That August survey was just marketing goin' crazy
By
Aces_High,
Posted on: 2009-06-19 23:29 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
[ QUOTE ]
In your opinion. I've played some very good, well-written, and creative arcs. Just because they don't meet with your approval doesn't mean they're not good, just that you don't personally like them.
[/ QUOTE ]If 99% the function is used to produce is crap to me, then the function itself doesn't seem to have been worth the time and effort, you know? On the other hand, one could say the same thing of the official content.
I'm passing my opinion. Most of the people writing arcs are bad writers. Most of the arcs that get written are bad arcs. None of them are going to get better on their own, the rating system serves no purpose to encourage good arcs at all, and the developer's choice function indicates that the minds that gave us Doc Brainstorm and the VEAT arcs are going to be the ones who determine if arcs get special preferential treatment.
In essence, from where I sit, the AE is a giant pile of terrible. Not because of bugs or exploits, but because it puts the power to create easily in the hands of people who aren't any good at it. So yes. That is my [censored] opinion, thank you very much, and I'll continue to hold it. Watch me be unimpressed with how they implement side switching, too, because I'm making the bold prediction it'll be handled with really stupid writing involved.
Edit: Oh, and good writing and bad writing are not, in fact, pure matters of opinion. Good design and bad design are equally not. A lot of the [censored] that gets churned out by the AE is emperically bad. It's not just my 'opinion' that most people are incompetent writers, it's an observation backed up by fact.
The point I'm making, Talen, is that a lot of people are having a lot of fun in the AE. Therefore it is a success and a worthwhile addition to the game.
Even the arcs don't measure up to your sense of artistic value, so what? Fine, it's useless to you. But it is definitely not useless to the playerbase at large nor to the game itself.
As to what constitutes good/bad writing: There are a lot of best sellers that major critics decry as bad writing. There are a lot of critically acclaimed books that are poorly written drivel. The only real empirical measurements that can be applied are with regard to mechanics, not substance.
The fact remains, though, that if enough people are enjoying themselves in the MA, it is a solid addition to the game and time well spent -- even if many of the arc writers are not particularly talented artists.
[ QUOTE ]
Therefore it is a success and a worthwhile addition to the game.
[/ QUOTE ]For you, sure. For me, it's a lot of effort spent on something that's made the game actively worse. I can't speak for you. I can speak for me. And when I see things being put in the game that make it worse for me, it doesn't muster up my enthusiasm.
Now stop telling me I have to be enthusiastic about giving idiots the tools to prove their idiocy.
[ QUOTE ]
So universal enhancement slots would be sort of like the ED kerfuffle, but in reverse?
[/ QUOTE ]
When I think about 3 global debuff accuracy enhancements slotted onto my level 50++ dark dark defender, I say "yes indeedy!"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Therefore it is a success and a worthwhile addition to the game.
[/ QUOTE ]For you, sure. For me, it's a lot of effort spent on something that's made the game actively worse. I can't speak for you. I can speak for me. And when I see things being put in the game that make it worse for me, it doesn't muster up my enthusiasm.
Now stop telling me I have to be enthusiastic about giving idiots the tools to prove their idiocy.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this. The whole idea of AE is that anyone can make their own custom arcs for everyone else to play. If you think the current implementation is so horrible then what would you change while still sticking to the original plan of allowing people to make custom missions?
Being upset at current enemy power choice customization is a good place to complain about implementation. Just because the majority of the human population are not quality writers (shocker, I know) does not mean that the AE is poorly implemented.
If you want to play arcs that you feel are well written and well paced/balanced then make one and play it. If you feel that the AE doesn't have the tools needed for you to make an arc you feel is worthy then that is a valid complaint. What you're complaining about now is like me saying the current character creation is horrible because lots of people make costumes I think are terrible.
[ QUOTE ]
If you think the current implementation is so horrible then what would you change while still sticking to the original plan of allowing people to make custom missions?
[/ QUOTE ]I wouldn't. The plan is predicated upon the idea that every person has something to contribute. For the most part, they don't. If I had to make a system whereby people could make custom missions, I'd make it discerning and possibly even a contest, with oversight and testing and an editor.
None of this is feasible. Instead, we got a toolset that lets bad arcs get made, a rating system that rewards mediocrity, and a playerbase festering in incompetence.
