One idea I had would be this: You choose a name. all are available, but it places an auto "_(II)" on the end. [Or (III), (IV), (V) etc.] This doesn't show up anywhere but in the names having over heads and the search function. The first guy gets the perc of being the one without a numeral. There would be no "Captain Person (I)."
If the first character to use that name does not log into the game for 9 months or so, then Character Name_(II) gets to be "Character Name." The guy who first got the name then logs in? they get the (II), (III), etc. Again, the roman numarals would not be used in dialogues, info, or any such things. They would simply be there to differentiate if two (or more) of the same name were on.
there's no need for an elaborate Rube Goldberg naming system because the current one works just fine.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
I play on Virtue, Freedom and Champion. I don't have problems getting names.
People just need to use some intelligence and creativity (i.e. stop trying to be "Captain Shadow", "Midnight Hawk" or "Spawn of Darkness") and they'll find that there are plenty of good names.
It's probably because people don't want to be Captain Amazing@XxXMURDERkillsatan66xx
edit:
And I don't want to be XxXMURDERkillsatan66xx@ResidentBaka
Quote:
People have been using "creative" punctuation and extra numbers for too long. Frankly I tire of it.|
Originally Posted by Judas_Ace
People just need to use some intelligence and creativity
|
It'd rather have to look at two Captain Shadows than ever see "The_Capta1n-Shad0w." thank you. It's ugly, damages suspension of disbelif and most importantly, there is no need for it. The devs have already offered to put it to bed.
If someone wants the name, they're going to use that "creative" crap to have it. So just GIVE it to them without the clutter and nonsense punctuation marks. Other than schadenfreude and being petty and childish, there's no reason not to.
.
Quote:
They already are that. That is how the global channels and email system see them. It's been like that for some time now.|
Originally Posted by ResidentBaka
It's probably because people don't want to be Captain Amazing@XxXMURDERkillsatan66xx
|
There's nothing explicit about the naming change the devs offered that says that your global name has to be more visible than it is already. That goes for in chat and over character heads.
You wouldn't "be" XX@YY any more than you are already in the eyes of the game and global channels, and you wouldn't become that any more in the eyes of players. In fact, I'm fairly sure the devs would want to avoid that and keep it as invisible as it is now, which is to say, only mostly. The only visible change would likely be that in game emails would require "xx@yy" to send to a specific character or switch to "@yy" only.
.
Quote:
*Glances at the names while passing through Atlas Park to the RWZ*|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
They already are that. That is how the global channels and email system see them. It's been like that for some time now.
There's nothing explicit about the naming change the devs offered that says that your global name has to be more visible than it is already. That goes for in chat and over character heads. You wouldn't "be" XX@YY any more than you are already in the eyes of the game and global channels, and you wouldn't become that any more in the eyes of players. In fact, I'm fairly sure the devs would want to avoid that and keep it as invisible as it is now, which is to say, only mostly. The only visible change would likely be that in game emails would require "xx@yy" to send to a specific character or switch to "@yy" only. . |
"Oh, look i see Lord of Darkness next to Lord of Darkness, and next to them Captain Deathblade talking to Lord of Darkness about Good Samaritan who is trying to ignore them while chatting with Good Samaritan while Lord of Darkness is hovering over Lord of Darkness. Yup, same old, same old. It's like nothing changed with the J_B naming system. Awesome."
*announces a respec in broadcast*
"Hmmm, looks like Lord of Darkness wants to join, but Lord of Darkness isn't interested, and someone just shouted that you shouldn't invite Lord of darkness because he doesn't pay attention and causes frequent teamwipes. Guess i'll invite Lord of Darkness, but not Lord of Darkness."
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
I personally like the idea of Display Name@Unique Global like that other game.
Of course, there will be another privacy outcry [justifiably so] with the global name needing to become public knowledge. But I think it'd work out better.
Naming really sucks now. Sure, I can come up with decent sounding names that aren't taken, but then, they're taken 
. And I also have to do the mess of hoping they actually fit the character anyway. And Emperor Cole forbid if you actually want a one-word name.
Let's Dance!
