konshu
-
Posts
539 -
Joined
-
Quote:I agree. It would be HUGE.Originally Posted by unjust
I actually think that the merging of the base editor and MA editor wouldn't be a bad thing at all. MA was hugely popular. And if you state there is an update to this that, not only allows you to customize your maps, but also allows to revamp your SG base and use it as a map as well I think would be huge. -
I'd like to add that it is extremely important we get some sort of Irish jig, along the lines of Riverdance.
-
Quote:I hear what you're saying, but not everything is a matter of taste.Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
I think it's really a matter of taste and perspective than anything else. I've played many of the arcs that were submitted for the contest and all of them were flawed in one way or another, (as far as meeting the objective of the contest was concerned), including my own. Every audience member will either feel the ends of arc a wasn't enought to warrant the hero sacrificing his ethics for, or that the act committed of arc b wasn't evil enough to properly be considered 'evil,' or that a choice was offered or a choice wasn't offered.
Judging from this winning entry, and assuming the judging remains consistent, I'd have to say ignoring the actual purpose of the contest and instead putting a bunch of cute distractions, clues, and descriptions in your arc is the best way to win. -
I would continue expecting it in Q2, and not at the beginning of the quarter, but at the end.
I mean, when was the last time a software project, let alone a game project, came in early?
So when we get a little closer to June we'll probably hear a few more rumblings about what they've got in the box. -
Quote:Well put.Originally Posted by FredrikSvanberg
If so, we performed a great evil for a lesser good, but it was still self-defense. And under very few circumstances can anyone be blamed for acting in self-defense.
-
Quote:I'm not quite understanding the nature of your argument.Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
As a response to the last poster, no selfless=good, selfish=evil, is NOT a definition I accept. Even if the mad scientist did all that and gave the cure away, the ******* is STILL evil. Why? Cause there are dozens if not hundreds of folks doing LEGAL selfless work to cure cancer and are not killing folks.
So no, I do not agree with that definition. Definitions of good and evil are not that black and white in reality.
I think I pretty clearly spelled out that what the scientist was doing was evil, except possibly for his last act, which Venture didn't spell out and I had to guess at.
As I see it, we have intentions that are good or evil, but not people who are good or evil. Sure, we can characterize by saying "good scientist" or "evil scientist," but it's the individual instances that are measured.
You could, for instance, have a very sincere and thoughtful man help you when your car gets stranded in the desert, never knowing that 20 years ago he used to be a notorious thug in a biker gang.
I think most people have had a mix of "good" and "evil" intentions. I tend to see the selfish or "evil" ones being mainly a sign of immaturity. -
Quote:Huh. I could have sworn that when I played it, it was a Dev's Choice arc.Originally Posted by Tangler
I'm not sure what you mean here, I don't recall this arc having earned any previous award prior to this competition, unless you're talking about the author.
At any rate, that's the issue I was addressing: should Hall of Fame, Dev's Choice, and Guest Author arcs be allowed into each competition, or be disallowed?
That was a reference to a guest author arc. Look up LOLBAT. It's a humorous arc using internet memes.Quote:I don't know how you jump from that to a competition about internet memes either, though if Dr. Aeon wants to keep what sanity a mad scientist has left, I doubt we'll see that challenge.
It's been a while since I played the arc, but wasn't Dr. Aeon the only person you talk to? So I suppose he was "the only one who figured out what the phantoms really were" because that's what he told you.Quote:I didn't have a problem with the reasoning: Dr. Aeon was the only person who figured out what the phantoms really were, and the time-frame before "everyone dies" was portrayed to be small. That said I completely understand if the feeling of "this is not what my hero would do!" would devalue your enjoyment.
Honestly, the whole time I was in the arc my spidey-sense was tingling saying I was being lead down the primrose path and there was nothing I could do about it. -
Quote:I think the disk had compressed text.Originally Posted by Kelenar
Yeah, thaaaaat's pretty much what I was thinking. Even unformatted, two megabytes => 2,000,000 bytes => 16,000,000 bits. The Library of Congress has more individual books than that.
