We might like to think of the arcs as part of the canon, but it's been spelled out to us that they aren't. Hero 1:
Death of the Author
The community's consensus on Architect projects is infinitely more interesting than the developers' stated intentions. Frankly, after that asinine backstory they stuck on it any authorial privilege went straight into the dustbin. The devs can definitively state they won't be incorporating any player-created content into their own continuity, but that doesn't affect how individual players view it.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Which means nothing is set in stone and anything goes. If you don't strickly follow the story then you can't complain about others who don't follow the story.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hero Version
Villain Version
Each person you speak to tells you a short story, unless you're the same origin as them then which they'll tell you a lot more. Overall when you look over all of the extended stories they all imply that every origin owes it's existence to magic.
What a crock.
[/ QUOTE ]
I basically took the whole thing as "none of these people know what they're talking about," after the mutant contact flat out invalidated some people's concepts with the whole "no mutants before they split the atom" garbage.
[/ QUOTE ]Invalidate concepts? How about invalidating the entire theory of evolution? Kinda a big deal, especially since said theory is how mutants as a concept arose in the first place.
[/ QUOTE ]
I thought of those arcs as being the rambling of retarded college students that are using the equivalents of ultra-biased web sites for their primary sources and that they should get kicked out for such poor scholastic competence.
Whoever wrote their particular stories should be fired. They are just that bad.
:
And on that "until they split the atom" [censored]... See that big 'ole glowing orb out there? "About the size" of the moon? Yeah, that one that hurts to look at? Yeah, think about that object, then realize why your claimed story is stupid as hell. Now wait for night and look at all those twinkling lights in the sky. Now realize why you should be fired for such a stupid story.
Blue: ~Knockback Squad on Guardian~
Red: ~Undoing of Virtue on [3 guesses]~
Wasn't the CoX backstory basically cooked up by high school nerds writing Champions modules? The fact that it holds up even this well is frankly amazing.
And for a while things were cold,
They were scared down in their holes
The forest that once was green
Was colored black by those killing machines
[ QUOTE ]
The community's consensus on Architect projects is infinitely more interesting than the developers' stated intentions.
[/ QUOTE ]
What consensus is that? I don't recall a vote being taken on this.
[ QUOTE ]
And on that "until they split the atom" [censored]... See that big 'ole glowing orb out there? "About the size" of the moon? Yeah, that one that hurts to look at? Yeah, think about that object, then realize why your claimed story is stupid as hell. Now wait for night and look at all those twinkling lights in the sky. Now realize why you should be fired for such a stupid story.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stars do fusion, not fission.
Issue 16 made me feel like this.
Warning: This poster likes to play Devil's Advocate.
QR - I just played Blight, and i enjoyed it very much.
That's all 
Eco.
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hero Version
Villain Version
Each person you speak to tells you a short story, unless you're the same origin as them then which they'll tell you a lot more. Overall when you look over all of the extended stories they all imply that every origin owes it's existence to magic.
What a crock.
[/ QUOTE ]
The only person who really implies it is Tarikoss, who is flat out wrong, anyhow. Probably lying, considering his Strike Force. If you do enough CoT arcs, both heroside and villainside, and that one Portal Corp mission heroside that has the dimension where the CoT were peaceful, you'll know that War Witch's explanation is the correct one.
The mutant thing is just flat out retarded, however. Isn't Sister Psyche like 80 years old or something? That would mean she was born before 1938. She also says "We're both mutants", "No mutant was born before 1938", and "I don't think of myself as a mutant". Which is it, lady?
[/ QUOTE ]
Positron is the one who annoys me the most, especially since I prefer to ignore the stupidity of the whole Doctor Brainstorm thing and the BS explanations of why certain powers were not allowed to certain ATs before but are now. Such a thing did not need a meta explanation and the one Posi gives makes him sound like an idiot.
Golden Roller on the other hand, the villain Tech contact, doesn't give you any metaphysical mumbojumbo at all.
[ QUOTE ]
The community's consensus on Architect projects is infinitely more interesting than the developers' stated intentions.
[/ QUOTE ]
What, 'L54 boss farm lf tank'? 
[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, after that asinine backstory they stuck on it any authorial privilege went straight into the dustbin.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if we're picking and choosing from established canon to suit ourselves...
