(Villains only) How evil do YOU want to be, really?

Great discussion!

Camp us very much still a part of comics.

Ex: Deadpool's actions and dialog, She Hulk's breaking the 4th wall.

There is also a very serious side to comics: Darkest Night, Civil War, All the 13233243th Crisis of Infinite stuff (), etc.

There's room for both.

There's also room for both in this game. Also I agree with those that say Villainous success DOES NOT have to mean taking over the Isles/Arachnos.

I too also tire of Arachnos. Longbow for that matter.

EDIT: Also want to mention that too much camp can dip into the area of "aweful" writing sometimes too. Foxbat in that OTHER game to me was bad camp. I didn't find him funny or amusing at all. Just annoying as hell.

On reflection, I'd like to clarify some nuances before I'm criticized for a position I don't hold. I don't want *every* villain to be a world-conquering megalomaniac complete with fortress, minions, etc. It's a path I'd like to see more of, and I think the game can support it more, but it's not the only path. Some villains commit crimes for the challenge of it: stealing the unstealable, beating the unbeatable. Some are too simple, or too alien, to understand right and wrong and just follow their instincts. Some are just very, very confused.

One thing that they share in common, though, is that they're instigators. In pursuit of their goals, villains start trouble - it's what makes them villains. While not every concept can be supported by the text, the idea that villains are fundamentally active rather than reactive can be supported without making major changes to the game mechanics, despite claims to the contrary.

A side note: AE could have been a great way to open up the options for villain concepts that the official game does not cater to, but sadly this did not happen - though not for lack of trying on authors' parts. A poorly considered rating and listing system, and the fact that HoF/DC is an eventual death sentence, are among the problems.

You get no disagreement from me about the contacts' dialog and all that inferred lackeyism toward the players' characters. That's rarely very fun.
Not that this is the answer, but I just avoid it all and use alternative ways to level up. So, I am greatly unfamiliar with the story arcs... and, even when I do run story arcs... I tend to just wave my hands at what the game says is going on and play within my own world. Not ideal, but, it is what it is.

And I do love the Rogue Isles.

So, I'm a bit unsure about the recent string of posts in here...
I love the (good) camp as much as most... Giant Laser Cannons from Volcano Fortresses and wild characteristics and I happen to be a big fan of twisting mustaches and all that too...
However, I also love me some gritty, realistic, very grim (and possibly depressing) dark villainy and character study/development.

My main villain is likely a good example of those extremes combined.
The gritty backstory and true nature of his whole character arc is utterly dark, twisted and quite depressing (*blissfully breaths it in like a warm cup of cocoa* Ahhhh ), but his persona and many interactions often play as an eccentric and flawed and (from a far) comical... and he seems to have a great camp appeal, so to speak. I did one movie involving him (Just to facilitate some role-playing between he and my main hero... Figured a movie was the most entertaining way to pull that off... and it was FUN!) and he seems to be one of those villains that people love to hate... but really love because of his campiness... and his dark and twisted background may even lend to some sympathy.

Anyway, my point is just that I definitely enjoy that dark real villainy, whether it be subtle oppression, things of the mundane or even greater terrors of twisted society and through and to true psychotics and serial killers and terrifying darkness that we wish never existed [And even some that don't truly... but make fun horror tales].

I also like the oppressed nature of the Rogue Isles. I love the citizens all drearily lined up in Grandville. I think it is one of the greater touches in the game.
I also love love love the architecture and artistic design of the place.

Now... don't get me wrong... Ever since I first laid my eyes on it... I wanted to HERO there and be a villain in the nice and clean style of Paragon City. That is one thing that I felt they got a bit wrong.
It's cool for the roots and majority of the Blue vs Red Sides to be Nice and Clean vs Dingy and Dark, respectively... But I feel like there should be more of the opposite as you progress to the higher levels.
If I were designing it... The level 50 zones would be dark and gritty and terrible for the Heroes and Stark, Sunny and Clean for the Villains.
Having another zone that is the opposite would also be fine, hehe.

I'll stop this ramble short! (For me)

My favorite villains are The Joker (ala the animated show voiced by Mark Hamill because he just has so much fun) and Lex Luthor/Kingpin types.