It said "TL;DR."
-
Quote:Actually, Striga's not bad. It's not usually as populated as The Hollows, and it doesn't have a hospital, but it does have 2 TFs and arcs which give temp powers, which is nice.Originally Posted by LittleDavid
As far as Hazard Zones go, the only one I spend a lot of time in is the Hollows. It's got things most of the other hazard zones just don't; a story arc of its own that spans several contacts, a battle with a villain group leader (Frostire), its own hospital, and the Cavern of Transcendence.
The hazard zones that lack content are: Perez, Boom, TV, DA, CF, and Eden (more or less).
Also, some zones are story zones, while others seem to be more story-neutral. A story zone would be where there is basically a single, multi-layered story told for the zone.
The story zones are: Hollows, Faultline, Striga, Croatoa, Ouroboros, RWZ, Cimerora, and the Shadow Shard.
I'm not sure how to count Peregrine Island, as it is mainly about the portals, but not entirely, and while Eden is obviously focused on the DE, unless I'm mistaken there's not a lot of mission content there. Likewise, Terra Volta has the respec trials, but otherwise not much going on.
The heroic zones that are neither hazard nor story zones are: Atlas, Galaxy, KR, Steel, Skyway, IP, Talos, and Founders'.
Did I miss anything?
-
Quote:We don't let female toons smoke because we have a commitment to focus upon their healthy ... lungs.Originally Posted by Jophiel
... I don't see why my female characters can't have a smoke.
O.O -
Quote:That sounds inherently unbalanced.Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
Actually it does. You get the benefit for 15 seconds after you activate the toggle. So Dark defenders, Rads, FF etc. get that benefit every time they turn the toggle on. After it's on they can still activate other powers to stack the buffs and the 5% end reduction from activating other powers make the toggles cheaper to run.
The idea is that the proposed Vigiliance status buff would be a temporary effect that occurs only when the player has finished building their Vig bar and activates the Vigilance power. I'd like to see it provide a few moment's protection against terrorize, disorient, immob, hold, confuse, slow, and sleep. This effect would be in addition to refilling the def's end bar.Quote:Also granting status protection isn't the way to go. Taking the sleep hole out of FF/ or Sonic/ would run contrary to dev history. Adding status protection to vigilance provides no benefit to the FF/ or Sonic/ which all ready have grantable status protection that is useable on self. Vigilance needs to benefit all power sets at least equitably.
The protection offered by FF and Sonic really doesn't compare, as when those powers are active they provide continuous protection for everyone within radius for hold, immob, and disorient. They are team buff powers, they don't restore end, and they don't provide temporary status protection against fear, sleep, confuse, and slow. At the same time, being a temporary effect that only occurs when the Vig bar is filled, you're not removing any sleep, fear, confuse, or slow holes; the holes are still there most of the time.
If you're concerned about "perma-Vig," keep in mind that's only a problem if the devs code it such that perma-Vig is possible. The devs will have control over how fast Vig builds, how long the status protection lasts, and how fast Vig recharges, so they would have considerable ability to balance the power out.
As I see it, this "Dom version" of Vigilance would give the def player a modest edge in those circumstances where the fighting has been heavy and someone needs to rise to the occasion to save the team, or where the def player is soloing and may occasionally dig deep within for additional strength to do battle. It also encourages def players to build out and use their secondary powers in order to gain this benefit. -
Quote:In defense of the arc's author, there are good things in the arc that I didn't mention. All I brought up were the shortcomings that I saw in relation to the contest.Originally Posted by Venture
N.B. I have not played the winning arc (or any of the arcs publicly mentioned as entries).
I disagree.Quote:This view of good and evil isn't likely to bear up under many real-world conditions.