Quote:
Now let's be honest there, that's about the same as :|
Originally Posted by Schismatrix
*Glances at the names while passing through Atlas Park to the RWZ*
"Oh, look i see Lord of Darkness next to Lord of Darkness, and next to them Captain Deathblade talking to Lord of Darkness about Good Samaritan who is trying to ignore them while chatting with Good Samaritan while Lord of Darkness is hovering over Lord of Darkness. Yup, same old, same old. It's like nothing changed with the J_B naming system. Awesome." *announces a respec in broadcast* "Hmmm, looks like Lord of Darkness wants to join, but Lord of Darkness isn't interested, and someone just shouted that you shouldn't invite Lord of darkness because he doesn't pay attention and causes frequent teamwipes. Guess i'll invite Lord of Darkness, but not Lord of Darkness." |
"Hey, look, it's L0rd 0f D@rkn355, and Lord 0f Darkness, hey hmm maybe we should invite 7056 of Darkness".
Of course, instead, the distinction is just Lord of Darkness@Random Hero 00 324 12 etc if you change to non-unique display names.
But, most likely, as a tech change, it's not one that's worth the return
.
Let's Dance!
Quote:
That would happen as much as you see LOrd of Darkne$$ next to LoRd of Dark-ness now. That rarely happens. When it does, it's not a huge problem most of the time, and I doubt it would become one.|
Originally Posted by Schismatrix
Oh, look i see Lord of Darkness next to Lord of Darkness, and next to them Captain Deathblade talking to Lord of Darkness about Good Samaritan who is trying to ignore them while chatting with Good Samaritan while Lord of Darkness is hovering over Lord of Darkness.
|
If anything, if someone rolls a new character and see's there's already an established active character (or many) running around with that name, they'd be more inclined to re-roll and change names than now because they'd know for sure that they'd be able to get whatever they wanted as a backup/alternate.
.
Quote:
I agree with this. I'd much rather put up with seeing multiple of the same names if it meant I could finally have decent, single-word names. I like my character names to be iconic, not obscure jargon. I don't care if everyone else can use the same name, because I focus on my character.
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
People have been using "creative" punctuation and extra numbers for too long. Frankly I tire of it.
It'd rather have to look at two Captain Shadows than ever see "The_Capta1n-Shad0w." thank you. It's ugly, damages suspension of disbelif and most importantly, there is no need for it. The devs have already offered to put it to bed. If someone wants the name, they're going to use that "creative" crap to have it. So just GIVE it to them without the clutter and nonsense punctuation marks. Other than schadenfreude and being petty and childish, there's no reason not to. . |
Quote:
The idea would be to NOT do it like that other game and instead keep the @Unique Global as invisible as it is now.|
Originally Posted by reiella
I personally like the idea of Display Name@Unique Global like that other game.
|
That other game made showing the Global optional, and made it visible by default. I can't get behind that.
People want their illusion of privacy (illusion because it's easy to get anyone's global name) and the devs have to respect that. Also, having @Global names being in your face is as much of an immersion breaker as having 1337 and extra punctuation in character names.
So yeah, let's not do it exactly like that other super hero game.
.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
The grown up thing is to understand
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Other than schadenfreude and being petty and childish
|
The current naming system is fine. Every workaround ever posited in topics like this has only succeeded in being spectacularly clunky and ugly.
Quote:
Nothing beats not offering up a counter other than "it's the status quo".|
Originally Posted by Primal
Nothing strengthens your case quite like slinging insults, amirite?
|
.
Question for you Johnny: Without something to make the names unique, how will teh system tell which player the /tell, invite, or e-mail is supposed to go to? It doesn't matter if there are two Hero Guys or two thousand, how is the system supposed to know who you're talking two when you type: /t Hero Guy, <message>?
The Abrams is one of the most effective war machines on the planet. - R. Lee Ermy.
Q: How do you wreck an Abrams?
A: You crash into another one.
Quote:
When the status quo works great why not defend it.|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
Nothing beats not offering up a counter other than "it's the status quo".
. |
If they eventually go to a 'one server' game model they'll need to do something about names. Until then, there's no need. Your aesthetic complaints fall far short of a compelling call to arms.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
Quote:
By having an account-based unique identifier that can be post-pended to the display name in appropriate venues as necessary. But that's a big mine-field I see with this game specifically, since there was already a big privacy outcry over Global Handles.|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
Question for you Johnny: Without something to make the names unique, how will teh system tell which player the /tell, invite, or e-mail is supposed to go to? It doesn't matter if there are two Hero Guys or two thousand, how is the system supposed to know who you're talking two when you type: /t Hero Guy, <message>?
|
In general, I think the tech cost to develop combined with the 'political' cost of changing from the status quo wouldn't really be worth it.
