Why do the devs hate COV?
By
Acanous_Quietus,
Posted on: 2008-01-06 17:57 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
[ QUOTE ]
I don't need a crystal ball to know which side of the fence YOU play on, do I....?
You will maintain this attitude as long as the developers give your interests the lion's share of their attention.
[/ QUOTE ]
I play both sides. And you are correct, the Devs have been giving my interests the lion's share of their attention! 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't need a crystal ball to know which side of the fence YOU play on, do I....?
You will maintain this attitude as long as the developers give your interests the lion's share of their attention.
[/ QUOTE ]
I play both sides. And you are correct, the Devs have been giving my interests the lion's share of their attention!
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
[ QUOTE ]
You will maintain this attitude as long as the developers give your interests the lion's share of their attention. Were you on the other side of the fence, you'd.... but why waste my time stating the obvious, which has been repeated more than once in other threads?
[/ QUOTE ]
1)There is no fence, the majority of players have access to both and play to their fancy.
2) Scrolled back quite a few pages which confirmed my recollection. The folks asking for a lions share of new stuff are self-proclaimed predominantly red side players.
I9, I10 and I11 was equal content for both factions.
This trend will continue.
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
[ QUOTE ]
Well, if you really want each side to have unique features, then I suppose we can count "Having more content than villain-side" as one of CoH's unique features. 
[/ QUOTE ]
And having "lol nobody plays Villains 'cause they don't get [censored]" being one of CoV?
If you really do play both sides, you probably play Heroes more. I completely understand you, since, y'know, people [censored] log on over there.
I'd like to take a minute to clarify my purpose here in this thread. It's getting lost in all the back-and-forth so I want to make sure that everyone knows where I stand.
My purpose: to provide a reasonable, rational, alternate explanation for the situation presented by the OP, namely "the devs hate COV."
I don't hate CoV; while I have some criticisms, I still enjoyed it enough to have two level 50 villains in my alt roster. (Neither were PL'ed, either.) And I don't think the Devs hate CoV either. If Matt Miller could wiggle his nose and have all the new content CoV could use suddenly pop into existence, I'm sure he would do it. But that's not the reality of the situation. Prior to merging with NCSoft, Cryptic just didn't have the resources to make everything happen the way it should have, so some things, like Villain EATs, ending up on the metaphorical cutting room floor.
It's not really reassuring, since in the end CoV is still lagging behind CoH in terms of content and red side players are upset about that, but at least with the NCSoft merger we can hopefully look forward to seeing things improve for villains in the Rogue Isles.
So what can you, a concerned villain player, do in the meantime? Well, I would suggest borrowing an idea from the PVP community and creating a "Villain's Wishlist" of things you'd like to see for the red-side in future updates.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, if you really want each side to have unique features, then I suppose we can count "Having more content than villain-side" as one of CoH's unique features.
[/ QUOTE ]
And having "lol nobody plays Villains 'cause they don't get [censored]" being one of CoV?
If you really do play both sides, you probably play Heroes more. I completely understand you, since, y'know, people [censored] log on over there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Chill. I was just responding to NancY's jibe with a jibe of my own. Supposed to be a joke, hence the " "
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody wants to see Heroes get shafted. But a 60/40 balance, or a 75/25 balance, still gives heroes plenty new to do and helps fill the obvious, glaring gaps in CoV.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen you bring up this point before(and I think I agreed with it too initially, I don't now that I've thought about it). Please explain to me how in the world giving about 1/3 of the game's population more content than the other 2/3? How would that make financial success? It seems to me that splitting the content 50/50(even if you don't like the content or how some of the missions are worded, it counts as content), like the have been doing recently, is the best course of action. Now if they do almost half and half then add a feature or two for villains each issue(Epic ATs, a new TF here or there, etc) that would be good for them as well.