I guess we agree the scientist is doing evil. First of all, he is killing people. Secondly, he is using unsavory methods and techniques. Lastly, his goal is self-aggrandizement. Evil, evil, evil.Quote:Consider a medical researcher trying to find a cure for, say, cancer. He decides to go the "mad science" route and uses techniques that will kill thousands of subjects. He's not doing it to heal the countless millions who would otherwise die without his cure. He's not even doing it for the money his research could earn him. He's doing it for the fame, even if it's infamy: "they can hate me until the end of time, but they'll have to remember me to do it".
Curing cancer is a greater good, but it's really hard to put a spin on our hypothetical researcher's motives to make them anything but selfish. Nor is it really possible to describe the totality of what he's doing as any kind of "good", even though people have gotten away with similar actions in the real world (members of WWII Japan's "Unit 731", which performed atrocities in the form of research on humans for bioweapons, were able to trade their findings for amnesty from war crimes prosecution). I think this example firmly challenges the notion that "anything done for the greater good is ultimately selfless".
If the scientist completes his project and gives the formula to a university for distribution, he still hasn't shown a "good" act, because all he has done is for himself. Most people would see him as evil.
Now I guess your unstated assumption is that this evil man would also freely distribute his cure to all who need it. In this case his motives are selfish (self-aggrandizement), but he is sacrificing his wealth to make the cure available, and he's not asking others for any further sacrifices. The young and the old, the rich and the poor ... all partake of the treatment at need.
In this case it's mixed, and I think people would, as you say, hate him for the evil he did in the past, but pragmatically accept the cure that is available now.
However, if he is asking for payment for his cure, then his degree of selfishness increases, and if he asks for an exorbitantly high price, so that only the wealthy can pay for it, then he's pretty solidly back in the evil department.
Agreed?
So I think the rule of good=selfless and evil=selfish works pretty well.
I wouldn't normally offer a review, but I think I will review your arc, since you've asked for it.Quote:Now, just to throw in a plug for my own stuff , while "The Christmas We Get" (#356477) wasn't written for the challenge (I had another arc in mind but RL got in the way; I might get back to it), it does have the kind of moral issue that was requested. I'd say it's more a case of "doing good for the greater evil", but I'd certainly be interested in your take on it, in light of your position....
You did review an arc of mine and I feel it would be courteous to return the favor.
...
-
Quote:One difficulty with your proposal is that it doesn't appear to consider toggles. Let's say I'm a storm def with Steamy Mist. This is a protective shield, so long as the team is near me. But I only turn it on once.Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
Vigilance's benefit shouldn't be anything that would benefit one particular defender power set or other. With that in mind I have always said that vigilance should give the defender a 5% global reduction in endurance costs and a 5% increase in global recharge each time the defender activates a primary or secondary power. The vigilance buff should stack up to 5 times and each 5% buff should last for 10-15 seconds.
I prefer the adaptation of Dom. The coding is already there. Just modify it so that as Vigilance it gives status protection instead of higher magnitude holds. -
I would add that I sent in an arc as well, and was mystified that I didn't receive an acknowledgement of my entry.
So I sent in an email asking if my arc had been received, and I got no reply.
Lastly, I expected to see an announcement of the contest winner on the main CoH page, and it never appeared.
Those are all things that should be changed.
As for the winning entry, aside from congrats to the author I have two complaints for the judge.
One, the winning arc was already an award winner. Shouldn't arcs that have already received an honor be disallowed in competitions? I mean, I can already imagine the outcome of the next contest ... "Write an arc that makes humorous use of internet memes."
Two, didn't anyone else find the winning arc hugely implausible? I didn't finish it, partly due to bugs, but also because I lost interest. I thought the use of Dr. Aeon didn't work, I thought the "perpendicular dimension" concept didn't work, and I thought getting shoehorned into an "evil" act without exploring other recourses was the wrong move.
Here's my view ...
Heroism is a selflessness, a willingness to sacrifice one's own needs and desires for others. Evil is the opposite: a self-centeredness that typically causes others to sacrifice for your own needs and desires.