I agree, for the most part, Sam.
In all forms of entertainment, the quality of the story has to be worth it in order to trudge through the darkness or sadness or whatever they may be throwing at you.
How many times have you started watching a movie that uses rather easy and obvious aspects that will make people sad or whatever... And you find yourself asking yourself... Is this going to be well done or is it crap not worth watching/going through this? Usually... if you find yourself asking that, it probably isn't good enough (They lost you and you're thinking outside of the experience. They may have jumped the gun and/or handled things poorly in the artistic delivery).

All that being said, for me, darkness doesn't have to have a happy or positive outcome nor closure necessarily. For instance, many people find interest in studying and learning about serial killers. These don't really have happy endings or an over-arcing moral story. Sure, maybe the ******* gets caught and the detective work done to find them is inspiring and entertaining... but that's not always the case. Sometimes it is just the simple psychological study and character development that serves as the beginning and ending of entertainment. And the questions, really... of How and Why did this person become this way?

For myself, I role-play and delve into forms of art (generally) to absorb myself into psychological landscapes that I may not experience otherwise. Some times, such as with something very dark and twisted, these are places I would never wish to experience in reality. Other times (The utter fantastical), they are places I can only wish I could experience for real.

I don't subscribe to the idea that art must produce a positive outcome for it to be enjoyed, but just that it has the depth to explore while whatever is going on is going on.

Then again... after getting into this bit of a tangent, I've reread what you said and don't see you saying darkness must have a light to be entertaining. It was probably just the "light at the end of the tunnel" that got me thinking along those lines more than anything.
Hehe, still, I figured you'd appreciate the tangent.

And while I don't think everybody enjoys a sad and/or dark tale with no glimmer of hope at the end, I know that I do, hehe.
Don't worry... I like happy stuff without any dark stuff as well.

I've always wanted to read and see more things that are about the "bad guy" and don't fall into the typical traps of making up for it all with the direction the story goes. In reality, I get and understand that bad deeds plant bad seeds and you'll become entangled within that and all. Believe me (GG!), I get that and believe in it. There are just more paths to take in story telling than to simply and forcibly steer any and all dark tales towards that moral lesson and trend. Reality doesn't play it out so simply and art does not need to make it even more clear cut (Art doesn't even have to take it into account... One could write a terrific story that ends with the main character's first kill). Not all art should be morality mythology (I love that stuff as well). I like good psychological profiles and character progressions (Or regressions, as it were).

So, with City Of Villains, I certainly look to enjoy that side of things. While it can be had, for certain. The game, as has been mentioned, does indeed push a bit too much nonsense onto the player of a villain. I'm not convinced they did this to make the player of a villain feel badly for making that choice. I just street sweep and run paper missions and blur out the contact's words if it doesn't match what my own imagination would prefer.

*pulls on the emergency brake*


Hmmm... my favorite villains... Weird, I'm having a hard time pinpointing that... Outside of the comicbook realm, I'd have to say Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker. Not for his bad-assery... But the backstory of great heights and terrible plummets and self hatred and all that fun stuff (Combined with style, of course). Lest we start a major Star Wars discussion, perhaps we should leave that alone...

Just tracing back to the subject of campiness . . . it certainly has its place. Personally, though, I think that place is over in Champions Online.
Not going to suggest we remove any of the campy stuff from this game, since even at its worst/campiest, this game holds great merit in its capacity to validate many varying perspectives. However, I know I would certainly be pleased with quite a bit less camp moving forward.

People toss around the label of "comic book game" quite a lot. I see this massive game as offering so, SOOOO much more than that. With very little tweaking, we really could be looking at the finest in revisionist post-modern reality media. Limiting this game to "comic book" concepts, I feel, is a terrible disservice to the astronomical potential this intellectual property holds.

But, as I said, the greatest merit of this game is we can all read in to it what we want. The Devs have been careful enough at avoiding a constraining label.

Some stories where the villain is arguably triumphant that I like:

Watchmen
Silent Hill
Memento
Primer

also, check out the anime series Speed Grapher, then tell me Chris Nolan did not watch it before making The Dark Knight, which is a story where the villain is arguably triumphant even though he is hauled off to an asylum at the end.

