SteelRat
-
Posts
950 -
Joined
-
Quote:If it were posted in an official capacity somewhere and there was corroborated evidence, I don't think anyone would complain. All we've had up until now (and I do realise that it's largely the nature of the beast what with NDA's and the like) is a glimmer of hope followed by the harsh reality of nothing actually changing at all. That is why people are cynical and that is why people are after something more tangible.Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
We may get that, or we may not. Brian is probably still NDA'd anyhow. We haven't heard any new grimy details one way or another yet from ANYBODY. Maybe after shutdown that will change. But if it does, unless it's posted on Youtube as Burnt suggested (highly unlikely. how often does anyone who is even a mild celebrity go out of their way to do that, just to prove it's they who is saying it?), nobody will believe it. Any other online venue he may post it on will be immediately dismissed as a troll account or a deliberate Titan smokescreen. -
Quote:I wouldn't mind so much if Brian HAD come forward and said "Yup.. it's all true guys, this is how it is", at least that'd be something a little more credible than "Oh yes, I'm mates with Brian I am, and this is what we were talking about the other night". Especially when such things come from someone who makes a living out of writing fiction.Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
Alternate scenario is, Brian posts about it. And the common response would then be, "How do we know you're really him?"
Proof is impossible these days. Even when the odds are good (And the odds here are not good since we have the opaque wall of corporate privacy to contend with AND the anonymity of the internet). Never before has technology made it so easy for skeptics to adhere to their beliefs... or lack of belief... whatever you want to call it. Everything but physically being there in person when it happens, can be faked. And even the example I just mentioned is probably on the way out. Someone will get a Total Recall style mind-trick to work, and then even our own experiences will be in question. -
I can't really add too much more to what Fire Away and IBtT have already said, except to echo their thoughts.
At the end of August the various moves that were employed to unite the playerbase and make our voices heard, lead by Titan, were something we could be proud of. The Unity Rally, AP33, the campaign to send in masks and capes to NC. All of those events really were a way of showing what players of a super-hero game were about, and that we weren't about to let our beloved game go without a fight.
Unfortunately it's what happened after that, as time went on, and NCSoft dug their heels in that made me change my mind about the way things were going and also the way they were being handled. Whilst it might have all been fluff and rainbows inside the Titan forums themselves (although it wasn't long after the "Sorry we're not changing our minds" announcement that I stopped visiting them) it was the behaviour by various people outside the CoH / SaveCOH bubble that gave me the most concern; comment bombing gaming reviews of NCSoft games with anti NCSoft rhetoric, constant and in some cases rather disturbing ideas to be responsible for the entire companys demise, for example.
The real doozy though was a week or so ago when a Korean newspaper published an article explaining that the reason for NCSofts stock problems was, in fact, due to TKJ selling a large part of his shares. Neither City of Heroes, nor the Unity Rally was mentioned. At all. And yet, there were a string of chest thumping victory calls triumphantly proclaiming that the SaveCoH movement has succeeded, and that you "really shouldn't mess with us NCSoft" and all this other nonsense.
Believe me when I tell you that I'm really no market expert, and yet I was able to read what was presented before me in black and white by people that are. I'm sorry, but I just cannot give any credence to anyone that aligns themselves with that level of lunacy without at least one of them saying "Erm.. guys.. actually that wasn't us. See look, it says so just there". Especially if when someone does call to question things of that ilk they're labelled as a troll. -
Quote:Of course, but sometimes when you fight there comes a point when you are defeated and you must accept defeat. If you keep trying even after that point, well it starts to get embarrassing and any displays of tenacity you had in the initial stages of your battle are soon forgotten.Originally Posted by blackjak
BUT, to not try, to roll over and capitulate, is bordering on cowardice IF you care. If you don't then no biggie.
-
Quote:Yeah, I know where you're coming from. I like fantastic, but I'd still like to believe it. Overly cartoony graphics detract from the believability, and whilst the super-hero genre is guilty of being a little cheesey and over the top almost by definition, CoH does manage to keep that cheese with its feet on the ground most of the time. I've often thought CO is almost a parody of itself.Originally Posted by Dollhouse
My issue with CO is that the setting is a bit too much of the cliched comicbook superhero thing for me. It's not as bad about being horribly campy (like a bad knockoff of The Tick, without the irony) as it was at launch, but it's still got a pretty high cheese factor. That's pure poison for an immersion junkie like me. I enjoy the game from a pure gameplay standpoint (I like the combat system a fair bit better than the one in CoH), but the game just doesn't "grab" me, even on my second attempt. My three month sub runs out in a week or so...haven't logged on in a month.