That's part of what makes a vigilante interesting story material, in that he says he's doing justice (for the greater good), but one wonders if he is merely exerting his own will upon others (selfishness)?
Now as far as I can see, the idea of a "hero who does evil for the greater good" isn't actually a reference to doing evil. Because you can't be selfish for the greater good. Anything you do for the greater good is ultimately selfless. So what we're really talking about here is a hero who breaks the law, who does something "bad" in the name of the greater good. He may pay a price for his good deed, if he comes under judgment, or he may gain acclaim yet feel torn by guilt. He might bear down and do the dirty deed to take the guilt upon himself so others might retain their innocence. He may also do the bad deed simply because it needs doing (for the greater good).
There are several permutations of this, as it's a common theme in literature. Heroes are tested to see if they have the courage to persevere in serving the greater good even if it means losing everything, including their reputation. Typically, the writer uses this conflict to heighten interest, and then bails the hero out at the end by providing something unexpected that saves the hero from having to pay the price. After all, we usually want a happy ending, we don't really want to see the hero lose everything.
I didn't see any of this sort of thing in the arc that won. As a hero player, I first off would not have allied myself with the notorious Dr. Aeon. I would not have been able to trust anything he said or did. If I took his claims of danger from a perpendicular dimension seriously, I would have contacted scientists, mages, and heroes higher in the chain than myself, as I was utterly ignorant of the nature of the problem and was being led by the nose by a villain. As for choosing to take the only option that Dr. Aeon gave me, well ... stupidity itself isn't evil, and neither was Dr. Aeon's preposterous solution to the problem. I figure that if there was information at the end of the arc (I couldn't finish it) about how wonderful the other dimension was, and how bad it was that it was destroyed, it would still only be tragic, not doing evil. Tragic, like a necessary operation on conjoined twins that takes the life of one of them, but not evil.
And if it turns out that Dr. Aeon was just using me to get me to do evil work ... well, if you don't realize you're doing something bad, it's not evil. It's a misfortune.
Anyway, that's my two inf. -
Quote:I have to assume it was something they did concept art for which never materialized.Originally Posted by Shadow Wail
On a side note: What is the Argus face based on?
Might have been for a space alien storyline. -
Quote:If you add a small team to revamp and add new content, it doesn't mean you get fewer new assets and features than you are presently getting.Originally Posted by rian_frostdrake
ok fine, that is you, want to hear how many would be disappointed with that? how many people scream re-hash now, there is a perception with content with no new assets that it is dull and worthless. how many people rave about the additional cimoria and hollows stuff? now does that compare to the rwz or faultline's reactions? I cant claim to be authoritative, but i suspect the response would be resounding meh's just because of human nature.
The original dev team would still exist and would still be making features like the Praetoria expansion.
What you would get is new optional content that includes all of the new assets developed since CoH started. Take the look of the blueside Midnighter arc as an example. A lot of those art assets didn't exist in 2004, but content created now could include them.
You could take the Lost Cure Wand art and animation, if you wanted, and apply it to a new ally or foe group.
You could replace the small old Circle caves with new wider caves.
You could use some of the Rikti maps and objects in new Lost missions.
You could integrate anything developed from 2005 onward into new content for blueside, such as the Hellfrost demons, the Legacy Chain, the Midnighters, Vanguard, and Arachnos.
As for players demanding new assets ... I think if it is done well, story IS an asset. -
Quote:I completely agree with what you're saying.Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Personally, if I had to choose between, say, a brand new Boomtown, or the old Boomtown, Pertez Park and Dark Astoria just with new contacts, I'd pick the latter without a second thought.
I believe the devs changed Faultline the way they did because the two complaints they received about it were: A) there's nothing interesting to do there, and B) players in the old days (without jetpacks and zero-g packs) were getting stuck in the cracks.
