Victims of Architect ratings griefers
By
Aliana Blue,
Posted on: 2009-05-24 15:28 in Mission Architect
[ QUOTE ]
Ok so what you're saying is, "The system won't let me do exactly what I want, so I will use it for what it is flat-out not intended for instead?"
You know what? The system won't let me do a lot of things I want to do. I'm sure nobody who has ever made a story focused arc could make one that fit their vision perfectly, whether because of file size limitations, mission objectives that are flat out unavailable (lead escort to object, find exit, standard minions and lieutenants as "boss" objectives), and a myriad of other reasons. We adapt. We do the best we can.
Lack of flexibility is no excuse for doing what you were specifically told not to do.
[/ QUOTE ]
you gimme a break, this isnt Gantanamo.
I do what i want.
I didnt lose any of my 38, soon 50 lvl 50s
you go play the game, and tell us where the devs are still infriging the copyright laws, because i do know where.....
how do i do? 'cause i grinded 13 lvl 50, so i know where the devs broke the law.
i dont care either.
but u dont gimme lessons in game.
[ QUOTE ]
You really, honestly think this is a one star arc? REALLY? It sounds like you're being insanely petty and have an axe to grind, to be honest. That or you're purposely picking a high-profile arc and 1-starring it to try and 'prove' there's no ratings griefing going on, I think, based on my experiences with the average quality of MA arcs in general. Think about it:
Given the literally tens of thousands of missions that are blatant farms, brokenly unplayable, filled with typos or are written by illiterates, outright inappropriate, don't even HAVE text or contacts, are just a stock NPC with all text being 'meow', have blatantly untested NPCs, have a plot as deep, literally, as 'There's a guy here beat him up I dunno lol!' etc. etc. etc... you still feel that the arc, which if nothing else has carefully selected maps, well-written, intelligent dialog, a good sense of humor and adventure, a coherent plot, and nice-looking custom enemies, and a unique gimmick I've seen literally nowhere else...deserves the lowest possible 'normal' rating? Really? I'm interested in hearing why you feel that the arc is on the same level as the absolute filth and dregs of the MA. Have you even PLAYED other MA arcs? I don't want to sound fanboyish here, (I'm not even on the same server as Geek,) but seriously, even if you hated the plot and the NPCs, you put it on the same tier as the worst of the worst in the game? Come on now.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it belongs in the same tier as the worst of the worst; the dregs of the MA, as you put it, are the ones I feel deserve 0 Stars.
Do I believe Speeding Through Time deserves 1 Star? Yes, I do. I didn't enjoy myself, felt my character had no impact on events, and didn't feel the plot was particularly well thought out or implemented. If an arc is combat-based, I want to have fun and be challenged while serving a vital role in the plot. If it's story based, I look for a well-defined plot and theme with good execution. I felt this arc lacked both.
[ QUOTE ]
I want to see what you consider a 5-star arc if you think Speeding Through Time is really one of the worst of the worst. Please, give me some arc numbers of 'good' arcs for comparison here. I'd like to see the review too, so I can see what he did that's so henious that you think the arc is ratings-equivalent to the scummiest of scum arcs the MA has to offer.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can send you a PM of what I feel are good arcs if you'd like. As for the review (it's really more of a critique), that's up to Geek; he mentioned he had a thread for feedback on his arc, and I gave him the go ahead to post it there.
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: This isn't about "I didn't get any xp during this mission" issue is it? Because that's all that's really wrong with that particular mission. It's a story, go with it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope; couldn't care less about xp gain.
[ QUOTE ]
See, I would never want anyone like you reviewing my arc because you don't bring anything to the table but how to make the arc more to your own liking. There is nothing functional about your critique, simply generalizations of your own feelings.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's your prerogative to say so, but at the same time such things probably shouldn't be said without seeing the critique first.