One thing I will comment to Nethergoat however. There won't be a need even with server consolidation. At worst, the only need will be 'old' server name prefixed being applied. Or just follow the method that Global Handles were assigned initially. It won't be pleasant, but y'know, it's not really that much bigger of a deal than the current situation with names.
Let's Dance!
Personally, I think of heroes/villains as unique characters and having multiple "Amazing Man"s on one server just doesn't jive with me.
Quote:
I think that the privacy issue is tied with the fact that many people have stated that they think "M I Abrahms@M I Abrahms" looks really stupid, and is more of an immersion breaker than seeing someone with -M I Abrahms.
|
Originally Posted by reiella
By having an account-based unique identifier that can be post-pended to the display name in appropriate venues as necessary. But that's a big mine-field I see with this game specifically, since there was already a big privacy outcry over Global Handles.
|
The Abrams is one of the most effective war machines on the planet. - R. Lee Ermy.
Q: How do you wreck an Abrams?
A: You crash into another one.
Quote:
And that is a fair statement. However, I believe the contention is that people using kreatyve methods of using the same name anyway.|
Originally Posted by Jophiel
Personally, I think of heroes/villains as unique characters and having multiple "Amazing Man"s on one server just doesn't jive with me.
|
I still see Amazing Man, Amaz'n Man, Amazing Mann, and Amazzing Man as still really being the same name, even though they aren't literally [obviously].
Let's Dance!
I generally like the unique names, but there's one catch: if you ever have a good name, and want to move the character, rest assured you'll lose your name.
Also, I'm probably in a minority, but I'd love for there to be a time that a character can hop from server to server without paying transfers. For that to happen, name frexibility would have to be part of it.
Quote:
The @ distinction is awkward to me, and feels more like resistance to change given verbage. That doesn't mean it's not a legitimate concern, just feels like it's trying to redirect where the issue of contention is. But that could well just be my different perspective and dismissing the view. I'd much rather see a Shadowstorm@Hector42 than Shad0wst0rm. Sidenote, the villain 50 paper missions with 0mega really annoy me |
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
I think that the privacy issue is tied with the fact that many people have stated that they think "M I Abrahms@M I Abrahms" looks really stupid, and is more of an immersion breaker than seeing someone with -M I Abrahms.
|
.The lllusions also kinda come to mind here. One on hand, they're really not that breaking, but they can cause a bit of frustration when attempting to communicate
.I will say, personally, it's not a system that's really worth implementing mid-stream.
As a fun comical sidenote, one of my friends actually has a character name that's now blocked because they added a Signature Hero to the game with the same name.
Let's Dance!
Quote:
Add this link to the character creation screen:|
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane
What could the devs do then to open up names for everyone and still please the doubters?
|
http://thesaurus.com/
Problem solved
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
A little while back, at HeroCon IIRC, the devs asked the people assembled if they would like a change to the naming system that would free up all names.
That crowd, for the most part, said "no".
This surprised me. I see a lot of complaints about name availability, especially on the larger servers. I don't think anyone likes using periods and increasingly odd punctuation to have a name, and I doubt people like seeing it.
I personally would love such a change. So, I was wondering why exactly people would object to it.
Is it because they don't want someone having the same name as one of their characters? That seems a little shallow to me. If that bothers them, is seeing someone with the same name but with a period at the end OK then? That seems even more shallow.
Being realistic, I don't see how someone who played a character to 37 and then stopped playing three years ago has any more or any less exclusive right to a name as someone who's actively playing and paying and thinks it would be great for their new character.
Ok, yes I understand some people like that they scored a choice name. But for everyone of those, I bet they've been grok-blocked on many more, maybe by someone who's never even going to play the game again.
The grown up thing is to understand that we'd be losing exclusivity on some names, but we would also be opening up a whole new universe of possibilities of names for us to use ourselves.
If that's not the issue people had with the dev's proposal, what is? What could the devs do then to open up names for everyone and still please the doubters?
.