But to even suggest that villains get 3 times the new content heroes do is absurd. Please explain to me how that could possibly be a good idea for NC Soft.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody wants to see Heroes get shafted. But a 60/40 balance, or a 75/25 balance, still gives heroes plenty new to do and helps fill the obvious, glaring gaps in CoV.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen you bring up this point before(and I think I agreed with it too initially, I don't now that I've thought about it). Please explain to me how in the world giving about 1/3 of the game's population more content than the other 2/3? How would that make financial success? It seems to me that splitting the content 50/50(even if you don't like the content or how some of the missions are worded, it counts as content), like the have been doing recently, is the best course of action. Now if they do almost half and half then add a feature or two for villains each issue(Epic ATs, a new TF here or there, etc) that would be good for them as well.
But to even suggest that villains get 3 times the new content heroes do is absurd. Please explain to me how that could possibly be a good idea for NC Soft.
[/ QUOTE ]
Your not giving One third of the population more content. about 99% of the population has access to both heroes and villains. All giving a 60/40 or 75/25 split would do is beef up one sides play making it more attractive.
3 times the content in one issue isn't going to make hero players quit in protest.
Personally I think the 75/25 is a bad example to go with. I would rather see 60/40 not as extreme and it would go along way towards evening things out. For example if the next 3 issues were a 60/40 split favoring villains we would see
issue 12 40 points to heroes 60 to villains
issue 13 80 120
issue 14 120 180
is this model were followed villains could easily catch up
heroes would still get a nice chunk of content
and then the 50/50 split could be resumed and most poeople would be happy.
everyone that plays this game pays the same 15$(not counting multiple accounts)no ones should be worth more than the others yet the past few issues have seemed hero oriented.
I just dont think giving Red side more is feasible at this point. I like the villain AT's more (though I am a self professed unabashed Kheld lover) but I do know the game came out a year and a half after CoH did. That means CoH had total attention for at least a year more. You cant make that gap up. And now since there is no division of labor, both games are made and run by the same people, it would be unrealistic to keep the game going on anything other then a 50/50 split. I do see some exception, like a villain Epic, but they will be few and far between. Yes wish and hope for more, but all in all don't feel shunned because the reality doesn;t match to it. I mean Im a good looking, smart guy, but that doesn't mean I should expect Kate Winslett to fall at my feet in love, reality keeps her away from me...Heh.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody wants to see Heroes get shafted. But a 60/40 balance, or a 75/25 balance, still gives heroes plenty new to do and helps fill the obvious, glaring gaps in CoV.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen you bring up this point before(and I think I agreed with it too initially, I don't now that I've thought about it). Please explain to me how in the world giving about 1/3 of the game's population more content than the other 2/3? How would that make financial success? It seems to me that splitting the content 50/50(even if you don't like the content or how some of the missions are worded, it counts as content), like the have been doing recently, is the best course of action. Now if they do almost half and half then add a feature or two for villains each issue(Epic ATs, a new TF here or there, etc) that would be good for them as well.
But to even suggest that villains get 3 times the new content heroes do is absurd. Please explain to me how that could possibly be a good idea for NC Soft.
[/ QUOTE ]
Explain to me how alienating, in your estimation, 1/3 of the game's population is a good idea.
[ QUOTE ]
I just dont think giving Red side more is feasible at this point. I like the villain AT's more (though I am a self professed unabashed Kheld lover) but I do know the game came out a year and a half after CoH did. That means CoH had total attention for at least a year more. You cant make that gap up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, you can, easily. they've had 2 years to sprinkle more CoV content in to catch that side up. They could have DONE it by now.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody wants to see Heroes get shafted. But a 60/40 balance, or a 75/25 balance, still gives heroes plenty new to do and helps fill the obvious, glaring gaps in CoV.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen you bring up this point before(and I think I agreed with it too initially, I don't now that I've thought about it). Please explain to me how in the world giving about 1/3 of the game's population more content than the other 2/3? How would that make financial success? It seems to me that splitting the content 50/50(even if you don't like the content or how some of the missions are worded, it counts as content), like the have been doing recently, is the best course of action. Now if they do almost half and half then add a feature or two for villains each issue(Epic ATs, a new TF here or there, etc) that would be good for them as well.