[ QUOTE ]
As far as 1 star, it is an insult. Saying an arc is "poor" is an insult and adds nothing from a critique point of view. And I wouldn't rate yours as 1 star if you put effort into it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe that's a flawed point of view. Any arc isn't going to appeal to everyone; all an author can hope for is to appeal to the largest audience possible. No matter what one publishes, there will always be those out there that don't care for it.
These differing opinions aren't any less valid, even if they don't coincide with the opinions of the majority. It's the role of the author to decide if the arc should be revisited to address the concerns of these folks. That said, a good arc should have enough high-end ratings to outweigh those that didn't enjoy it. That's how a rating system works.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm curious, have you made any arcs? Do you even know the functions and limitations of MA?
[/ QUOTE ]
Been working on one for some time now; been taking me a while to overcome (at least to my liking) the very limitations you mention. I'm aiming for a 3 Star average for myself, at least for my first arc.
[ QUOTE ]
i think i get your point, thing is,
mine is that honnesty will prevail.
[/ QUOTE ]
Only if you are following the rules. I'm sure you've tried this when you drove while intoxicated and answered "I'll be honest; I'm DRUNK" when the cop asked you.
Did it work?
[ QUOTE ]
Been working on one for some time now; been taking me a while to overcome (at least to my liking) the very limitations you mention. I'm aiming for a 3 Star average for myself, at least for my first arc.
[/ QUOTE ]
Least you're aiming low. Then you can't really fail can you? 
Hope the low bar doesn't effect how much effort you put into especially since it seems like you're taking a long time for an average rating.
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, I'm not sure that people take the time to READ the description of the mission before they enter - and that act alone would stop many low ratings. I had one guy who high-rated my arc and asked me to try his. But when I read his discription he told everyone upfront that they would need a team to complete ... so I passed it by. Enteriing an arc that truly advertises itself as tough, parody, fantasy, sci-fi ... if you do NOT like that genre ... should clue people in to take a pass at playing your arc. But some folks can't take the hint ... and then low rate you ... because they didn't "enjoy" your mission. And that sucks.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a very salient point. The mission description should be the main criteria by which your mission should be judged. If your mission delivers what the description promises, you should get an automatic three stars from every honest person playing it.
If it was well executed (well written, very engaging, smart twist, etc.) you should get 4 or 5; poorly executed (really hackneyed farmfest, poorly written, unintelligible, tedious, too wasteful of the player's time, etc.) 2 or 1 stars.
Because descriptions can be so subjective, it would be very nice for the system to provide some kind of automatic difficulty rating. I.e., if the arc contains an AV or multiple ambushes, the arc would have a higher difficulty than one that has nothing higher than lieutenants. A suggested level range and team size would also be nice. These wouldn't hold fast for every team, playing style and player experience level, but having some consistent automatic estimate would at least give everyone a common reference point.
Finally, having some predefined keywords associated with the arc would be very nice. That is, enshrining something like the SFMA and other tags in the system, along with genre types.
[ QUOTE ]
Because descriptions can be so subjective, it would be very nice for the system to provide some kind of automatic difficulty rating. I.e., if the arc contains an AV or multiple ambushes, the arc would have a higher difficulty than one that has nothing higher than lieutenants. A suggested level range and team size would also be nice. These wouldn't hold fast for every team, playing style and player experience level, but having some consistent automatic estimate would at least give everyone a common reference point.
Finally, having some predefined keywords associated with the arc would be very nice. That is, enshrining something like the SFMA and other tags in the system, along with genre types.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is nicely formulated, and obviously efficcient.
Too bad the devs only care about... 
Well, in the spirit of the OP, I will put my two arcs up for review. A couple notes....
Uberbots, if you solo this on anything above heroic the last mission will spawn the uniques as EB, and they will be rather difficult. My lvl 50 inv/SS tank tried to test this arc on invince, he faceplanted 3 times before i gave up. So, if you want to solo it, set it to heroic. teams, anything should be fine, in fact I would be curious how an 8 man invincible set team handles it. Oh, and it has a snakesssss mision, so watch out if you are lvl 42ish. the spawn lvl split to the elder snakes is harsh at that lvl.
