Samuel_Tow

This is something that gnawed on me the entire way through first ward: Why are the Carnival of Light a carnival? I mean, I know why the decision to make them one was made - the Carnival of Shadows existed and their Praetorian counterparts, the Carnival of Light, have had mentions since as early as Issue 1. The Cryptic Studios of seven years ago promised us a Carnival of Light, and like Gearbox scraping together bits and pieces from 12 years of dropped projects to make Duke Nukem Forever, Paragon Studios of today HAD to give us the Carnival of Light, because they'd been written into a corner.

But this doesn't answer the actual question as it pertains to First Ward and Praetorian Earth in general. Why are the Carnival of Light a carnival? On Primal Earth, the answer is actually simply - the Carnival of Shadows are a carnival because Primal Vanessa DeVore feeds on people's emotions, so it's natural for her organise events where people come to be entertained, thrilled and frightened. It also makes sense for the Carnival of Light to be a Carnival because this makes it easy for them to hide their activities, with people who've had their souls stolen simply believed to have been deeply affected, and where the women can wear masks all the time and the walking corpses don't stick out as much. The Carnival of Shadows being a travelling circus is just an extension of who and what they are and the convenience such a venue offers to villains of this type.

But why are the Carnival of LIGHT a carnival, aside from just for the sake of parity? They never act like a carnival, never act like entertainers. Especially in the First Ward, what purpose is there for a carnival to begin with? Oh, sure, most of the Carnies either act crazy or dress like jesters, but again - why? Why do they act crazy and goofy? Why do they act like circus performers... Really weird circus performers, since their gold and white clothes just stand out too much, and the misshapen masks with wings on the side are a bit much. I just can't follow the train of thought that saw former Midnight Club or Legacy Chain mytstics suddenly decide to dress up like clowns. Even Vanessa's own acolytes don't make sense to look like carnies, nor, as a point of fact, does Vanessa herself make sense to be in that ridiculous getup.

The Primal Earth Vanessa and her entourage make sense to BE a carnival because that actually is what they masquerade as. The Praetorian Vanessa and her Carnival, however, don't act like a carnival, so why do they dress partially like one and why are they called this? The story simply assumes that this should be obvious, and it really isn't.

I've never actually seen "I don't like it" as a legitimate complaint for wanting a refund. If the item you bought is damaged, sure, or if it's not as advertised. Then the vendor should have the responsibility to reimburse you, though even then I've only ever seen vendors take the item back for a trade of another item and never for a refund. But buying an item and just deciding you suddenly don't like it? Should have thought of that before you bought it. A deal's a deal.

In other words, a vendor is only responsible for a trade-in or a refund if the vendor is responsible for the problems with the item. If the customer has problems beyond those, especially "I don't like it as much as I thought I would," then that's too bad so sad.

Here's the thing - if I get roped into watching the Last Airbender movie and I hate it, do I get to go out and demand a refund? If I buy a car and decide I don't like it red after I park it in my magenta garage, do I get a refund? If I buy a game and realise my computer is a piece of crap that doesn't cover the minimal system requirements, do I get a refund? Because in none of these cases would I say "yes."

I'm not even talking about "caveat emptor." I'm talking about being responsible for the decisions you make, and if you got exactly what you were promised, you don't get to complain. And what WERE we promised with Saint Justice? A melee set with a combo mechanic. That it is. End of story.

Yes, I can. They don't have a responsibility OF ANY KIND to disclose anything whatsoever to the players, just like said players don't have a responsibility to buy anything that they haven't been informed about. Valve have been selling TF2 chest keys for real money with absolutely no disclosure as to what that key will actually earn people in the real game.

The vendor doesn't have a RESPONSIBILITY to hold people's hands and make decisions for them. It's good business to have greater accessibility and information, obviously, since not everyone wants to buy something without a good understanding, but that's on the discretion of the vendor and not something you can go about demanding.

Well, no, you CAN go about demanding it and you probably have a right to that, but you can't turn this into a responsibility on Paragon Studios' part just because you say it's so.