So they took steps to make the zone about 1/3 as craggy as before, and they inserted new content. -
Quote:Well, since when they die you get Vengeance and then you rez them and make progress on your rez badge ... it's not so bad.Originally Posted by Garent
Losing a teammate isn't a penalty?
(BTW, so far as I know there isn't really a rez badge.) -
Quote:The devs have a game design mentality that focuses on new assets, new features. Their focus is on risk/reward, and while story is not counted as a reward, new features and new assets are. Consequently, we get just enough story to stitch together our encounters with rewards.Originally Posted by rian_frostdrake
... from what i have heard the developers say about implementing things that would be similar to your suggestions, they tend to involve a lot more assets than you are considering
However, we don't have to do everything that way. We can also create content that is based primarily upon story and re-use existing assets.
If we can use the feature base that currently exists in the MA, and tweak it manually as needed, that would be fine for most projects. Only "epic" pieces of content, like a massive Clockwork nest in Boomtown, or a complete revamp of the Cavern trial, would require new assets.
As for QA, it's less of an issue for content that reuses old assets. The QA is mainly for new assets like new foe groups, new bosses, new zones, new maps, etc.Quote:... and there still is a QA approval system that babs mentioned when asked about breaking up issues to smaller, faster issues, that ads lag too, plus dont forget testing, bugs can pop up during live testing, so give them time for different iterations of each zone "revamp" so add on a few weeks for player beta testing, and there would be testers fatigue if every week had a new test.
The QA that would be required would be basically the same sort of QA that players using the Mission Architect are required to do on their own arcs. (Except as a dev you might actually be able to fix certain issues!) -
Quote:Count me as one of those who liked the original Faultline for what it offered: unique visuals and really, really steep verticals.Originally Posted by Slashman
I think it all comes down to the value of the zone in question. How many other people actually thought that flooding Faultline was a massive mistake because the view of the dam was obscured? Basically...if it was just you, then that's not a big enough reason for them not to do it.
I don't mind that they changed it. Change happens, and I wouldn't chain myself to the dam to prevent it.
But I did like the original. Kudos to whoever designed it.
If the original Faultline had interesting and unique content, I would have been in there all the time.Quote:What I mean is, how much use was Faultline seeing from the game community? We all know that hazard zones were very underutilized. Pretty much all of them became ghost towns a long time ago.
And I bet I wouldn't have been soloing either. There would have been a lot of people in there.
Faultline was uninhabited due to failure to provide content. You see the exact same thing with Perez Park and Boomtown.
I agree that it makes sense to change a zone that isn't drawing attention. However, it's also a waste of resources to make changes you don't have to.Quote:I personally think it's fine to change around a zone that sees practically no use and make it into something useful. That's not something I would do to zones that are always populated...like Atlas, Galaxy, Steel, Cap and St. Martial. That's what Perfect Pain is proposing and I am most definitely not in agreement about it.
While they could revamp Boomtown and Perez like they did Faultline, all I really want are some unique stories for those zones.
Perez has, among other things, the Boneyard ... the neighborhood where the Skulls rose up from under the shadow of ... the Shadows. I think we could get more involved with that. Game lore says "most" of the Shadows were killed. What happened to the rest, and what sort of influence were they upon the Skulls? The similarity in the names suggests there could be a linked origin.
Unlike Perez, Boomtown is out of the way and is stocked with foes you'd likely have outleveled by the time you get there (especially with the accelerated leveling we have these days). Boomtown should get a makeover in some way, and one consideration would involve raising the level range of the zone.
As for Skyway, it's an underutilized zone mainly because it offers no content you can't get elsewhere (aside from Synapse TF); it has no university, WW, Vault, or Icon; and players level so quickly these days it's like a surplus zone.
If I was a dev, I'd be inclined to make Skyway roughly equivalent to KR and Hollows. That way you could have content originating in Galaxy with branches that continue in the bordering zones of KR and Perez, and you could have content originating in Atlas that continues primarily in The Hollows and Skyway.