I have recieved a few ratings on this one, but no feedback at all yet.
The pawn of time one, I got a feedback a week ago(last one i got on it) that said one of my bosses had his enemy group set to "all custom". I looked through my arc, but I cant find that anywhere. if you see it, please let me know which one it is, or which mission etc.
Both of these need some fine tuning to be stellar, but I need some more feedback so I can get a feel what the masses want out of them. They are both listed as "very long" but both have at least one mission that can be mostly skipped over if you arent interested in fighting, and there are no giant outdoor maps or anything, so the time to go through them isnt as bad as it sounds.
thanks in advance!
Liberty server
Eldagore lvl 50 Inv/ss, co-founder of The Legion of Smash
3.5 servers of alts....I need help.
May the rawk be with you.
Arc #'s
107020 Uberbots!
93496 A Pawn in Time
[ QUOTE ]
Least you're aiming low. Then you can't really fail can you? Hope the low bar doesn't effect how much effort you put into especially since it seems like you're taking a long time for an average rating.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd hardly call aiming for a middle-of-the-road rating a "low bar". And don't worry, it's not having an impact on the quality of the arc. I just feel it's not one that will appeal to most out there; it has an origins story as a subplot, though the primary series of events is separate from it.
But at any rate, this whole thing has taken the thread off topic. Time to put this particular line of discussion to bed and let the posts find their way back to the tracks, as it were.
tracks?
your tracks?
I was 4 stars rated.
Now, im 3 star rated on my own "private" stuff... someone got in an subrated it, just to do so.
Brownosing might be your national sports,
im not into this.
Can i have a little privacy, or you want my GF on top??? 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Least you're aiming low. Then you can't really fail can you? Hope the low bar doesn't effect how much effort you put into especially since it seems like you're taking a long time for an average rating.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd hardly call aiming for a middle-of-the-road rating a "low bar". And don't worry, it's not having an impact on the quality of the arc. I just feel it's not one that will appeal to most out there; it has an origins story as a subplot, though the primary series of events is separate from it.
But at any rate, this whole thing has taken the thread off topic. Time to put this particular line of discussion to bed and let the posts find their way back to the tracks, as it were.
[/ QUOTE ]
This simply proves the point that rating is broken because no one understands where 3 stars is versus 5 stars because it's ambiguous and yet it directly effects the over all rating on the arc from getting exposure for other people to play, ie the front page.
No, it's applicable to this thread. You can rationalize that your 1 star is legit, and therefore there are other legit 1 stars on Geeks arc. And I can rationalize that you are a freak outlier that would rate Van Gough as trash and therefore not a valid representation of what the general population would rate Geeks arc IF they actually played it.
And origin stories never work because honestly no one really cares where your character came from. The only reason people make them is to stroke their own gamer egos. Just some helpful advice for you future arc.
Yes, let's, please. The point isn't Heavens_Agent's rating system. He played the arc, he didn't enjoy it, he is entitled to give it whatever rating he wants, whether you feel it's too harsh or not.
The point is, HE PLAYED THE ARC.
Now I know you can see how many people finished your arcs by looking at your badge progress bar (at least, until i15 hits.) The problem is we have no way of knowing how many people, say, started the arc, and finished the first mission, how many people quit because they couldn't beat the end AV, and how many people simply clicked "Play", and immediately quit and 1-starred it without even entering the first mission. If there was some way we could see that, we would be able to say for sure, "my arc got griefed, three people 1-starred it without even going into the first mission."
Unless there is someone out there who has access to that information, and would maybe be willing to take action against those aforementioned "1-star without even starting" people. You know, like they said they would....
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
[ QUOTE ]
And origin stories never work because honestly no one really cares where your character came from. The only reason people make them is to stroke their own gamer egos. Just some helpful advice for you future arc.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd disagree. One of my three published arcs is an origin arc that seems to have been received quite well (40+ ratings as of yesterday, 4 stars, typically positive feedback).
