're right, Manga is a style, but then when I said "setting" I was referring to the artistic environ of manga - because we were talking about a visual medium. Manga can also be referred to as a genre of comics, which in turn are a genre of illustrated art, and so on and so forth.

Interesting, but not really relevant to my feelings on the western comic flavor of the game and its being watered down over time.

[ QUOTE ]
If you insist on referring to everything comic-like collectively as a "genre",

[/ QUOTE ]

In the quote you were responding to here, I was referring to comics as a genre. Speaking properly: comics are a genre of literature. Also of printed media, in a less proper usage.

[ QUOTE ]
What, exactly, is the "theme" of superhero comics? I'll take a stab at it--Superhero comics depict the lives of people with extraordinary abilities who fight nefarious evildoers in (mostly) a modern-Earth setting. ?

[/ QUOTE ]

To see the "theme" of "superhero comics" (which I assume means western comics, as that is where the term was born) one merely needs to place them alongside manga, italian comics, and pulp mags. I don't see the point in a break down of artistic and thematic differences, I think we're all comic fans enough to know them at sight.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll take a stab at it--Superhero comics depict the lives of people with extraordinary abilities who fight nefarious evildoers in (mostly) a modern-Earth setting.

[/ QUOTE ]

This discards art style, story themes, political backgrounds, moral undercurrents and a score of other flavors added to a subsection of the comic genre based on the society in which they are created. These things are key in the difference of various comic styles. Is starts with art but goes well beyond the moral themes of various culture's take on "comics".

[ QUOTE ]
How does adding new abilities dilute that

[/ QUOTE ]

Adding new abilities may not dilute that. If they do, it will be by straying from the theme the game is built around.

Heroes in western comics used swords. So much so that nearly 40% of scrapper primaries feature them? I dunno about that.

This has been commented on before the new sword set. It's being commented on again. Obviously, people perceive a theme in this game (I assume it's the game the game states it was built on) and some of them see Cryptic as straying from it a bit - I imagine there's a reason behind that perception.

You know... it's true... CoH features some dingy looks in its map zones... but CoV just seems to be overall dingy with very fre bright spots... and the few pretty spots there are tend to be infested with very mean things.

I remember enterring Nerva on my first villain and, since I was a super speeder (yeah, I did ok, had the jump pack) exploring it first... I got out to the tree area and thought "Hey, cool! This is sort of pretty in a creepy way! I wonder what's out he---OH DEAR SWEET JEEBUS ABOVE GET IT OFF ME GET IT OFF MEEEEEE***"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And manga is not a comic setting? The graphic novel? Pulp mags, ala the 60s and 70s, wherein heroes were anything from spelunkers to... well... Rex Havoc? Teen morality comics? Would Jughead really fit into Paragon?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well...no, they're not. They have settings, certainly, but the settings are distinct within each genre.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's exacly the same situation as fantasy settings, mate. Each has a distinct style, flavor, etc.. To lump them all together under a generic whole is to discard individual theme in the face of a universal label. Genre describes the whole, with both subjects, yet each contains thematic microcosms which differ entirely from one another. They don't all belong in the same book/game/media. Fantasy or Comic Book, neither can be encompassed in its whole in one design.

Same with any genre. Action movies, comedy, drama. A "Midsummer Nights Dream" is not a "Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy", despite being in the same genre.

I can't think of a single genre that could be encapsulated in one graphic setting and still maintain a thematic whole.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. You still seem to be conflating settings with genres

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually thought that's what *you* were doing:

[ QUOTE ]
They have settings, certainly, but the settings are distinct within each genre.[/

[/ QUOTE ]

Genre refers to "comics" - manga is a subset of the comic genre. Settings occur within the different elements found within the genre, the genre itself is far too broad to be encapsulated in one "setting".

[ QUOTE ]
... and now have added individual books within a setting to the mix.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, within a "genre" - comedy, in that case, was a "genre" of written fiction. Manga is a setting/style in comics, which are a genre of printed art or fiction, take your pick.

[ QUOTE ]
Are you trying to suggest that because there are multiple comics with distinctive elements set in the DC universe (for example), it is not a single setting?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, multiple setting within the genre of comics: manga, Italian, British, pulp mag, etc. The DC universe would be a distinctive (western comic) setting within the genre. Having DC and Marvel mix would be odd to fans, but wouldn't hinder a western comic setting in the least.

[ QUOTE ]
To reiterate: My contention is that a single superhero setting can reasonably contain all of the powersets, costumes, and other elements currently available to us in the CoX game engine, as well as a vast array of still more disparate elements, including some which also appear in other genres.

[/ QUOTE ]
My contention is that a "comic book superhero" MMO setting cannot incorporate all elements of the genre of "comics" and still maintain a cohesive theme.

Your speaking in specific terms of similar settings: DC, Marvel - I'm referring disparate setting within the genre: pulp mag, manga, etc.

I think they can give a nod to this stuff (shoulder pets... shudder) and, say, 3 out of 8 scrapper sets being swords (one would think swords were FAR more common in western comics based on that) - but the more is added, the more diluted the theme becomes.

Before Sam objects: This is my opinion - Sam has his and it's as valid as anyone's.

(I am sitting half-expecting that someone is eventually going to grasp the term "western comics" and start making noises about elitism in western culture, etc.)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And manga is not a comic setting? The graphic novel? Pulp mags, ala the 60s and 70s, wherein heroes were anything from spelunkers to... well... Rex Havoc? Teen morality comics? Would Jughead really fit into Paragon?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well...no, they're not. They have settings, certainly, but the settings are distinct within each genre.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's exacly the same situation as fantasy settings, mate. Each has a distinct style, flavor, etc.. To lump them all together under a generic whole is to discard individual theme in the face of a universal label. Genre describes the whole, with both subjects, yet each contains thematic microcosms which differ entirely from one another. They don't all belong in the same book/game/media. Fantasy or Comic Book, neither can be encompassed in its whole in one design.

Same with any genre. Action movies, comedy, drama. A "Midsummer Nights Dream" is not a "Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy", despite being in the same genre.

I can't think of a single genre that could be encapsulated in one graphic setting and still maintain a thematic whole.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And manga is not a comic setting? The graphic novel? Pulp mags, ala the 60s and 70s, wherein heroes were anything from spelunkers to... well... Rex Havoc? Teen morality comics? Would Jughead really fit into Paragon?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well...no, they're not. They have settings, certainly, but the settings are distinct within each genre.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's exacly the same situation as fantasy settings, mate. Each has a distinct style, flavor, etc.. To lump them all together under a generic whole is to discard individual theme in the face of a universal label.