New Dev Choices?

Am I correct in noting that they didn't add any new Dev Choices to the mix with I16? I'll admit to not having memorized the list, but I would have definitely noticed if any of the arcs I see promoted in this forum (dozens of which are better than the current Dev's Choice lot) had been added.

Before I say anything else, I think I'll bite my tongue and wait for some replies.

Haven't seen any new additions to this thread in a while, not that they appear to be reading it...
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=181852

Actually opinions, while not true, can be cogent. Whether or not an arc deserves DC status is not an opinion, though, it is an aesthetic judgment. Those are not true, false, or cogent; they simply are.

On the topic of quality. Heck I remember one of the Dev's Choice arcs was filled with tons of spelling and grammar errors. You think they'd ask them to clean it up before making it a Dev's Choice.

The Butterfly Effect was the Dev's Choice arc that we badge hunters used to farm the DC badges, and a few others as well in the past isssues... I don't know if that was part of the reason that it was declared invalid, but as it could be completed in about 5 minutes for the whole arc, I wouldn't be surprised if it got flagged as a farm due to all the excessive numbers of play throughs; I know I did 100 times through it for the DC badge alone.

But frankly, most of the DCs so far have been pretty poor in my opinion. Some one else has mentioned the tolerance of bad spelling and grammar in a lot of them, but also they've largely been inconsistently plotted (especially with regards to characterisation), so I'm really hoping they are taking their time and picking only the cream of the crop.

The problem isn't whether other arcs are or are not better than Sumericon's, or GadgetDon's, or any other particular DC arc. The problem is that those arcs are showcased as "the best of the best." They are the first to show up in the search, they have a fancy icon next to them, they are locked to always display a 5-star rating. These are the first arcs a player new to the AE sees, and they are likely the first arcs this player will try.

These arcs establish a standard, due to their prominence. Other arcs have been published that meet or exceed that standard. Very very few of these other arcs (what, two, three since AE went live?) have been made Dev's Choice. Looking at the Dev's Choice list, its small size and the publication dates of the arcs in it, makes the MA as a whole look bad.

I remember playing Sumericon's arc some time ago, the details are now hazy. It was one of the better Dev Frozen arcs. The plot is interesting. It essentially simulates your role in the origins of the Clockwork King. I think it was done as if it really happened - so more like an Ouroboros adventure, than a simulation. I don't know what I rated it at the time, probably a 5, I was easily impressed back then when MA had just been released, but other DC arcs scored much lower from me. Curiously, this flashback into City of Heroes history is similar to the concept of Dalgryn's Consequences of War arcs, although the atmosphere is considerably different.

But if I was to rate Sumericon's arc today, I might give it a potential 5, and ask that typos and the up-down level ranges be smoothed out. I believe that was once possible. A Dev Chum author could fix his arc, then have a developer check the changes against the original (to ensure NCSoft wasn't lending their name to something that might become a legal issue) and then NCSoft would insert it. I don't know of this ever happening, whether due to authors, lack of time at NCSoft, lack of mechanism to make the fix, or even lack of critiques to highlight improvements. Whatever, I believe updates are not happening, so I would rate this arc a 4, because it's stuck.

And yeah, my monikers for the DC process are divisive. It is not sour grapes. I tease, hoping that someone at NCSoft might explain the process better, since it's not based around attention to detail or any of the MA features since the first release. Perhaps a cruder arc is less likely to bug out in the long run, and DC arcs are chosen to be "robust". Even better than an explanation would be to get the process going again, or find another way to avoid having MA appear to be crude and unchanging.

Arc: 379017: Outbroken See all your old friends in the Outbreak Tutorial sequel!
Arc: Coming Soon: The Incarnate Shadow Shard of Fire and Ice Mender Rednem needs you!
Massively.com opinion poll: Please Help Save CoH!

OK, I can continue posting here now that I'm no longer operating without all the proper knowledge.

First, I'd say I'll eat crow, but for the record I *never* said all the Dev's Choices were bad. I said that dozens of the arcs critiqued in this forum were better than the Dev's Choice lot. That's not an exact quote, but it's close enough. In later conversation I clarified a bit, stating basically that there are many arcs in this forum that are better than most arcs that have made Dev's Choice.