I've been thinking about this - the actual title of the thread, rather than the discussions that have resulted from it and I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that even though I do enjoy playing villains, my answer is "Not very."

I'm quite happy at the caricaturised "evilness" of many of the signature characters, the moustache-twirling nastiness of Lord Recluse and the various over-egged aspects of his henchmen.

Thing is, there's scope to be just about whatever you want to be here - so all things are possible. There's a range available from the "fallen hero" type to the "psycho-killer."

Even some powers reflect this - a simple example is the bayonet power available to SoAs... however you look at it, using a bayonet on someone is vile... and as someone who has studied military history I can tell you that although I'm not even remotely religious I pray I never have to use such a weapon in anger.

Almost all the powers available to heroes and villains in this game have a real potential to be lethal, be it burying someone in tonnes of mud, or impaling them with thorns, or electrocuting them, and there is the potential to be really evilly sadistic with it (as there is with any game.)

I, however, will take it at face value and be very happy that my bullets aren't lethal, that I never really "kill" anyone or do lasting damage. It's a game and I don't need to stress about morality and consequence.

"You got to dig it to dig it, you dig?"
Thelonious Monk

Say, something just occurred to me...

Has anyone ever noticed how, in City of Villains, the narrative always assumes that your villain is working alone, has no friends, has no allies, has no base of operations and is basically just the equivalent of the nameless, faceless adventurer in most Fantasy MMOs? It's been bugging me a lot ever since I first set foot in City of Villains, since I've always been a fan of the Doctor Doom type villain who has resources to employ and bargain with. Now, I can always come up with reasons as to why the leader of an organisation is out and about doing his own grunt work. After all, despite all the Doom Bots, Dr. Doom always seems to do his own stunts, as it were. And it makes sense - he's the smartest, he's the strongest, he's best suited for the kind of wild and crazy plans he comes up with, usually.

So when the game treats my villain like he's some kind of transient, homeless, friendless thug it bothers me. I mean, OK, not all stories can account for all concepts, but there don't seem to be ANY stories aside from the I17 ones which so much as acknowledge the fact that maybe, just maybe, you're more than a common thug for hire. In fact, the game assumes that your villain has no base, has no friends, has no allies, has no resources, has no money and has no authority. And that kind of bites, because a lot of fun concepts DO. For instance, when dealing with Crey, Lord Recluse doesn't call up Countess Crey to send her to bring him a crate of Crey tech. He deals with the company as a company, allowing them to set up shop in Grandville and probably hosting business deals with them. That's kind of what I want.

In fact, you know what I'd like? The ability to delegate. Let's go hypothetic for a moment. Suppose one day we got the ability to host our own player-specific organisations that we could put our own characters into. Kind of like a SG, but personal. Now, suppose my level 50 Brute, a self-professed emperor, goes and chats up a level 5-10 contact. Currently, the contact will say "Dude! You're too strong for me. My stuff's too easy for you!" Now suppose it wasn't like that.

Say I go to a 5-10 contact with the aforementioned level 50 Brute and he says "Sir, I really need help with this particular job. I know you're too important for me, but is it possible for you to help me? I can pay, kind of." Instead of clicking "Close," my Brute goes "Hmm... Yeah, I don't want to bother, but you know what? I'll delegate. I'll send someone to get it done." I then log out, then log into my level 7 Mastermind, and I can choose to do this mission. So I do, I complete it, I go talk to this guy, and he's all like "Huh, so you're the one the big shot sent, eh? Man, his recruitment policy must suck if he hired you!" Then you have the option of picking whether you're happy with the response or not, relog to the level 50 Brute and chew the guy out for being an *******, or possibly commend him and offer to do more business with him.

I mean, yeah, it's a dumb way to essentially do what we can already do, but it's that slight bit of extra flavour text and extra option that would really make me feel like more of a big-shot than the game currently lets me be. Again, it has nothing to do with game mechanics. It's all down to presentation. And I feel that kind of presentation would rock.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

It's a fine line.

There have been complaints about the flavor text "you crack your knuckles and slick back your hair" so I can imagine the Devs are avoiding being any less generic than that to avoid more complaints.