Again, you're acting almost exactly like Icedrone.

No worries I just know that pretty much no-one here will ever give you your money back for anything. Not a big business, not a small business. Sometimes you can appeal to business owners' good nature and they'll make an exception, but once you purchase an item here, there are no refunds. Maybe I'm just used to it.

Here. You just said it here.

Also: No, I don't believe Paragon Studios are under any obligation, ethical, moral, legal or religious, to inform players what they are buying. As long as they don't actually LIE about what it is that they are selling - which they aren't - then they can offer whatever they damn please with as much or as little explanation as they please. If people agree to buy these things, then people should be responsible for their own money.

I live in an EU country and there's no such law here. There never has been. What country is this that this exists? Because "the EU" is not a country, nor an authority with law-making rights over sovereign states.

They ARE too expensive, but that just means one thing and one thing only: I won't buy them. Because they're too expensive. Neither you nor I are the only people who feel this way. I'm sure many will. I'm also sure that if many don't, either costume slots will drop in price, or they'll go on sale hella' often.

Honestly, I don't think this is a matter that can be won by debate. Buy what you feel is priced right, shun what you feel is a ripoff and let profit margins carry the point across.

Which should have come as no surprise to anyone. Free players are limited to three channels: Local, which doesn't reach much people, Team which only works if you're on a team, and if you're a Free player you have to knit your fingers and pray, and Help. This should have been obvious to the folks at Paragon Studios long before it happened, and I'm pretty sure it was. The question is what they want to do about it.

What I'd like to do is set up a server-wide chat channel that Free players can take part in which isn't Help or Arena or any other single-theme channel. Because if this doesn't happen, then Help WILL turn into server-wide Broadcast.

This, more or less. I only ever make new characters on Victory and Pinnacle, and each new character comes with a long decision process as to which server to put it on. So it's hard to forget.

I never said you did, as the post I quoted didn't say that. But others have said this in the buildup to Freedom.

The numbers can be obtained by calling out the power names in-game. If one needs to know the power names, ParagonWiki - which shows up in loading tips - has them. I don't know if Mids' or City of Data have them yet, but they will. Failing that, on these very forums are people who WILL supply power numbers if you ask them to.

It's only a circular argument if believe the character creator to be the only source of City of Heroes numbers on the Internet, and it isn't by far. It isn't even the only source of numbers within the actual game.

What are the developers supposed to show you that lets you know how a powerset performs at high levels BUT its numbers? And those are available to ALL players with the only requirement being knowing what the powers are called, which is trivial to find out. Are you perhaps suggesting that the developers give players level bumps on test as a means to provide information? Because this won't happen, nor should it ever, not outside of a larger test with more productive goals.

Does it matter if they charge for one powerset or four? Does it matter if they charge for a powerset and a zone? You still don't know what you're buying until you buy it.

Which was to test that the set is working, not to give players "infromation."

So says you. Far as I'm concerned, the forums are perfectly official. Furthermore, since ParagonWiki is showing up on loading tips, that should be considered a go-to source for information, as well. It's not official, but it's accurate.

They don't need an excuse, because they don't owe you an early look. If you don't feel informed enough to make a purchase, then don't make that purchase.

Two points to make:

1. We already made pretty much the same complaints in Beta, at least I know I did.

2. Not everyone tests. Not everyone has to. It's not an expected player responsibility to test. Testing is work much more than it is play. It's for those who are indeed willing to put in the effort as well as the money. That's not everyone. As an MMO is a constantly-evolving thing, it stands to reason that people who played the game as they paid to do are just now finding out about these.

In my case, I listed my complaints about the tutorial in Beta and I was so disappointed that I simply never ran it on Live. For various reasons, I HAD to run the tutorial again recently, and I was simply reminded of how disappointed I was now that I ran it again. Chances are that if I end up running the tutorial again, I'll be disappointed again.

Basically, we shouldn't be looking to the past and to what could have been done, but to the future and where we go from here. Even if we agree that players "failed" and it's all our fault that the new tutorial is terrible, that doesn't change the fact that it's terrible and something needs to be done to improve it, as right now it's about as much use as an FMV.