TSW, on the other hand, works perfectly for me, despite the combat system being meh at best. I don't care so much about the "super powers" aspect (I'd have preferred that to be toned down enormously, in fact), but the story writing, contextual setting, and so much more about the game is simply brilliant. Immersion heaven...
Likewise. The Elin in particular were vomit-inducing. Mind you, the rather cartoonish graphics aren't a bad match with the over-the-top combat animations, absurdly outsized weapons, and other elements of that portion of the high fantasy genre that isn't even trying for any kind of realism. Doesn't work at all for me, though, so despite being interested in the combat system, I never even considered trying the game.
TSW shares that same "fantastic but believable" feel to it that COH has. -
Quote:I think this is part of the problem you know. It's so easy to forget that MMOs are products. Products with a life span. Products that just like everything else we buy have a very strong likelihood of being pulled and replaced with something else if it's not selling as well as other products by the manufacturers competitors.Originally Posted by Dollhouse
but that's how the corporate world works, for the most part: hard, cold numbers.
For all the fuzzy wuzzy feelings of "togetherness" they promote, this is what it comes down to; ensuring we as the consumer are spending our money with them and not with someone else.
I'm sorry if that sounds a bit harsh, but however much it sucks donkey, ultimately that's the truth of the situation. -
Quote:Whilst I agree with you in principle, could I just put what I said back into the context of my original point?Originally Posted by Thunder Knight
I'm not sure why "an 8-year-old game" should be presented as a negative. It doesn't mean the same thing for a MMO that it does for, say, a console game. CoH has constantly had an active dev team and a constant stream of updates (including, lest you forget, a highly-anticipated one still in beta when the game was killed) during most of its life, and those updates were just getting bigger and more frequent rather than slowing down, as opposed to an 8-year-old console game, which is exactly the same now as it was eight years ago.
For example, the I24 beta wasn't just a content update, it was an update to the technology itself, redoing a lot of the game's backend for improved cutscenes, better demo recordings, and customizing character powers. I24 was a huge technological improvement over I23, let alone I1. The game can do things now that the original developer team and early players could only dream of. That's not "an eight-year-old game". That's a game that's been constantly developed for eight years, which is not the same thing at all.
The whole point of MMOs is the long term play. Older but constantly-updated games are the ones with the amount of content for just such long-term player retention. (That's why, for example, the six-year-old Dofus - which gets regular updates every three months, and in fact has an update in Beta right at this moment - is still breaking subscription records in its home country of France, while its newer, shinier, fancier, and, frankly, better-designed sequel Wakfu appears to be stagnating after less than a year)
NCSoft clearly doesn't understand that it's better to have a small but loyal group who will stick around through thick and thin for nearly a decade than to get a bunch of people who play a shiny new game for a few months, get bored, and wander away.
But NCSoft is apparently looking to grab the latter crowd instead of the former. We need to point out the benefits of "an eight-year-old game" over a newer, shinier, fancier, smaller, emptier game.
"talking about an 8 year old game with a playerbase in steady decline from 2009"
It's not the fact that CoH is 8 years old, it's the fact that players have been steadily leaving it. It doesn't matter that it's been in constant development in that time, because it's clear that that content hasn't been of sufficient quality to make sure that it enjoys the retention you're talking about. -
Quote:If you want to use that as analogy, my standpoint is that I wouldn't continue applying CPR even after someone had been pronounced dead by medical personnel.Originally Posted by Twisted Toon
You know, I'm really glad that you weren't one of the people looking for survivors under the buildings on 911. Being a "realist", you would have given up before you even started looking.
-
Quote:It's not exactly the first time something along these lines has been suggested and is indicative of the general tone now that seems to prevail.Originally Posted by Thunder Knight
So... one person offering a negative idea is now suddenly the entire community?
-
Quote:Ok fair enough. So where has that damaged reputation come as a result of our actions to save the game then, hmm? Seems to me if their reputation is c**p it's because of their own mismanagement.Originally Posted by shadow35
Um, in case you hadn't noticed, Nexon's implant of a monetization manager into ArenaNet before it would buy controlling shares of NCSoft isn't exactly leaving GW2 players jumping for joy over that decision these days. And there's what can only be described as a complete $hitstorm happening over the current gear changes that ArenaNet had previously sworn they would never make, too. So yay for the original 2 million boxes sold before these changes went public: Warhammer Online and TOR sold a couple mill when they launched, too, and it saved them as well, amirite? :P
And I wouldn't exactly call B & S "eagerly awaited" in the west. Judging by various blog and forum posts and player responses, many see it as yet another cheesy Korean grindfest with little to offer anyone.