Now, if all your arc has to offer is showcase your character being awesome, it's likely it won't be very well received; but that's more likely to be because "just showing someone awesome" is doomed to fail when you don't involve the person playing said arc. That applies wherever the awesome character is actually one you play, or Statesman, or whatever.
Make your origin arc be "my character came from you being awesome and beating this big bad and their evil scheme" and you'll see more success. I.e., make an arc where the player actually has something to do.
Players' Choice Awards: Best Dual-Origin Level Range Arc!
It's a new era, the era of the Mission Architect. Can you save the Universe from...
The Invasion of the Bikini-clad Samurai Vampiresses from Outer Space? - Arc ID 61013
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd LOVE to have it where a zero and one star force commentary
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd love it if zero stars didn't exist. From a review standpoint, they make no sense. Star ratings are always from 1 to 5, not 0-5 and the WAY you have to do it feels like a glitch (clicking a rating and then unclicking it). From a math standpoint, it's very uneven since it makes it vastly easier to tank an arc than promote one.
Plus, imagine what would happen if all zero rating were instantly nullified/ignored/cleared from the system...
[/ QUOTE ]
This. There's no reason for a zero-star rating. It's supposed to be a 1-5 star rating system.
Together we entered a city of strangers, we made it a city of friends, and we leave it a City of Heroes. - Sweet_Sarah
BOYCOTT NCSoft (on Facebook)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/517513781597443/
Governments have fallen to the power of social media. Gaming companies can too.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You really, honestly think this is a one star arc? REALLY? It sounds like you're being insanely petty and have an axe to grind, to be honest. That or you're purposely picking a high-profile arc and 1-starring it to try and 'prove' there's no ratings griefing going on, I think, based on my experiences with the average quality of MA arcs in general. Think about it:
Given the literally tens of thousands of missions that are blatant farms, brokenly unplayable, filled with typos or are written by illiterates, outright inappropriate, don't even HAVE text or contacts, are just a stock NPC with all text being 'meow', have blatantly untested NPCs, have a plot as deep, literally, as 'There's a guy here beat him up I dunno lol!' etc. etc. etc... you still feel that the arc, which if nothing else has carefully selected maps, well-written, intelligent dialog, a good sense of humor and adventure, a coherent plot, and nice-looking custom enemies, and a unique gimmick I've seen literally nowhere else...deserves the lowest possible 'normal' rating? Really? I'm interested in hearing why you feel that the arc is on the same level as the absolute filth and dregs of the MA. Have you even PLAYED other MA arcs? I don't want to sound fanboyish here, (I'm not even on the same server as Geek,) but seriously, even if you hated the plot and the NPCs, you put it on the same tier as the worst of the worst in the game? Come on now.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think it belongs in the same tier as the worst of the worst; the dregs of the MA, as you put it, are the ones I feel deserve 0 Stars.
Do I believe Speeding Through Time deserves 1 Star? Yes, I do. I didn't enjoy myself, felt my character had no impact on events, and didn't feel the plot was particularly well thought out or implemented. If an arc is combat-based, I want to have fun and be challenged while serving a vital role in the plot. If it's story based, I look for a well-defined plot and theme with good execution. I felt this arc lacked both.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's just a difference in views. You are more than entitled to rate the arc at 1 star since you actually played throught the full thing and disliked it. Thing is, many of us consider 1 star to be the dregs, 2 stars to be something we disliked/thought could be done better, and 0 stars simply aren't even valid. Your critique is what makes it stand out and as a game you've made a valid point of noting that even if there is an important backstory, the player should always be involved. I haven't played GeekBoy's arc to compare but it's something I was careful of with mine since it was intended as being centered around one of my heroes but that character is never mentioned directly since I put the player in that role.
