Alright as someone who has recently returned to the game after about a years absence I see no problem whatsoever with freeing up names on inactive accounts. Especially those names not attached to a global as if they haven't come back by now they probably aren't going to and even if they did is it really realistic to expect all their names to still be available (if it were me I wouldn't)? To me this whole thing isn't about creativity it's about keeping the game fresh and alive for the folks who are giving it the funding to keep growing.
Give those who would be under the gun an opportunity to come back at the very least long enough to reset their timer. I don't think that's too much to ask and it's something I did during my long absence. To me that warning is the key here. If you don't heed it then is their anyone else you can blame?
Of course all this is my opinion (you're welcome to yours) and I'm pretty laid back as long as I feel I've been treated fairly so take it for what you will.
Quote:
The problem I have with this statement and others made like it is, it works great in theory but fails in practice. It's a business, someone who has been gone for four years could come back during a particular event (say the launch of GR) and thus pay for a certain amount of time of their choosing. Which increases NCSoft's revenue for that period.|
Originally Posted by Decaf
To me this whole thing isn't about creativity it's about keeping the game fresh and alive for the folks who are giving it the funding to keep growing.
|
Now should they not, they're not losing anything either (not over inactive accounts and names anyways, it's fractional compared to a massive process of canceled accounts). The game has been doing fine through the years with this process going, this is why I initially disagree on the motion, because I don't think it'll impact the game any greater than say, five hundred people picking up the game and starting an account. And we clearly see that they aren't losing money by keeping these names around nor will they get a boost in revenues for freeing them up. The only way to do that would be if you were willing to have a claimed name from an inactive account, would be to pay another $15.99 (or some percentage of that) for the other persons account. Which would be silly.
Quote:
I see. Not quite what I was thinking. It sounds as though it would work,though. I only see one problem with this, and that is that every character a person has doesn't neccesarily work with one suffix. For instance. If I choose "The Fearful" as my suffix, I could have "The Fearful Night Stalker" and the "The Fearful Death Knell" but "The Fearful Sunflare" doesn't really work. I realise its a cosmetic thing, really, but that's the type of thing I think that would bug a lot of people, given the amount of talk I hear about the lack of certain types of titles. |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
When CO launched and the subject of the Global@Local thing came up, I suggested the alternative of having a freeform prefix that would *default* to global, but which the player could override with something else if they did not want to be known that way. So instead of one of my characters being known as Arcanaville@Violet Rumble, I could override that and be TheAwesome_Violet Rumble or whatever. The burden would then be on me to find an alternate unique prefix. The exact mechanics of this would need very careful refinement, particularly in how players show up in chat, in teams, in team listings, in Supergroups, etc, and preserve some of the existing rules regarding names (like for example the name above would be illegal because only GMs can have underscores in their names).
We could even expand the current prefix system so that my server-wide unique name could be The Unstoppable Violet Rumble and everyone would have to pick a unique set of prefixes to attach to their local name (the first player to pick that name could elect to have no prefixes, since that would be unique at the time). The advantage of a prefix system is that it could be expanded or enhanced to make local names globally unique without resorting to forcing people to use global handles, allow people more freeform control over their visible names, and allow for a potential future where either shardless or cross-server teaming became possible. Those are things purges can't do. I'm not sure I exactly like the idea, but I think it has promise and would likely be more palatable to more people. It can be sold as adding more possibilities rather than allocating existing ones. |
One solution I see is that there could be an option not to have it show up, but that option would need to be on the players end, or else I'd see "Sunflare" and everyone else would see "The Fearful Sunflare". (Which is why CO's system didn't really work out.)
The world is crazy. I offer this as proof; found on a butane lighter: Warning: Flame may cause fire.
You can sleep when you die.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Decaf
To me this whole thing isn't about creativity it's about keeping the game fresh and alive for the folks who are giving it the funding to keep growing.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stryph
The problem I have with this statement and others made like it is, it works great in theory but fails in practice. It's a business, someone who has been gone for four years could come back during a particular event (say the launch of GR) and thus pay for a certain amount of time of their choosing. Which increases NCSoft's revenue for that period.