And 'Make your own' is the most retarded possible solution to the problem of everyone else's material being bad.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you think the current implementation is so horrible then what would you change while still sticking to the original plan of allowing people to make custom missions?
[/ QUOTE ]I wouldn't. The plan is predicated upon the idea that every person has something to contribute. For the most part, they don't. If I had to make a system whereby people could make custom missions, I'd make it discerning and possibly even a contest, with oversight and testing and an editor.
None of this is feasible. Instead, we got a toolset that lets bad arcs get made, a rating system that rewards mediocrity, and a playerbase festering in incompetence.
And 'Make your own' is the most retarded possible solution to the problem of everyone else's material being bad.
[/ QUOTE ]
/e yawn.
As long as folks are having fun, that's all I care about.
Could the AE be improved? Sure.
Does it still allow folks to have fun? Yes.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
Yes, well, that's nice for you, but since the subject was 'my reaction' to the announcement, and why I wasn't enthusiastic, my opinion is kinda the one that I find germaine to the discussion. There are people out there happy with Oprah, that doesn't mean I have to be.
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, well, that's nice for you, but since the subject was 'my reaction' to the announcement, and why I wasn't enthusiastic, my opinion is kinda the one that I find germaine to the discussion. There are people out there happy with Oprah, that doesn't mean I have to be.
[/ QUOTE ]
true.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Therefore it is a success and a worthwhile addition to the game.
[/ QUOTE ]For you, sure. For me, it's a lot of effort spent on something that's made the game actively worse. I can't speak for you. I can speak for me. And when I see things being put in the game that make it worse for me, it doesn't muster up my enthusiasm.
Now stop telling me I have to be enthusiastic about giving idiots the tools to prove their idiocy.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that you are entitled to your opinion. And it's all right that you feel it doesn't muster much enthusiasm for you. I can even sympathize a little.
However, in your initial comments and comments in this specific post you did presume to speak for everyone else, not just yourself. You basically claimed AE was a wash. It is not for many of us.
You just said that those who don't measure up to your standards are idiots; namecalling and casting aspersions on others doesn't rate you any higher than that yourself.
My apologies to the forums (and to Moderator 8) for bothering to respond to this.
Meh, it's Talen. Once you realize he only posts so he can read his own posts, then it makes better sense.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you think the current implementation is so horrible then what would you change while still sticking to the original plan of allowing people to make custom missions?
[/ QUOTE ]I wouldn't. The plan is predicated upon the idea that every person has something to contribute. For the most part, they don't. If I had to make a system whereby people could make custom missions, I'd make it discerning and possibly even a contest, with oversight and testing and an editor.
None of this is feasible. Instead, we got a toolset that lets bad arcs get made, a rating system that rewards mediocrity, and a playerbase festering in incompetence.
And 'Make your own' is the most retarded possible solution to the problem of everyone else's material being bad.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, the solution to "everyone else's material being bad" is to not play it. And I still don't get how you think the AE is poorly implemented. You just said that what you would do with it isn't even feasible, so what's the problem with AE? There's not much point in going through the effort of developing a custom mission toolset for your playerbase but only allowing 2 or 3 missions be actually played because of how "incompetent" the playerbase is.
You don't like most of the content everyone else is coming up with, that's fine. Poorly designed content isn't necessarily due to the tools being given.
I think a Bounty Hunter would be funner than a Spy.
@Blood Beret(2)Twitter
I am a bad speeler, use poorer grammar, and am a frequent typoist.
MA ArcID: 1197
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. Winston Churchill
[ QUOTE ]
If this is a "We told you so!" type of thread, go ahead and be proud of the fact that you turned out correct. That really isn't anything to be proud of, though, because all it meant is that your incredibly unlikely scenario turned out to be correct.
Rationally, the likelihood of things in that survey leaving the planning stage were low. You just went with the crazy option with little to go on aside from hope and turned out correct.
That doesn't really seem like something to be proud of, to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Most/all of those things were already in the works. There was a huge hiring phase prior to the marketing survey. They wanted to know the importance placed on each new planned feature...ya know, for MARKETING.
[ QUOTE ]
However, in your initial comments and comments in this specific post you did presume to speak for everyone else, not just yourself.
[/ QUOTE ]Who the [censored] else can I speak for?