[ QUOTE ]
The devs can definitively state they won't be incorporating any player-created content into their own continuity, but that doesn't affect how individual players view it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think we can safely say that definitive statements don't have much bearing on individual tastes, no matter who makes them.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And on that "until they split the atom" [censored]... See that big 'ole glowing orb out there? "About the size" of the moon? Yeah, that one that hurts to look at? Yeah, think about that object, then realize why your claimed story is stupid as hell. Now wait for night and look at all those twinkling lights in the sky. Now realize why you should be fired for such a stupid story.
[/ QUOTE ]
Stars do fusion, not fission.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is missing my point but hey.
The point I was making was that any effect "splitting the atom" could have caused would have been applied long beforehand due to background radiation just from the rest of the universe.
Blue: ~Knockback Squad on Guardian~
Red: ~Undoing of Virtue on [3 guesses]~
What, 'L54 boss farm lf tank'?
Sadly, yes. I think we're well past the point at which the idea of the MA system being used for leveling needs to be discarded, but that's another argument.
Well, if we're picking and choosing from established canon to suit ourselves...
I think there's a qualitative difference between ignoring historical events and ignoring weak justifications. To borrow a reference from upthread I'm really not going to think poorly of someone who says his Tech Origin character doesn't really have seven artificial hearts.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
The purpose, through and through, of AE was to give us as players the opportunity to write fun little comic book hero stories. It was not intended to provide the next great American novel, not an elaborate tied together perfect canon bundle of credibilty, not to wrestle with the meta-physical reality of the stories setting, and not to make any one person happy or not.
fun.
Rate based on its fun. Use your own personally biased concepts of perfection to evaluate and shift it from 5 stars to 4 or 3. Anything more is even less meaningful than the activity within the game.
And all this because one player did have fun, and said thank you publicly for that fun...
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
[ QUOTE ]
Rate based on its fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
For many players (myself included), the quality of a mission's story can and does affect how much fun it is to play. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with rating an arc poorly because you think its story sucks.
[ QUOTE ]
Use your own personally biased concepts of perfection to evaluate and shift it from 5 stars to 4 or 3. Anything more is even less meaningful than the activity within the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hang on...what makes 3 the minimum? How is it that a one-star or two-star rating is somehow "less meaningful" than a higher one?
[ QUOTE ]
I think we're well past the point at which the idea of the MA system being used for leveling needs to be discarded, but that's another argument.
[/ QUOTE ]
Something else you're wrong about . . .
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rate based on its fun.
[/ QUOTE ]
For many players (myself included), the quality of a mission's story can and does affect how much fun it is to play. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with rating an arc poorly because you think its story sucks.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed, agreed. Your definition of fun is your own. I would never recommend restricting that. My point is, recognizing that everyone's idea of fun is different makes it hard to criticize another player's idea of fun. We can make critical comments about an arc, but... Well, the OP was a player's thank you for what they found fun and 20+ pages later we tearing into review styles, personal attacks, etc. It misses the point.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Use your own personally biased concepts of perfection to evaluate and shift it from 5 stars to 4 or 3. Anything more is even less meaningful than the activity within the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hang on...what makes 3 the minimum? How is it that a one-star or two-star rating is somehow "less meaningful" than a higher one?
[/ QUOTE ]
Apologies. I did not imply a minimum. Or did not intend to. I just quit there. Certainly, knock it down to a two, or one, or quit and don't finish.
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
I played this arc a week ago, and found that I didn't agree with the hype.
I think, as a story, it was decent enough. But as a roleplay story... not so much.
Rather than doing a point-by-point review, I'm just going to give an overview of my experiences while playing it...
I read the description of the arc. The description tells me what the arc is about. Seems okay... standard fare. I hit 'play'.
The contact has an odd na-- oh. Hrm. Okay, now I'm immediately suspicious of the contact.
At this point I should mention that, when I play MA arcs, I'm usually looking for things to weave into my own character's story. The contact's name starts to put this objective at risk. For now, I'll just pretend my character hasn't actually seen it written down anywhere.
Anywho, I head into the first mission. I find it to be okay enough, though I have some issues with it. They're enough that now I'm thinking this arc probably isn't going to be adopted into my own character's lore. Could still be fun, though.
Second briefing. Well, okay, now things just got interesting. Much, much more difficult to swallow... but interesting. Putting aside all the "buts" that come up with the presented scenario, I'm now curious to see how the author's going to resolve all of this. Maybe, in light of the positive comments on the forums, the resolution is novel? We shall see.
I love the visual impact of the second mission. I've seen the map many times, but that map with those custom critters just... works for me. They click. Particularly the lieutenants. Nicely done. I choose to use hit-and-run tactics to relieve Liberty of all her backup before focusing on her, and that just adds to the atmosphere of the mission.