Now should they not, they're not losing anything either (not over inactive accounts and names anyways, it's fractional compared to a massive process of canceled accounts). The game has been doing fine through the years with this process going, this is why I initially disagree on the motion, because I don't think it'll impact the game any greater than say, five hundred people picking up the game and starting an account. And we clearly see that they aren't losing money by keeping these names around nor will they get a boost in revenues for freeing them up. The only way to do that would be if you were willing to have a claimed name from an inactive account, would be to pay another $15.99 (or some percentage of that) for the other persons account. Which would be silly. |
This has all been addressed in the proposal Ascendant made, so it really serves no purpose to continue bringing it up. I realise not everyone reads every post on the thread though, so I've summarised it in the original post. You should take a look.
The world is crazy. I offer this as proof; found on a butane lighter: Warning: Flame may cause fire.
You can sleep when you die.
Quote:
I still don't see what it solves. It also negatively impacts those who can't get on during that two week period/don't get the email for various reasons. What if they're over seas stationed in Afghanistan or what if their computer is broken? Too bad, so sad? And in the end what do we gain with this risk of potentially infuriating potential customers? A few names get freed which will instantly get taken up again and we're back at square one.|
Originally Posted by GreySquirrel
*resists the urge to be overly snarky*
This has all been addressed in the proposal Ascendant made, so it really serves no purpose to continue bringing it up. I realise not everyone reads every post on the thread though, so I've summarised it in the original post. You should take a look. |
It's a bandaid to the problem, not a fix.
Quote:
The prefix would be adjustable per character, specifically to avoid the problem you describe which would occur if Global@Local was adopted. You wouldn't want to force someone to be known as ClownPants@Death Knell. That particular bit of cognitive dissonance should be optional on the part of the player.
|
Originally Posted by GreySquirrel
I see. Not quite what I was thinking. It sounds as though it would work,though. I only see one problem with this, and that is that every character a person has doesn't neccesarily work with one suffix. For instance. If I choose "The Fearful" as my suffix, I could have "The Fearful Night Stalker" and the "The Fearful Death Knell" but "The Fearful Sunflare" doesn't really work. I realise its a cosmetic thing, really, but that's the type of thing I think that would bug a lot of people, given the amount of talk I hear about the lack of certain types of titles.
|
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Keep in mind, they'd have to miss every free reactivation weekend for two years to not have their names re-reserved. The amount of names we'd get back is an unknown factor, but with somewhere in the neighbourhood of at least 75,000 inactive accounts, I think we'd get a lot of names freed up. There are a lot of old accounts out there that don't even have globals still; its a fairly safe bet that they're not going to be coming back for the most part.
|
Originally Posted by Toony
I still don't see what it solves. It also negatively impacts those who can't get on during that two week period/don't get the email for various reasons. What if they're over seas stationed in Afghanistan or what if their computer is broken? Too bad, so sad? And in the end what do we gain with this risk of potentially infuriating potential customers? A few names get freed which will instantly get taken up again and we're back at square one.
It's a bandaid to the problem, not a fix. |
The world is crazy. I offer this as proof; found on a butane lighter: Warning: Flame may cause fire.
You can sleep when you die.
Quote:
So we're basically looking at a replacement of the title system that's in the game now, correct? It seems like it would be a bit unwieldy to have The Dark Salacious Fearful Death Knell. I can't remember if those are actual titles or not, but you get my drift?
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The prefix would be adjustable per character, specifically to avoid the problem you describe which would occur if Global@Local was adopted. You wouldn't want to force someone to be known as ClownPants@Death Knell. That particular bit of cognitive dissonance should be optional on the part of the player.
|
The world is crazy. I offer this as proof; found on a butane lighter: Warning: Flame may cause fire.
You can sleep when you die.
On a completely anecdotal level, I was checking names this evening, and in about ten minutes found the following names currently not attached to any global:
Spike, Bell, Dragon, She, Street Rat, Kung Fu, Slapstick, Shatter, Soul, Mighty, Red, Badge, Gentleman, Freedom, Sinful, Sun, Moon, Magician, Evil, Moonlight, Sunlight, Starlight, Swarm, Sun, Blue, Might, Brain, Tough Guy, Pirate, Ninja, Power, Blur, and Light.