OK having looked over Heaven's Agent's review of the arc, and seeing what ludicrous things he's docking stars for, I'm absolutely convinced he's just a troll - nobody can actually be this petty and overanalytical and be serious about it.
Some highlights include (paraphrased, and this is only a handful of them):
"Arc had too many commas"
"Arc did not go in depth to explain every nuance of Red Shift's time travel plugging all possible interpretations of it against possible plot holes by over analysis of the arc"
"Arc contained time travel"
"Arc contained 'clones'"
"Arc had clues that were fun, instead of adding to the plot"
"Red Shift was not a lieutenant"
"Red Shift's name was coloured red in text"
"Red Shift casts speed boost on his party members"
"Contact addresses the ally you have to escort out of the map, but that ally isn't physically in the AE building when you exit the mission"
"Mission goal text isn't orange"
"1960s Paragon isn't destroyed don't use the destroyed Atlas map" (Ignoring the whole fact that you're being shown an alternate history on this map)
"Map uses council empire map, council empire didn't exist at time depicted" (Ignoring the whole fact that you're being shown an alternate history on this map)
"Map says 'find mysterious benefactor and take them out' instead of 'defeat Dr. Aeon'"
"Map uses Dr. Aeon instead of a custom brand new enemy"
"Contact summarizes what happened in a mission after the mission ends"
"Mission with the Red Shift time duplicates deserves 0 stars by itself because there is no challenge on it"
"Last mission on the arc exists at all"
...in other words, he sounds like the most bitter, petty, pendantic, anal rententive person to play/review content you can pretty much find, anywhere. Several complaints were either really tenuous/stretch/grasping at straws, were asking him to change things in a way that's actually completely impossible to do in the MA, or weren't actual critiques, simply zrbitrarily docked marked for perfectly valid content because it doesn't fit some arbitrary criteria he seems to have made up on the spot (ie 'I don't like this colour of text' or 'I don't like time travel')
[ QUOTE ]
"Arc had too many commas"
[/ QUOTE ]
I wonder if he has considered writing Amazon.com reviews. I hear there's a lot of so-called literature out there that uses an excess of commas.
(Note: Not a single comma in the above sentences.)
Wow - I know I'm new to the forums and only an occasional player, but I had no idea I'd get this many responses from my original post.
I see a lot of valid points through all this, some of which I didn't know or understand at first. I've got no answers for "fixing" the system. Like many new technologies, there's an awkward period of figuring out how to make it work in the real world that we're all going to have to suffer through (think VCR/Betamax, Napster/filesharing, internet gambling, etc).
I got some decent feedback on my arc - my introduction text is a little clearer now on what to expect. Thank you to those who gave it. I also plan to go through all the arcs mentioned here and give them feedback (starting next week after I get back from my vacation). I have a feeling most of these will be good story quality arcs, which is what I like. That and the fact that I'm a solo player with very few friends to team with out there.
By the way - I had fun with the Red Shift arc. The key mission discussed earlier was a fun diversion, like watching a horde of ninjas following me around. It made the story different and entertaining - and I still had to face Aeon one on one at the final mission anyways. A nice story of unsung sacrifice, so it was high marks from me.
[ QUOTE ]
OK having looked over Heaven's Agent's review of the arc, and seeing what ludicrous things he's docking stars for, I'm absolutely convinced he's just a troll - nobody can actually be this petty and overanalytical and be serious about it.