Third briefing. Wow, this just got epic. The support for it seems pretty flimsy, but I push that back for the moment. Now I really want to know how this is going to be resolved.
Third mission. I go around the corner, and at the end of the corridor is a hulking, misshapen black silhouette standing in a patch of fire. What the hell is that?! Oh! It's CK! Holy shi-wow, who knew he could look that scary? Best visual moment of the experience, right there, and I immediately want the Synapse TF tweaked in order to emulate it. This mission is also just fun to play.
Fourth briefing... what?
Ah. Now we get to it. I'm a touch disappointed by the turn. I did see it as a distinct possibility (due to the contact's name), but was hoping it wouldn't go that way, mostly because it just doesn't work for the character I'm playing. I'm still interested to see where it goes from here, though. More specifically, I'm interested to see how the author gives my character back to me.
The design of the fourth mission is pretty neat. A friend of mine has done something very similar, but has yet to publish. I wish there were more missions along these lines in the standard content. I also love the clues.
Fifth mission. A lot of people have apparently come to dislike the map, but I still enjoy it. I move through it quickly, though, because I want to get to the resolution. I want to see how this is all tied up.
Oh. I see. That's something of a let down.
I come away from the arc with two major issues:
1. What I got was not what I had signed on for.
2. My character was taken away from me... and, worse than that, was not given back to me at the end.
These issues are rooted, not so much in story expectation, but in roleplay expectation. Particularly the second, though they're intertwined, as the second wouldn't be as much of a problem, were it not for the first.
I find that there are some architects who approach MA more as an author than as a GM. Given the medium, I think that's an inherently tricky path to take. Not being clear about it at the outset... that's even more dangerous.
This arc wasn't at all clear about it. Quite the opposite, in that it was deliberately misleading. I understand why that is. I'm not even sure it could've been made clear without damaging the twist/reveal. But, from an immersive roleplay perspective, that doesn't make it any less disappointing.
All that said, I can see why this arc gets high ratings from a lot of players. It's got a lot going for it. But, specifically as an immersive roleplay experience, I think it misses the mark by a considerable distance.
Given the medium and the audience makeup such a medium is going to attract, I can certainly see why there'd be some controversy and extreme differences of opinion associated with this arc.
In the future, I may recommend playing it... or I may recommend avoiding it. It'll all come down to who I'm talking to and how they, as a default, approach MA.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
No, no. You're doing it all wrong. You're supposed to give it a negative rating and tell Witch_Engine he's a bad person for having published it.
Recognizing that it accomplished it's goals despite it not being your cup of tea is entirely too rational, polite, and balanced a respone.
What a fine review.
Eco
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
I'll admit that I did feel a pang of disappointment that it didn't turn out to be some sort of plot to pacify or brainwash my hero in the end, but I think that was part of the idea. Part of my feedback to the arc was that I felt it was one of the most mean-spirited and nasty arcs I'd played, and I liked it all the more for it.
QR
Weatherby_Goode - "Heck, Carrion Creepers negates the knockdown from Carrion Creepers."
Wow.
I am feeling very sorry for the author at the moment. All I can say, if you are still reading Witch, is that people are very over-critical about AE arcs and it is just something you will have to deal with.
The other interesting point about AE arcs is wheras in normal arcs, players begin by questioning themselves: 'I wonder if I misunderstood this?' in AE arcs, they begin by questioning the author and the mission 'This isn't right, the author has done this wrong.'
This is a fundemental problem but nothing that can be changed. In my mind, it is due to the fact that players are aware that the mission is created not by a dev, but another player - a peer. They know it is created by someone who probably has less knowledge then themselves, and this fuels the over-critical nature. An analogy would be schools. Dev made missions are ones made by tutors, player made missions are made by other students.
Or in other words, instead of filling the blanks with something that will justify the story(as they would in a dev made mission), they fill in the blanks with something that contradicts the story.
I look forward to playing this arc when the servers come online Witch, and would like to thank you for taking the time to create such a thought provoking story.
I liked Hydrophidians review as well.
The reason I started this thread is because, I, like most other players who don't generally visit this AE forum section of the boards, don't get the skinny on where the really well written arcs are, and wade through a mass of really poor stuff.
This was an arc, that was as well written as I have ever come across, from a player or a dev, its characters were challenging and fun to defeat, and the author got me, with the reveal at the end. I had no clue. I never said I was the sharpest crayon in the box, but I know what I like. And I liked it. I thought others would too.
I don't take it as a personal assault that my character got tricked. Because my charater's not real; he just moves on, to wherever I take him.