You could even plan mission doors so they take players into zones via the roadways as opposed to by train.
-
Quote:As others have posted, this is more about making the inherent usable for the AT all the time, as opposed to being active only when on a team, and active when a team plays well, as opposed to just when they play poorly.Originally Posted by Garent
The basic suggestion of making defenders an archetype that has near infinite endurance is cool, but as usual I disagree with the reasoning behind the complaints with current vigilance. In this case the reasoning seems to be: "It's cool having infinite endurance when my team is in trouble, but when everything's going fine I don't seem to have enough" To rephrase this, this is basically saying "I want to do better in the situations in which my team is untouchable"
That's also why I suggested that the Vigilance bar be advanced as a result of the use of offensive powers. That way it builds up most when a player is soloing.
Your point about this change benefiting overpowering teams doesn't really apply. If the defender is on a team that has overmatched their foes, neither the end bonus nor the status protection is going to produce any notable effect on the outcome.
So this is a way of enabling Defs to solo better, to be more active and effective in team play, without actually increasing their power or damage output. It's a reward for developing their secondary.
The trick is that if they don't throw some offense, their Vigilance bar won't move, and they won't benefit from the power.
I don't believe this really penalizes those who go purely with the primary set, since if the player isn't building out the secondary they'll have plenty of slots for end reduction and recharge on +end/+recovery powers.
Also, those players who focused on the primary set probably weren't ever seeing any benefit from the old Vigilance anyway.
-
Quote:I think you're making it out to be tougher than it is, or than it has to be. One developer can do a LOT to revamp content, so long as by "content" we mean "mission arcs." Sure, one person wouldn't be creating new powers, art, animations, or any of that in addition to missions ... but those things aren't 100% required. There are a ton of assets already available, and if something is really needed, then you could ask a fellow dev to produce the art piece or whatever it is you need.Originally Posted by rian_frostdrake
thats all nice to say, but i think you really underestimate the manpower commitment needed to do what youa re claiming. as per the recent massively dev interview, we know that mission generation tools were a significant bottleneck and that was one of the reasons that ma came about, coupling that with the until recent stupidly low staffing levels, and do you really think this is feaseable? One developer cant just redo content, it involves a lot of different developers specialties, and would have impacted a number of great things we did get. Now after gr hits, i am hoping for the exact thing you are, that a pass is made on old content, because a lot of fluff could be cut to streamline old taskforces, underused zones, and especially the security chief nonsense, but I am reasonable that if they do that, its going to take more than hiring one new developer. hopefully the accelerated creation tools, plus the increased staffing will allow for a rejuvenated game.
As for the immediate changes we'd like to see in the old content - like making the contact's cellphone available immediately, and making errands to PvP liaisons and Hero Corps Analysts optional - I'm pretty sure that's just a matter of making adjustments to values in a set of spreadsheets and/or text files. I feel pretty confident it could be done by one person within two days, to all arcs on red side and blue. I don't see how it could possibly be so complicated that it would be otherwise.
On the other hand, if you wanted to include a new Green Line terminal in the southern portion of IP ... I could see where that *might* be a little more complicated because it deals with zone art and animations.
If I was a dev, and I had free rein to do what I wanted to revamp content, I'd begin with the cellphone and errand business outlined above. I might try to do a few other things too, like maybe fix the door errors in the Seer Marino arc, and possibly make changes in the tutorial missions. But the main thing I'd do is start additional, optional lines of content coming from the existing contacts. So you'd visit Azuria, for example, and she'd say something to the effect of "hey, go beat up 10 Hellions as usual - OR - do something new and head to this mission door."
If it is feasible, other methods of acquiring arcs could be employed, such as having contacts appear in instanced zones instead of outside; having an arc be unlocked by defeating a particular street mob; or having an arc unlocked by locating a glowie clue that randomly appears somewhere in a zone.