At the same time, from the time of the announcement of CoV, the players have wanted a system that would let them build up their own evil organization, complete with henchmen. SGs are basically intended to be that, redside, just with PC underlings instead of NPCs.

But people have always wanted to be able to 'take over' existing spawn points so that their own personalized minions would snatch purses or break into bus stops there.

It would be cool if they tied the SG base Mission Computer into the 'paper missions' system so that you could RP alts working for the leader of your personal SG.

Since we have the 'pokemon battles' Gladiator system in the arenas, they could also do something with that. Maybe allow you gain xp and drops by sending your henchmen obtained through that system on 'missions' that were basically npc v npc battles that you could watch, and costing you xp/drops to fix your minions up after the fight, with a cap on max earnings.

For extra points, make these features unique to redside for a time, the blue side can get their equivalents after the extra shinies attract some folks redside for a while.

It just bothers me that "having your own underlings" keeps getting equated to "joining a SG." That REALLY doesn't work. For one, I - the player - am not a leader type. I have no patience for leading groups of people, organising events, recruiting and so forth. And, really, even if I WERE, I couldn't treat my SG mates like servants. I don't know, maybe if I were some kind of successful cut-throat businessman jaded on the cost of other people's lives, I could get some satisfaction out of a leader's position, but I know I'm not "in charge" of anybody in this game, not should I ever be.

Hence comes the problem. I want MY OWN secret military organisation where everybody serves one of my characters, including other characters of mine. I want a place all to myself, not shared with other people whom I couldn't assume control or delete out of existence if I so chose. A common SG base is cool and all, but I don't think I'll be happy with that aspect of the game unless I get a PERSONAL version of this, preferably with less need for highly-specific customization down to the level of placing every vial on ever countertop.

Realistically, even in the most RP-minded community, I'm never going to be in charge of other players, because at the end of the day, we're all equal in this game. And that's how it should be. That's why I want a more personal type of secret base.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

True, but you can always create an SG, then invite one other person with the understanding that after they invite your alts to the SG, you will then kick them out (recompensing them for their time however you work it out).

I'm with Sam in his line of thinking here.

A personal stronghold is not the same as an SG/VG base.

I think all villains should have had the ability to establish a stronghold in whatever zone they are doing missions in and then as a result of successfully completing missions gain the ability to expand that stronghold.

I envision a personal stronghold to be representative of your status as a villain and have more options open up for its expansion as you level up and complete missions. I believe that should be something that's woven into each villain character. And because of that, then you wouldn't want a very complex base building mechanic, since not everyone would enjoy meticulously editing a base.

Just to be able to choose to add on, for example, an advanced observation room which might allow you to expand your information network and gain access to more lucrative missions, or adding automated defenses and have NPC enemy groups try to take your base down while you work to defend it. There are a lot of neat ideas that could be done around this kind of system.

The whole point of this is that the devs need to stop thinking of villains as dishonorable heroes who have turned traitor and don't deserve to have anything worthwhile and begin to think of COV as a game that should offer a different but rewarding experience.

I think it's that kind of thinking that drove the art style behind the Rogue Isles and also the fact that they left a lot riding on the attractiveness of PVP to entice villain players. Well we all know what a good idea that was.

My basic hope for COV is that having someone look over my shoulder and seeing me play both COH and COV in turn should be able to tell that I'm playing two different games. Currently, that is impossible apart from different art styles and is dependent on the observer knowing what ATs are limited to what side. And now with GR ATs will not be side limited at all.

You know what I'm reminded of? Remember the castle/throne room design of older Civilization games? Even just something like that would satisfy me. Give me one of, like, three presets of evil lair and let me build it on a very rudimentary level, like "You can add a control room. Do you want it to be tech, arcane or contemporary?"

Again, like the costume creator. Think about how we design our costumes. Pick, say, a general upper body type, then pick a chest, pick your gloves, pick your shoulders, etc. This is the kind of builder I'd like to see for a base. Give me a few basic layouts for base, and then just give me a selection of rooms/buildings to put in its predefined slots.

There's a reason I keep coming back to Assassin's Creed 2's Villa Monteriggioni or the town builder of Heroes of Might and Magic 5. A pre-set base plan with customization options is far, far, FAR easier to use than what is essentially a simplified version of graphics editor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.