When I as a CoX player like something, I am happy to give thank you to reward whoever it is that gave me that enjoyment. Sometimes its a really great team, with others and we really clicked, or a neat story, or perhaps a costume piece that looks great.
The author of this arc did not deserve to be lambasted like he was. That was just poor sport.
-Largo
Founder of A.G.O.N.Y. Supergroup on Victory
Member of Thought Sanctum VG on Victory
Member of St0rm Batallion SG on Guardian
I think Hydrophidian's review was a very good example of negative criticism delivered graciously and with good feeling.
Eco.
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
[ QUOTE ]
I think Hydrophidian's review was a very good example of negative criticism delivered graciously and with good feeling.
Eco.
[/ QUOTE ]
I second or third this. Hydrophinian wrote a very good critique.
Live arcs: 517377 and 517381
Virtue: Quickshot. Swiftwind. Aliuneidis. Gizmodeus. Dasher. Fiver. Inuit Acer. Daniel Darke. Cerebral Flame. El Halcon.
Intel Core2Duo 2.4 Ghz 4 GB RAM**NVIDIA Geforce 9600 GT set to 1280 x 1024**Windows Vista 32 bit
[ QUOTE ]
The other interesting point about AE arcs is wheras in normal arcs, players begin by questioning themselves: 'I wonder if I misunderstood this?' in AE arcs, they begin by questioning the author and the mission 'This isn't right, the author has done this wrong.'
This is a fundemental problem but nothing that can be changed. In my mind, it is due to the fact that players are aware that the mission is created not by a dev, but another player - a peer. They know it is created by someone who probably has less knowledge then themselves, and this fuels the over-critical nature. An analogy would be schools. Dev made missions are ones made by tutors, player made missions are made by other students.
Or in other words, instead of filling the blanks with something that will justify the story(as they would in a dev made mission), they fill in the blanks with something that contradicts the story.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're painting with too broad a brush here. While I'm sure there are a fair number of players that comply with your description, I'm also confident there are a fair number who don't.
In my case, I'm much, much more critical of developer content than I am of MA content. The developers are professionals, are getting paid, are the stewards of the world in which we are meant to immerse, and are, in effect, the GMs for the whole shebang. In light of all this, I approach dev content with greater expectations and I hold it to a higher (and narrower, more precise) standard.
For example, if the developers introduced something like Blight, I'd be screaming bloody murder about it, believe me.
But this is, to me, one of the greatest strengths of MA: the freedom to operate outside of the box, to create content that doesn't have to adhere to the constraints the developers have no option to ignore.
I'd just prefer to have fair warning when those constraints are being deliberately discarded by an architect.
But, back on point: I'd say there are also people who approach MA with the same standards, the same expectations, with which they approach developer content.
And that's fine. I don't do that, myself--neither do a lot of other people I know--but I think it's a valid approach.
However, neither approach--be it the more forgiving and accepting one, or the one that's universally applied--fit into the picture you're painting.
Given that, the players you're talking about may very well be a minority. A large minority, probably, but a minority nonetheless. So, as an architect, when it comes to feedback, I'd be a little leery of applying their view as the default.
In any event, I don't believe forumers, at least in this regard, are at all representative of the larger player population. Arcanaville made an interesting observation about that up thread. Standards, on the whole, seem to be less demanding, players less critical, than they tend to be around here on the forums.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
[ QUOTE ]
haven't played the Arc in question, but I have to say, I find all the controversy fascinating. I saw this, and wanted to respond because the gist of the comment is that he doesn't understand WHY anyone would find creating an Arc 'fun'; and in a smaller sense intinates that if it was for the 'in game' awards (aka MA tickets) its quicker to just run arc and not write them.
[/ QUOTE ]
First of all, I wanted to say excellent response sir. I agree with everything you said but, just wanted to clarify my stance with respect to your above comment.
I realized that I should have added a line about exactly what you say above but, couldn't quite figure out how to fit it in. I have written five arcs total myself for fun (i.e. just to see how that MA system works and what its limitations are). Only three of them are published as I decided one was crap and, the other can't be made to work within the current MA tool set. In my case, I wrote them purely for myself and have zero interest in promoting them. Two of them were specifically built for some of my characters, one being an origin story and the other a background story that will flesh out where a group of my other characters come from. I do have ideas for other non-character attached stories but, at this point of no interest in working on them for a number of reasons. So, I do appreciate the concept of writing MA content just for the fun of doing it.
Jail.Bird
Jail.Bird