I'd use the MA interface to generate the basis for the arcs, because it would be much faster than doing it all in text files or spreadsheets. Though of course if I had a special purpose, I could edit the output of the MA to insert features that are not presently in the MA, like a trip trigger, or if I needed to add a sixth mission, or whatever.
If you wanted to revamp a zone - like Boomtown, Perez, or Hollows - that's normally about 5 arcs. You might want to have a new map or set of art assets to give the zone arcs a unique look, so you'd have to request that. I don't think you'd get it done in a month, but unless you got hung up on art, animations, or whatever, it shouldn't take forever.
If I was going to do up a new TF, like an alternate Posi TF, it would probably be aimed at being about 10 missions long, so basically 2 arcs in MA manually pasted together. Style-wise, it would be all door missions; no hunts, patrols, or errands, because I don't really think those are appreciated in TFs. Again, it shouldn't take all that long to work it up; nothing like the six months we often spend waiting for new content.
And, as I've said, the "revamp" or "new content" dev team could be small, even as small as one person.
That's my impression.
-
I like this idea. It gives the player a proactive power that makes sense.
I'd take the angle that the Vigilance bar builds off of attacks, though - like Dom - just to make playing it more interesting.
-
Quote:I actually liked the old Faultline. The new one isn't bad, but for me the main virtue of the new one is that it had new content.Originally Posted by Alanari
The storyline changes I can definately see, but as for the physical changes to the zone, well, personally after watching the video I think the old look was way more dynamic and definately looked more like a ravaged zone instead of just another city neighborhood. I think it would have been far more fun to explore.
If they'd left Faultline as it was and just added new content, that would have been cool with me.
-
Quote:I hear you, but what I'm asking for is slightly different.Originally Posted by rian_frostdrake
you know man, maybe yes, maybe no. I'd be amazed and pretty darn ticked if there isnt more than 18 arcs in a boxed expansion, but i am not sure, its nice to say that a developer should be revamping old stuff, and i don't disagree with revamping things, particularly the shadow shard, but lets be realistic about how fast new content gets chewed up. we need mroe, no question, but big ideas expand the breadth of the game, gives you more things to do with every character. new content gets run through far faster than it can be created, and then what? saying you are bored indicates a break is the exact right thing for you, because new content would only hold you for a time, and then you'd likely be bored again. Issue 10 is often rightly praised as an amazing content release, with several arcs, but you know what? if memory serves me, threads appeared the night after open release that people were done with it, and were bored again, so fighting a battle of attrition with content is similar to emptying a lake with a kids bucket.
For years now, I've been asking for someone to do continual monthly releases of new content. I've also been asking for changes to old content, like the elimination of the odious errands and hunts.
If the devs had started this policy back in 2005, the current content situation would be fantastic. If they would start it now, eventually the content situation would improve.
The problem is that we ALWAYS have to wait SEVERAL MONTHS for new content, and even then it is usually like only five or six arcs. And everyone plays those few arcs over and over, because it is so preferable to playing the older arcs, and then in about a month or two they get sick of the new stuff too.
I'd like to see the devs hire someone, or a few someones, to create new official content for monthly release. They could revamp old content, including the Cavern Trial, and they could create alternate TFs, like one or two new Posi TFs.
It would be great. And it is years late in getting started.
This would be in addition to the new development the devs are always working on, so not only would there be new content each month, but there would be big, new features released approximately twice yearly.
The monthly content would help keep players entertained while they wait for the next game update. And there's a lot of things you could do. You could have situations where a story begins in one month, and concludes in content released the next month. You could introduce new bosses and new foe groups. You could reveal some of the game's hidden backstory. That sort of thing.
Compare that to the present (and eternal) situation where players know that nothing much is going to happen for the next several months. They have nothing to look forward to doing in the intervening time, and people lose interest in stories like the "Coming Storm" because they take FOREVER to tell.
It seems to me that if you were releasing new content each month, you might retain a lot of these people and hear less grumbling.