Some highlights include (paraphrased, and this is only a handful of them):
"Arc had too many commas"
"Arc did not go in depth to explain every nuance of Red Shift's time travel plugging all possible interpretations of it against possible plot holes by over analysis of the arc"
"Arc contained time travel"
"Arc contained 'clones'"
"Arc had clues that were fun, instead of adding to the plot"
"Red Shift was not a lieutenant"
"Red Shift's name was coloured red in text"
"Red Shift casts speed boost on his party members"
"Contact addresses the ally you have to escort out of the map, but that ally isn't physically in the AE building when you exit the mission"
"Mission goal text isn't orange"
"1960s Paragon isn't destroyed don't use the destroyed Atlas map" (Ignoring the whole fact that you're being shown an alternate history on this map)
"Map uses council empire map, council empire didn't exist at time depicted" (Ignoring the whole fact that you're being shown an alternate history on this map)
"Map says 'find mysterious benefactor and take them out' instead of 'defeat Dr. Aeon'"
"Map uses Dr. Aeon instead of a custom brand new enemy"
"Contact summarizes what happened in a mission after the mission ends"
"Mission with the Red Shift time duplicates deserves 0 stars by itself because there is no challenge on it"
"Last mission on the arc exists at all"
...in other words, he sounds like the most bitter, petty, pendantic, anal rententive person to play/review content you can pretty much find, anywhere. Several complaints were either really tenuous/stretch/grasping at straws, were asking him to change things in a way that's actually completely impossible to do in the MA, or weren't actual critiques, simply zrbitrarily docked marked for perfectly valid content because it doesn't fit some arbitrary criteria he seems to have made up on the spot (ie 'I don't like this colour of text' or 'I don't like time travel')
[/ QUOTE ]
On the bright side...reading those quotes makes me want to try your arc. I love the name in red thing, lol. I get it
EDIT: You know what, forget it. I stand by my rating, and I shouldn't need to justify it to the spectators. It's not worth it. Though if you want to read my actual critique, rather than the incomplete and misquoted synopsis, it would seem Geek is up for sharing.
QR
Its the hall of fame
Not
The Hall of whiners
Or
The hall of mediocrity
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: You know what, forget it. I stand by my rating, and I shouldn't need to justify it to the spectators. It's not worth it. Though if you want to read my actual critique, rather than the incomplete and misquoted synopsis, it would seem Geek is up for sharing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Come on, now. You're the one who jumped out and said, "IT WAS ME! I DID IT!"
I tried to keep it anonymous for you, but you couldn't help yourself. I liked to assume that maybe you were having a bad day or something, but you couldn't just leave it there.
I was going to eventually post a huge wall of text with your entire review and my entire critique of it, but I assumed people wouldn't care that much. I might branch out into going through your deviantart and giving you some pointers there too, since I'm an art school dropout who was one or two classes away from an art history degree. Since you were so helpful with what I could do to improve my ar-oh wait, no. You just told me it was bad for a lot of nonsensical and arbitrary reasons.
By the way, if your arc is about your character's origin, it is almost certainly going to be terrible. I don't think I've rated one that covered that ground better than a 2 at this point, but for real reasons and not for using, too, many, commas, . , .
My next post will start with your review, HA. Again, I was going to keep this 100% anonymous here, but you chose to come out and reveal yourself. I'd start here, but it's a lot of text and I don't want to hit the cap.
... I think the griefers are laughing at y'all. Instead of sticking to the original premise, you're arguing WITH EACH OTHER in regards to what kind of ratings and critiques you should get, or who from.
Also, since arc comments are delivered via PM, they are considered private between the player and the author. I believe reposting PM's between two players to the forum is considered poor taste; this is likewise rather gauche.
I know that I'll have to carefully consider whose arc I leave comments on, at any rate. Since Geek_Boy's friends seem to think it's alright, his arcs won't be getting any from me. Sorry man, I'm sure you'd like to know why I liked or didn't like your work, but ... yeah.
"City of Heroes. April 27, 2004 - August 31, 2012. Obliterated not with a weapon of mass destruction, not by an all-powerful supervillain... but by a cold-hearted and cowardly corporate suck-up."
I have been a little too vocal on these forums about ratings griefings and I seem to have helped spawn a new version of the typical mouthbreather who thinks that knocking something that is being well received off the first page of search will somehow move their arc that isnt getting any ratings for a good reason (its probably terrible) up to the front and into superstardom. Despite probably a dozen or more posters sharing personal experience and there being groups of people openly admitting to the practice, there are a certain number of posters on these here boards who want to refuse that it happens.