...

In fact, I suspect a sufficiently cool FMV, or even an in-game graphics intro might do a better job than the actual tutorial.

No, they are not "responsible" for providing anything of the sort any more than they have been responsible for providing power numbers to people who have not purchased the game prior to Freedom. Allowing us to see power numbers would be good business, but NOT providing them is neither criminal nor unjust. It simply asks players to look for these numbers on their own, and these numbers are not that hard to find.

Furthermore, providing numbers does nothing for people who can't do the math, so it would be logical to request that it is the development team's "responsibility" to provide comprehensive numbers breakdowns for people who aren't well-versed in basic statistics.

Seriously, what is it with all the Icedrones on the forums of late?

I don't think you have anything to worry about there. Much as players may make noise on the subject, so far almost no set we've gotten has been explicitly better than all the others, and I don't think that's about to change.

O.o

...

Wow, OK, I might be able to play Praetoria again. That would be pretty nice

Hey, I have no problem with it whatsoever. Everyone spends his money on what he really wants. For me, this just happens to be new costume pieces much more so than new costume slots It's very rare that I have even a many as three meaningful costumes per character, and most of the time most alternates are just filler so the slot doesn't stay empty forever.

Now, if they were giving them away for nearly free... Sure, I'd grab the things, because even if I haven't needed them ever at all, a bargain is a bargain

Shubbie, you've been making that threat for the last seven years. It loses its weight when you keep throwing it around.

This is probably where most of the disconnect between the different parties' mental images takes place - are all super heroes publicly attempting to be heroes? Well, no, that's an easy answer, as people like the Punisher and... Um... I'm not that well-versed in comic lore, but no, not every one tries to act like a traditional super hero. Oh, Blade, of course! That's another one.

There's something of a general expectation of super heroes that is neatly exemplified by a question often asked when directing character concepts: "Well, why did he become a super hero?" Thing is... He DIDN'T. He has powers, yes, and he has a general goal, yes, and he even has a hero ID - they give those out at the City Hall gift shop these days. But he isn't what you'd call a "protector of the city," he doesn't patrol the streets, he doesn't solve crimes, he doesn't watch the news for people to rescue. He just kind of does his own thing and helps people when those objectives cross paths.

So, no, I don't believe all general-purpose heroes have to be exhibitionists, because not all general-purpose heroes even have a reputation, or even care to have one. Most of mine, in fact, are just meta-humans in a meta-human society, trying to fulfil their life's goal and not die in the process. In fact, that's part of where my desire for less... "Fashionable" women comes from - not all of the women I create really care about impressions or appearance so much as they care about focusing on their primary objective, which may not even be fighting crime.

This is something that bothers me, and greatly. It's not necessarily a BAD thing, but it is bad by virtue of being so pervasive and so all-consuming. I'll almost never complain about a character (female or otherwise) being attractive, but at the same time, sometimes I still want one who isn't, because sometimes I want to create or experience something that's not a retread of what I've already experienced a thousand times over. Why would I make a hundred cheese cakes when I can make ONE and keep playing her? Why do I need a hundred fanservice movies when I can have one and keep watching that? There needs to be something new, interesting and unique in a character in order for it to be interesting, and "not an ultra-sexy bombshell" is one of the least explored new angles.

This is pervasive, but it bothers me much more so when it's exclusive. Sure, I don't mind when a character is attractive, I even prefer it. But I want a character to be attractive AND INTERESTING, and a lot of authors don't really seem to make that final step, expecting that we'll be satisfied with any female character as long as she has breasts. Sorry, but in this day and age of Rule 34, that's no longer sufficient. If that's all I wanted, I wouldn't need to subscribe to a game for it or pay whatever ungodly amount a movie at the cinema costs these days. I can simply type my fetish in Goodle and pictures and movies and even games to that effect will appear. FOR FREE!

If I'm playing a game and not resorting to the easiest, most direct source of "this," then I'm trying to imply that I want something more than just "that." Attractive is good. JUST attractive isn't nearly as good, is what I mean. In fact, unattractive can sometimes be even better.