[ QUOTE ]
And I still don't get how you think the AE is poorly implemented.
[/ QUOTE ]The AE is a feature created to make it maximally accessible for a community to easily and transparently swap things from one to another, with a rating system. None of these are in my opinion good things, because the ease of use encourages everyone to do it, rather than providing the barrier for entry that I'd like. If it was actually challenging to make an arc, I would hope that most of the terrible arcs wouldn't be there. If there was oversight or editing or a rating system that was worth a crap, most of the terrible arcs wouldn't be rising to the top. Instead, the AE is implemented in such a way that every person is totally equal under its purview and the net result is fanfiction.net with XP.
[ QUOTE ]
None of these are in my opinion good things, because the ease of use encourages everyone to do it, rather than providing the barrier for entry that I'd like. If it was actually challenging to make an arc, I would hope that most of the terrible arcs wouldn't be there.
[/ QUOTE ]
So it's poorly implemented because it's...... easy to use?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
None of these are in my opinion good things, because the ease of use encourages everyone to do it, rather than providing the barrier for entry that I'd like. If it was actually challenging to make an arc, I would hope that most of the terrible arcs wouldn't be there.
[/ QUOTE ]
So it's poorly implemented because it's...... easy to use?
[/ QUOTE ] because it encourages mediocrity.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
None of these are in my opinion good things, because the ease of use encourages everyone to do it, rather than providing the barrier for entry that I'd like. If it was actually challenging to make an arc, I would hope that most of the terrible arcs wouldn't be there.
[/ QUOTE ]
So it's poorly implemented because it's...... easy to use?
[/ QUOTE ] because it encourages mediocrity.
[/ QUOTE ]And rewards popularity based on the opinions of the mediocre.
Yes, much better for all of us Im sure if the only content allowed to be produced were that which meats with your personal approval. *nod, nod*
And I thought /I/ had an ego problem...
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, much better for all of us Im sure if the only content allowed to be produced were that which meats with your personal approval. *nod, nod*
[/ QUOTE ]I know, I'm so unreasonable for wanting content that meets my standards.
Oh, the rest of you are happy eating mud? Well, fine, I suppose, but I don't want to eat mud. I'd like to eat, you know, food.
[ QUOTE ]
And I thought /I/ had an ego problem...
[/ QUOTE ]My opinion is not a democracy.
[ QUOTE ]
My opinion is not a democracy.
[/ QUOTE ]
This quote has a bright future in my sig, the next time I have an opening.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
I could swear I heard the wind, a hard blow to be sure. Or a blowhard. It's hard to tell sometimes -- except that the wind is more pleasant to listen to.
Clouded has great wisdom. I should have listened the first time. 
Yeah, it's much easier to ignore it when I say something that you can't refute. I mean, silly me, thinking that my reaction to things was mine to dictate. I should wait on the polls to tell me what I think before I form my opinions.
Just for fun, let's take a look at part of that in regards to Going Rogue:
1.) New high level Space Station Zones (PVE, PVP, & Co-op)
An expansion restricted high level zone, possibly in Praetoria?
2.) Characters that do not wish to change sides are rewarded by becoming exemplary heroes or villains, and earning rewards not available any other way
3.) Heroes and villains who go to the other side can also act as Double-Agents.
5.) Players undertake missions that define their character's morality and steer them in a more heroic or villainous direction
6.) By switching sides (going from good to bad or bad to good), players can access content "on the other side" (heroes can experience villain zones and content, and villains can experience hero zones and content)
just possible parts of side switching, which has been announced.
4.) Character Creator 2.0 includes Powers Customization, allowing players to customize not only the character, but also the actual look of its powers
announced.
7.) Completely new low-level player experience/zones for new characters in which new characters do not begin a hero or villain, rather become one or the other through early gameplay
also a very possible low level expansion exclusive zone involving Praetoria somehow.
8.) New Spy Archetype, Power Sets & Costumes
9.) Universal Enhancement Slots - at level 50, these enhance powers to the character, essentially bringing them to a hypothetical "Level 60" once they have earned all ten slots
and these also make sense as something that could be expansion restricted.
alltogether, the survey makes sense as things they would try to implement. The ones that accrued the most interest would be pushed to the front burners, while the ones with the least interest get put on the back burners, or scrapped alltogether.