You must have earned those 0 and 1 ratings, they say. Evidence to the contrary is summarily ignored, of course.
Well, today I found a new version of this ratings griefer, but thats not a fair description. This particular player is not only handing out a rating to prove a point on the message boards, but hes also that all-too familiar breed of reviewer who has such a strange and abnormal set of values theyre basing their judgments on that its hard to tell what they will enjoy.
Im going to be nice and keep the persons name out of it unless they decide to announce themselves, so lets think up an appropriate name for them. Ill just call him HA for short.
For those who may not be familiar with the arc in question, go play it. In fact, I urge you to play it without having read any of the rest of this thread. This guys opinions are completely opposite of any and everyone Ive spoken to about my arc, both good and bad. He has an obviously extremely narrow view of what he finds fun and its not so much that he cant find anything hed enjoy (Im sure there are some arcs out there he does), but he cant seem to separate what his definition of good is from whats in front of him. Its like kindergarten coloring all over again: If you go outside the lines, he obviously thinks youre terrible (whether it was a conscious decision or not).
Now, Ill admit my arc isnt everyones cup of tea. Some people just really cant let go of the terrible rewards you get in the third mission and some people just dont like the author to bend the rules, even if it results in something that is different from anything youll find out there in the official content.
Without further ado, heres the review in question:
[ QUOTE ]
Story Arc: Speeding Through Time, ID 51728
Rating: 1 Star
Unholy Spawn of Two Exploited and Poorly Implemented Themes, Poorly Designed and Overpowered Custom Characters, Plot Holes
This arc, perhaps intended to be an epic tale, simply comes across as contrived and boring. Its poor use of difficult themes accompanied by the upstaging of the players due to overpowered NPCs and a plot not focused on them or their abilities leaves little for players to do and no challenge to be had.
* Text & Grammar: Overuse of commas.
* Explain Theme: If you're going to use time travel, you have to explain how it's achieved in detail; what is this time barrier? How had he used it prior to the event in question? What are the ramifications and limitations, if any? It's a tricky theme to use, as it breeds plot holes and inconsistencies; plug them or don't use it.
* Exploited Theme: Using time travel as an excuse for an army of EBs ... there's no other way to say it. That's weak.
* Unholy Spawn of Two Exploited Themes: Your implementation of Time Travel is done poorly. Then you combine it with a poorly implemented cloning theme.
* Excess Clues: Keep clues to a minimum, and don't feed us what we can see for ourselves. You repeatedly add clues that provide no benefit to the plot, and in fact inhibit the plot from building properly.
* Red Blur: Much too powerful as an EB. Able to defeat mobs on map solo and upstage the player. Should be no more than boss, maybe LT.
Mission 1
* Compass Navigation Text: Bright red text is very distracting and unneeded.
* Compass Objectives Text: Too wordy; should be simple, such as "Lead Red Blur from Caves", or some such.
* Red Blur: A custom character that put Speed Boost on you is a bad idea; some dislike this power for very valid reasons. Very bad when custom mob is a rescued hostage that can't keep up with you once power has been used.
* Red Blur -- Text Inconsistency: Addressing different groups; "Whoops, guess I forgot to wait up for them" & "Try not to fall behind this time, old chum". Select one and use consistently through mission.
* Mission Clue -- The Past Reaches Forward: This clue serves no purpose, and interrupts flow of plot; give it the axe.
* Quest Completion Text: Addressing the player and his younger self interrupts plot; Red Blur isn't physically here, don't address him.
Mission 2
* Quest Introduction Text -- Mission Goals: Color is traditionally orange, not green. There's no need to be unique here; "K.I.S.S."
* Quest Introduction Text -- Mission Warning: Thank you for warning, but such are not usually orange in color; see above.