Having played Sumericon's "Once and Future King" (arc #71601), I'll stick to my assertion. I'll grant that OaFK is one of the better Dev's Choices. It is interesting, well-written, well-researched, and technically sound. It expands on CoH canon in a way that fleshes out Paragon City history for the better. I'd certainly be hypocritical if I didn't give points for that, given what my arcs are all about. It would work quite well as part of CoH content. In fact, I'd even say that, if the majority of the Dev's Choices were as good, many of us wouldn't be as inclined to be critical.

That said, it still has flaws that, yes, *in my opinion*, would have been discussed and possibly improved had the arc been subject to the same scrutiny many of the arcs in this forum have been subject to. My guess is that Police Woman, Airhead, Bubbawheat, and/or Mister Captain Man would have suggested areas that could have been expanded on in regard to story and text that would have caused the story to grab the player better. Any number of reviewers would have spoke about the fact that the allies are pretty overpowered and explained why depowering them some would be better for the arc and players. My guess is LJ, Lazarus, and Venture would have been first to do that.

Pretty much everyone would have taken note of the "defeat all" in the third mission and questioned its need, especially in light of the fact that the MA tour and help files themselve specifically note that "defeat alls" are *not* good things. Those are just the most obvious examples of how the arc could have been improved. Which is what the better arcs in this forum have all been subject to. As I've said, it isn't catering or conforming. It's accepting constructive input from perspectives outside your own to make it better.

At the time the Dev's Choices were chosen, OaFK was likely a gem compared to others. It still is when compared to most of the rest of the current Dev's Choices. Given the changes to the MA, the willingness of many authors to subject their arcs to criticism for constructive purposes, and the additional time other authors have had to learn the MA and develop innovative ways of using its resources, I'll still contend that there are many arcs in this forum that are better than most of the Dev's Choices. Call it opinion if you like, but playing word games doesn't change anything.

The bottom line - and the point I was really trying to make - is, the Dev's have been all but criminally negligent when it comes to selecting and posting Dev's Choice awards. They raced to throw anything vaguely decent into the mix when I14 went live - they just happened to be fortunate enough to catch some pretty good ones, like OaFK. I tend to think the intent in the beginning was good. Maybe they underestimated the time it would take to actually play and critique arcs. Maybe they really didn't have a game plan and just wanted to show everyone all the MA bells and whistles of the time. Since then, however, they've done almost nothing to improve their track record and it certainly seems they have no game plan. Maybe waiting until the entire playerbase (or at least those that were interested) had an opportunity to learn the ins and outs of the MA and establish some systems of interaction that would support improved arc creation - like those in this forum, the various MA guides, the MA channels, the MA websites, wikis, etc. - would have been a better plan.

In any case, we've all but handed them a veritable cornucopia of great choices in this forum. That isn't to say there probably aren't other great arcs out there that aren't discussed here. It does, however, give them a place to start rather than beginning to look for a needle in a haystack of 400,000 arcs.

And simply *starting* would really be a good thing, wouldn't it?

I dont want to comment on the quality or lack of same in the DC arcs because i havent played many of them -i did set out to play them all back when i only had The Exho published, but after i'd done 3 or 4 with no response to my feedback i decided my time would be better spent playing arcs where i'd get some to-and-fro, and maybe a reciprocal play for The Echo. The DC arcs must get thousands of plays, so i can see why they dont reply.

What i do find odd however is simply why tgere arent more DC arcs appearing. It looks like they're not playing AE arcs at all?

Eco

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 played "Once and Future King", it's about a 3-star arc. There's no theme and it's got a few technical and canon issues. The reveal at the end comes out of nowhere and really, should have stayed there; I can't imagine why anyone would want to build off of the novels.

It does seem as though the devs have given up on Dev's Choice. I wouldn't care to speculate as to why.

I'd have to speculate that the Dev's just arent playing that many arcs - probably very little interest.

For all intents and purposes, Dev's choice is a dead concept. IMO, there should be a minimum of at least 1 new dev choice each month. Minimum.

If the Devs aren't willing to spend a little time to support the concept, I think they should just drop it completely and remove existing dev's choice designations.

Another great idea with poor/incomplete implementation and support, yeah.