And Wildstar.....Carbine should run the hell away from NCSoft while they still can. You can't tell me there aren't other publishers out there who'd be willing to take them on.
And straight from Brian Clayton, NCSoft's reputation HAS been damaged by their closure of CoH (and not just by the fact that they're closing it but by the brutish, callous way they went about the whole ordeal) and they ARE in fact worried about that. As they should be. Blade & Soul, cheesy grindfest that it is, is making its way stateside at what will still be a very bad time in NCSoft's history reputation-wise. -
Quote:There's a lot of truth in that. I think part of the reason I can't get on with CO is because in concept it's about as close to CoH as we're going to get, but the implementation of that concept is about as different as it's going to get. When I play it I can't help but think "This isn't CoH". I think that's also why I've plumped for TSW. It's got elements of super powers in a contemporary setting, but it still is nothing really like CoH.Originally Posted by BrandX
Because you'd find something else to complain about with the game.
Want a game that isn't a WoW clone? Check out TERA. Fun game! Different game mechanics! It's only downside is teaming on normal quests. :/ But, I'm sure all the nice things about it would be overlooked.
Basically, what I'm saying is, you probably wouldn't behappy with any game except CoH.
As a CoH vet, I know I look at every MMO and compare it to CoH.
Of course, as a CoH vet, I looked at some things other MMOs did and went "Why cant we have that in CoH?"
As for TERA, I did have a look at it but couldn't get past what appeared to be overly cutesy graphics. Call me fickle :P -
Quote:Haha. Again. This.Originally Posted by Judas_Ace
Another stellar idea from the community that consistently labels itself "the most mature and reasonable MMO community on the internet"
Honestly, far from "We Are Heroes. This is what we do", the slogan should be relabelled "We Are Desperate. We'll Try ANYTHING!" -
Quote:Not sure I agree that it's made even a scratch on NCs image, quite frankly. It's easy to have a polarised view of the effect precisely because we're directly involved with it, but in the bigger picture have we made that much difference? The popularity of B&S in the East and its eagerly awaited arrival in the west, coupled with excitement over Wildstar and 2,000,000 copies of GW2 sold in its first month would probably indicate not so much.Originally Posted by Pyrokinetix
While yes the game will sadly close on the 30th, the actions of the community even though we couldn't stop the closure we have created waves throughout the internet.
Even if everyone moves on at least there will be a reminder throughout the world that the CoH Community actually TRIED to do something to stop it's closure. In the end we've our efforts have left something other than a huge dent on NCsoft's public image. -
Quote:This.Originally Posted by Judas_Ace
The problem is that there isn't a market for City of Heroes. 50k subscribers isn't a market, it's a minor blip on some spreadsheet. In the corporate world, 50k people is worthless.
If this game was worth keeping alive from a financial perspective, it wouldn't be dead. It has value to some people, but even from the 50k subscribers, how many are actively trying to save it vs just moving on? Maybe 10k tops.
The game has been dead for a while, it's time to put it in the ground.
I'm not a cynic, I'm a realist. We can "rouse the troops" all we like, but you're talking about an 8 year old game with a playerbase in steady decline from 2009. Whilst we the die hard fans might think (and quite rightly) that it's a game and IP worthy of saving, the en masse gaming populous does not, and therefore neither do the suits at NCSoft whos decisions are governed by their P&L statements, not the misty eyed sentimentality of a few thousand players who won't let it go.
Players are spoilt for choice at the moment. There are a lot more games available than there were in 2004 and a whole load more in development. If you think that making a big noise about an old game that a large number of people for what ever reason have already decided they don't want to be part of in the place of that sort of marketplace, then whilst your tenacity to the cause and belief in the IP is admirable, it's a little misplaced.
I'm not knocking you for having that opinion or belief; more power to you, but please don't label me as an unwilling cynic just because I've accepted what is. -
Quote:Same here. That isn't sexism, it's self preservation.Originally Posted by blackjak
I dunno. My motto is everyone online is a 45 year old man in a cheetos stained t-shirt. Especially the girls.