---

Here's a funny tangent: What IS attractive? Large assets? Improbably spine contortions? Chainmail bikini? Fetish gear? All of the above? Sure, probably, but sometimes... It can be something completely different. For some - myself among them - function in itself makes the form which produces it attractive. For instance, I like big guns, not because I like guns that are big aesthetically, but because big guns shoot big bullets and make big holes, and I like things that shoot big bullets and make big holes, so backtracking along that line, I end up liking big guns. And I don't mean that on a logical level of "I like the result, so therefore I must acknowledge the source." No, I mean this on a purely emotional level where the more I see something being effective and functional, the more I start to find it attractive.

Easy example: I didn't use to like Fire Blast. The breath attack seemed goofy and all of the others were kind of over too fast. However, having played a Fire/Fire/Flame Blaster to 50, I fell in love with the set. Every time I saw the sweet, sweet flash of Blaze, I got a smile on my face. Why? Because Fire Blast is... A bit overpowered. Playing with the set, I quickly grew to love the look of its powers on an instinctive level, because I began to associate that look with the performance they held. In time, the logical distinction of "I like Blaze because it's powerful" washed away into simply "I like Blaze."

This is something that far, far too many authors in general appreciate. If you make your audience care about your characters, then you've succeeded in making them care about your character designs in general. Whether your women are busty or frumpy, if you get your audience invested and interested in those characters, they WILL assign aesthetic beauty to their appearances not necessarily because they are aesthetically beautiful, but because they belong to those particular characters.

In short - you don't have to conform to people's aesthetic expectations. If you make compelling enough enough characters on their own, you can promote your own aesthetic, even if it's not the current popular fad.

Captions aren't titled, however, and when you have three separate people speaking in captions... At least what I inferred to be three separate people... It makes it very hard to tell whose dialogue is whose from the NPC tab. Having speaker names in the actual captions would help tremendously, making me wonder why no-one ever thought to include those.

That's more or less what I want to see, yeah Sometimes, some people just NEED a punch in the mouth. Not to kill them, not necessarily to hurt them, just so they get some sense punched into them

I disagree. That kind of dry, disconnected type of justice is very rare among the characters I create, pretty much isolated to the eponymous Samuel Tow, and only because he has a mostly clinical mind. But for most other characters? Yeah, they'd be angry, and rightly so, and to be honest, most of them would punch him.

See, the reason I want to specifically punch him and NOT kill him is because harming Aaron as some form of retrobution isn't the point. The point is to shut him up. Walking away isn't an option, since he has to go down one way or the other, and the man WILL NOT shut up if you just try to talk to him. So why not have a "I don't wanna' hear it! *slap*" option. I would think this would be even easier to write, since you don't really need any dialogue. Aaron says "Hello." I put my fist through his nose and send him off to the Zig. Conversation end. Because, frankly, that's all the conversation I want to have with that murderer.

Let me flip that question around - would you honestly WANT to debate ethics with a psychopath? I mean, aside from reasons of disconnected curiosity? It's like wrestling with a pig - win or lose, you end up getting dirty and the pig likes it anyway. Shut him up, send him to the Zig, job done, and I get a little bit more satisfaction out of it.

Honestly, I wish this were an option in a LOT of non-essential dialogues in this game. If said dialogue doesn't have any real point, just let me end it with a punch to the teeth.

That's how I figure it, as well, only for me it goes in the other direction. In seven years, the number of times I've been able to fill all five costume slots AND have ideas for more has been... Um, zero, actually. I don't ever remember having a new idea for a costume and not having the costume to do it with. So $10 for an extra costume slot is $10 wasted on nothing at all.

Well, for me, anyway.

You can check out all of the powerset's power names in the actual game. All you need is the power names, and you can see that at character creation. And if you can't, ask.

Secondly, claiming that a 6-foot-radius AoE can't hit anything is profoundly ignorant.

Lastly, proclaiming that the powerset was made weaker since Beta is false. The numbers are identical.