* Conflict of Canon, Plot Hole: 1960s Paragon City was never in ruins as presented. Even in relation to this story, how could I time travel to such a reality; in The Red Blur's past I've already helped him stop this event, so it shouldn't exist for me to travel to in the first place.
* Clue Confusion -- Miss Liberty: You indicate Statesman witnessed his fallen daughter, as if she spawns to fight, but she doesn't appear. There's way for us to know this.
* Mission Clue -- The Past Reaches Forward: Once again, unneeded and distracts from the plot. Get rid of it.
Mission 3
* Quest Introduction Text -- Plot Hole: The Red Blur states he traveled to other times and gathered other versions of himself. Especially at EB level, this would be a veritable army (see comments below). If they could not stop this, the player will not be able to.
* Quest Introduction Text: See comments regarding text color in mission 2.
* Compass Objective Text: Vague and wordy; "Find their mysterious benefactor and take him out" should simply be "Defeat X".
* Map Choice: Poor map selection. Map theme clashes with enemy group; Council did not exist at this point, and never took over Paragon City. Try switching out to alternative city map.
* Army of Temporal Clones: If there's anything worse than one overpowered ally, it's an army of them. Especially when they not only overpower the primary EB, but the army of EB clones as well. All being left in the dust as they cannot keep up with the player they just buffed.
* Mission Clue -- And Again: This string of clues was humorous the first two or three times. Then it got annoying. Toward the end, it begins to deflate the plot. Not needed; toss them aside.
* Dr. Aeon: Dr. Aeon being the benefactor behind a time travel plot isn't surprising. Maybe a custom villain would be better.
* Mission Completion Text: Save the summary for the souvenir, and keep the mission on track. It's too early for such a dialogue.
This mission is designed extremely poorly; if I could rate it separate from the rest of the arc, it would receive 0 Stars.
Missions should be designed as a challenge for the players, not so they can watch a show put on by NPCs. I didn't activate any powers during the course of the mission after rescuing the first temporal clone.
Mission 4
* Mission Introduction Text : You shouldn't have to describe in such a way why the contact is no more; and having to do so indicates you wasted space that should have been used for plot development.
* Mission Introduction Text -- Plot Hole: How did someone not notice the armies of temporal clones battling it out in the middle of Paragon City?
* Mission Introduction Text -- Plot Hole: How do you even know Aeon currently has the research that allowed him to time travel and create his device in the first place? It's unbelievably convenient that such is the case.
* Anticlimactic: I'd recommend you remove this mission entirely. After the EB armies battling it out, this is a contrived conclusion at best. The big fight is done, the plot has already come to a head; this mission limps along as an afterthought, and is not a good way to end things.
* Mission Clues -- Multiple: Too many and repetitive.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now, to pick it apart:
... amend that. Since Geek_Boy has seen fit to post a comment/review in public, and dissect it?
Not only will I not comment on his arcs, I refuse to RATE them, period. I might play them for the tix, but there's no way I'm feeding an ego that big. No way, uh uh.
"City of Heroes. April 27, 2004 - August 31, 2012. Obliterated not with a weapon of mass destruction, not by an all-powerful supervillain... but by a cold-hearted and cowardly corporate suck-up."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
imma be frankly: i got lotsa accounts, stop it, or i will start.
An eye for an eye.
Im french, but im rude.
[/ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't that be "so" not "but?"
This isn't really an effective threat because it already happens. I don't look for 5 star ratings because it's all crap. Strangely enough, the 4 star ratings are a better indicator of decent maps than 5 star.
And if you want to make an arc that doesn't get banned, for gods sake don't say "warning this is for farming." If you make an arc that has a plot (any plot really) that doesn't say "farm", they can't really ban it. On the other hand, it might take away from the number of people playing it but it's the price you pay for not getting banned.
[/ QUOTE ]
i think i get your point, thing is,
mine is that honnesty will prevail.
or am i wrong.
im not banned yet.
the very instant i will be, i ll move to another game. no biggie.