But to even suggest that villains get 3 times the new content heroes do is absurd. Please explain to me how that could possibly be a good idea for NC Soft.
[/ QUOTE ]
Explain to me how alienating, in your estimation, 1/3 of the game's population is a good idea.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nice job avoiding my question. I like how when presented with a real question about your views you either ignore it or avoid answering it in your response.
Now to answer your question. I fail to see how splitting new content 50/50 or giving villains a few extras with every issue is alienating anybody. Or to put it more bluntly: It is not alienating 1/3 of the game's population.
So I ask again, how does giving a minority of the games players an overwhelming majority of new content a good idea? Try to answer this time.
If, by your reasoning, giving CoV extra content is "giving a minority of the game's players an overwhelming majority of new content", then the inverse must be true.
Fixing the overwhelming gap of content CoH has over CoV does not mean abandoning CoH, as you seem to think it does.
Quite simply, Munki, your question is absurd, therefore, unworthy of a real answer.
Might as well be asking why the devs are so intent on angering the harp seal population.
[ QUOTE ]
3 times the content in one issue isn't going to make hero players quit in protest.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. But honestly, I think it would take more than one issue like that for villains to catch up total content wise.
That being said, they were to do one issue like that, then do the rest equal with a few extra things for villains I could see that being a good idea. I just feel it would be a mistake on their part if they went the 75/25 route until villains were completely caught up, as I think it would just take too many issues. Sure there would be [censored] from heroes if it happened the way I just suggested, but they would deal with it.
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I think the 75/25 is a bad example to go with. I would rather see 60/40 not as extreme and it would go along way towards evening things out. For example if the next 3 issues were a 60/40 split favoring villains we would see
issue 12 40 points to heroes 60 to villains
issue 13 80 120
issue 14 120 180
is this model were followed villains could easily catch up
heroes would still get a nice chunk of content
and then the 50/50 split could be resumed and most poeople would be happy.
[/ QUOTE ]
First keep in mind the coming up issues already have the major parts planned.
Now with the larger dev team a 60/40 or 55/45 split may be ok. We won't really know until we see how much stuff they can pump out in one issue.
[ QUOTE ]
everyone that plays this game pays the same 15$(not counting multiple accounts)no ones should be worth more than the others yet the past few issues have seemed hero oriented.
[/ QUOTE ]
i9 was inventions, both sides have access to that and the same chance of any recipe dropping. Now heroes have more players so naturally their market is going to be bigger. I don't see that as being slanted towards heroes at all. Personally I think markets should've been merged from the beginning, but that's a subject for a different thread.
i10 was the Rikti trying to destroy us all. Destroy heroes and villains, so it was in everyone's best interest to stop them. Now if you don't like the content, I'm sorry, I really am. That means an entire issue went by that you didn't care for. But it gave the same amount of content to both sides. It's that simple. If the biggest complaint you have is the wording you get from contacts, consider it a good day and move on.
i11 was flashback and both sides got that content. Now the heroes having more arcs means that can flashback to more stuff. I realize some people use that as some sort of proof that villains are mistreated, but that argument is really grasping at straws. At least IMO, but I can see the other side to an extent.
[ QUOTE ]
everyone that plays this game pays the same 15$(not counting multiple accounts)no ones should be worth more than the others yet the past few issues have seemed hero oriented.
[/ QUOTE ]
While your 15 a month is worth as much as mine, the game's population isn't 1:1. I don't know for a fact that it's 2:1, but that is the estimate most used that I see. I think both sides should from this point forward get equal treatment, but if one side had to be picked over the other, why in the world wouldn't it be the side that brings in the most money?
[ QUOTE ]
Fixing the overwhelming gap of content CoH has over CoV does not mean abandoning CoH, as you seem to think it does.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you want to split it up 75/25 until villains catch up it would take more than one issue. Anywhere from 2-4 issues is my estimate, just depends how much the larger dev team can crank out. So if you're talking about that kind of split for anywhere from 6-12, then yeah that is a horrid idea. I don't see how that is good business.
[ QUOTE ]
If, by your reasoning, giving CoV extra content is "giving a minority of the game's players an overwhelming majority of new content", then the inverse must be true.