Saves on mind bleach too.
EL, you've obviously never heard of the slightly tongue in cheek expression "there are no gurls on the interwebz!".
That has nothing to do with sexism, it's do with demographics. Granted, there are more girl gamers now than there used to be, but it's still predominantly a past time enjoyed by men and therefore for every player you might come across, there's a stronger likelihood that player will be male. It's true that there are some games that have stronger appeal for women than men and that the distributions of men and women in those games might be different, but in general it's a fairly safe assumption.
Sexism isn't the assumption that a past time is generally enjoyed by one sex more than the other, sexism is saying that one gender shouldn't enjoy that past time based on their gender alone. -
Chat channel might be a good idea? Might make it easier to co-ordinate things?
-
Fair point, but on the flip side, we're not the only epitome of respect and by no means all sweetness and light either.
WoW is probably not the best yard stick, to be fair. That game is a stinking cesspit of yuck from every point of view. Except the board members share options one, I'd imagine. -
My point being that boycotting either NCSoft or Disney will have the same net effect; zero.
-
If you think the CoH community is all flowers and rainbows and that every player is the Paragon (excuse the pun) of righteousness, politeness and love of its fellow man, I'd like a big order of whatever mind altering drug you're smoking.
This games playerbase is not essentially that different to most other games. Other games have their nice people and their idiots just like we do and as much as you may find this hard to believe, the relative numbers of each group is probably about the same.
I think where CoH IS different is that its grouping mechanic is so much better implemented than other games and the game is actually a lot more fun WHEN you group up with other people, you're more likely to be put in a position where you meet all those nice people. If, as in other games, you're playing largely solo and the only time you're exposed to other people is in PVP or large raids, then of course you're going to have a skewed view of what the player base of that game is actually like. -
.. so about the same effect as boycotting NCSoft then.
-
Never the let the facts of a situation spoil a good rant.
-
WoW clones do get finished and dont end up as vapourware after 6 months? Different from that point of view i suppose
-
That is true but that's also my point; WoW was the unusual beast which is why I wanted to take it out of the equation. In the scheme of other games that occupied a similar market share to CoH's, was CoH's advertisement profile noticeably lower than theirs? Did we see lots of advertisements for SWG, EQII, GW1, DAoC and the other "MMOs that aren't WoW"? and from that point of view was CoHs noticeably absent?
To be honest, before I knew about CoH, WoW (and possibly EvE) was the only game that as a non MMORPG player I knew about, so I'm not sure it's lack of advertising that was really a significant enough factor.
I think if CoH had a history of single player games that it could've used as a launch pad in the same way that WoW did, it might have had the playerbase that could've generated sufficient revenues for all of those avenues you mention to be utilised. I wonder if the only reason WoW was able to advertise as heavily as it did (and does) is because back in 2004 if you were a gamer, you'd have heard of Blizzard and probably played Warcraft. -
That is true but that's also my point; WoW was the unusual beast which is why I wanted to take it out of the equation. In the scheme of other games that occupied a similar market share to CoH's, was CoH's advertisement profile noticeably lower than theirs? Did we see lots of advertisements for SWG, EQII, GW1, DAoC and the other "MMOs that aren't WoW"? and from that point of view was CoHs noticeably absent?
To be honest, before I knew about CoH, WoW (and possibly EvE) was the only game that as a non MMORPG player I knew about, so I'm not sure it's lack of advertising was really a significant enough factor.
I think if CoH had a history of single player games that it could've used as a launch pad in the same way that WoW did, it might have had the playerbase that could've generated sufficient revenues for all of those avenues you mention to be utilised. I wonder if the only reason WoW was able to advertise as heavily as it did (and does) is because back in 2004 if you were a gamer, you'd have heard of Blizzard and probably played Warcraft. No o -
Lots of things CoH got right which made it's failures seem relatively unimportant. In order of importance from my own personal opinion:
1 - Not gear driven; or at least not from a visual appearance stand point.
2 - Grouping. Even before the relatively recent side-kicking changes teaming was where this game really shon.
3 - Unique power sets which all had their place and looked darn cool no matter what character concept you came up with.
4 - Clearly defined archetypcial roles so that you knew what would be expected you on a team, the team knew largely what they'd be getting.
5 - Probably should've been the top of the list, but it's really a bit subjective result of all those things above. Fun. CoH had fun and buckets of it. There were things it did wrong but most of the time, it let you do the things that were fun and rewarded you for it.