[/ QUOTE ]
I just caught this. You intentionally misquoted me. And you know it. I said, multiple times in fact, that splitting the content close to equally, with the villains getting a little bit more was ok, I even said it was probably a good idea.
I said splitting the content 75/25 was bad. A 3:1 ratio of villains to heroes getting new content is an overwhelming majority.
I'm actually disappointed in you man. You intentionally spun what I said and misquoted me to make it look like I was taking a position I wasn't. Try not making stuff up, people might take you more seriously.
[ QUOTE ]
i9 was inventions, both sides have access to that and the same chance of any recipe dropping.
[/ QUOTE ]
Villains have almost no access to Pool D (Trial) drops. We have *ONE* trial, and it is almost never run.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i9 was inventions, both sides have access to that and the same chance of any recipe dropping.
[/ QUOTE ]
Villains have almost no access to Pool D (Trial) drops. We have *ONE* trial, and it is almost never run.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well it is there for you to run if you want to. So you do have equal chance at getting that drop.
Ok, you have now entered levels of willful ignorance that makes you no longer worth talking to. Baibai.
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, you have now entered levels of willful ignorance that makes you no longer worth talking to. Baibai.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nice, I like how I bring up points and attempt to rationally discuss this(as have others), and you just to continue to ignore points made, misquote people, take stuff out of context, and then name calling.
This will be my last statement on the matter as I have given my views with very little reasonable discussion back.
They've got equal treatment this year. If all the content doesn't make you happy, sorry that is just the way it goes sometimes. A majority of the income from CoX comes from Hero side, so if one side gets more attention than the other, then it makes perfect business sense for it to be the side worth the most money. [censored] and moan all you want, but as long as you continue to be irrational and lie, then your voice will fall on deaf ears. As the people that matter have better things to do than read your made up accusations, half-truths, and outright lies.
Good job trolling.
*sigh* That's the thing. You AREN'T making good points. You've demonstrated that you quite frankly don't know what you're talking about. Even if you have the evidence clearly pointed out to you about some major disparity in the game, you IGNORED IT.
So, we ignore you.
[ QUOTE ]
*sigh* That's the thing. You AREN'T making good points. You've demonstrated that you quite frankly don't know what you're talking about. Even if you have the evidence clearly pointed out to you about some major disparity in the game, you IGNORED IT.
So, we ignore you.
[/ QUOTE ]
I thought you were done with me.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i9 was inventions, both sides have access to that and the same chance of any recipe dropping.
[/ QUOTE ]
Villains have almost no access to Pool D (Trial) drops. We have *ONE* trial, and it is almost never run.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hero-side, Eden Trial and Abandoned Sewers Trial give out Task Force pool drops instead of Trial pool drops. Cavern of Transcendence's drops are buggy, so that leaves us with the respec trial and Hamidon for Pool D recipes. And that's exactly the same as what villains have.
[ QUOTE ]
You've demonstrated that you quite frankly don't know what you're talking about.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody wants to see Heroes get shafted. But a 60/40 balance, or a 75/25 balance, still gives heroes plenty new to do and helps fill the obvious, glaring gaps in CoV.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen you bring up this point before(and I think I agreed with it too initially, I don't now that I've thought about it). Please explain to me how in the world giving about 1/3 of the game's population more content than the other 2/3? How would that make financial success? It seems to me that splitting the content 50/50(even if you don't like the content or how some of the missions are worded, it counts as content), like the have been doing recently, is the best course of action. Now if they do almost half and half then add a feature or two for villains each issue(Epic ATs, a new TF here or there, etc) that would be good for them as well.
But to even suggest that villains get 3 times the new content heroes do is absurd. Please explain to me how that could possibly be a good idea for NC Soft.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's why I think a 55/45 split would be more accepted by the playerbase-at-large; just that WEE bit of a lean towards redside, until the content levels are in better balance between the two.
Well, if you really want each side to have unique features, then I suppose we can count "Having more content than villain-side" as one of CoH's unique features.