Like I said, completely anecdotal, but interesting that it was over the course of around ten minutes.
Where do we go from here?
Quote:
I mention titles only because they already exist, so its easy to point to as an example of a similar system. I wouldn't appropriate titles for this purpose for the reason you specify: people have randomly picked multiple long winded titles just because they can and it currently doesn't clutter up the name space.|
Originally Posted by GreySquirrel
So we're basically looking at a replacement of the title system that's in the game now, correct? It seems like it would be a bit unwieldy to have The Dark Salacious Fearful Death Knell. I can't remember if those are actual titles or not, but you get my drift?
|
But if I *want* to be The Dark Salacious Fearful Death Knell then even if we switched to Global@Local with no prefix options I can still be a relatively unwieldy name by simply setting my global to "TheDarkSalaciousFearful-" and as long as it fits in the blank that's what I would be known as. You can't really stop me from being unwieldy if I want to be (short of the maximum field lengths), but you can design the system to prevent a player from being *forced* to be unwieldy.
The point to the suggestion was that if people actually think Global@Local is a good idea in terms of making names unique, there's no reason not to simply say that Prefix@Local (or Prefix-Local, or PrefixSomethingLocal) must be unique and allow players to put in something other than their global handle in there. There's no computational difference, and no namespace difference. The fallback is always Global@Local which is guaranteed unique, but if the player can find *another* SomethingLocal combination that is *also* unique, why not allow them to use it? I can't see what problem that creates, in that it has all the benefits of Global@Local but with one more option available to the player.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
The other objection to this would be (and this is an assumption, but it seems a fairly safe one, given that it is made whenever CO's system comes up) that people don't really want to share names. Such as, you level a character named Death Knell to 50, and have a good reputation, and then someone else makes one, becomes a griefer, and unless someone can remember the full Dark Salacious Fearful Death Knell then the newer Dark Fearful Salacious Death Knell could ruin a reputation.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I mention titles only because they already exist, so its easy to point to as an example of a similar system. I wouldn't appropriate titles for this purpose for the reason you specify: people have randomly picked multiple long winded titles just because they can and it currently doesn't clutter up the name space.
But if I *want* to be The Dark Salacious Fearful Death Knell then even if we switched to Global@Local with no prefix options I can still be a relatively unwieldy name by simply setting my global to "TheDarkSalaciousFearful-" and as long as it fits in the blank that's what I would be known as. You can't really stop me from being unwieldy if I want to be (short of the maximum field lengths), but you can design the system to prevent a player from being *forced* to be unwieldy. The point to the suggestion was that if people actually think Global@Local is a good idea in terms of making names unique, there's no reason not to simply say that Prefix@Local (or Prefix-Local, or PrefixSomethingLocal) must be unique and allow players to put in something other than their global handle in there. There's no computational difference, and no namespace difference. The fallback is always Global@Local which is guaranteed unique, but if the player can find *another* SomethingLocal combination that is *also* unique, why not allow them to use it? I can't see what problem that creates, in that it has all the benefits of Global@Local but with one more option available to the player. |
(Last reply for the night, as I'm up way too late and want to miss the sun. This argument against CO's system just came up tonight, which is why I'm mentioning it.)
The world is crazy. I offer this as proof; found on a butane lighter: Warning: Flame may cause fire.
You can sleep when you die.
Quote:
That is a potential problem, but its one instance of the more general problem, because we already have a plethora of similar names with no guard against people making visually similar names. And not just the weird punctuation stuff; I can already make Dark Death Knell if Death Knell is already taken, or even if it is not. Then someone else can make Death Dark Knell. And probably already has.|
Originally Posted by GreySquirrel
The other objection to this would be (and this is an assumption, but it seems a fairly safe one, given that it is made whenever CO's system comes up) that people don't really want to share names. Such as, you level a character named Death Knell to 50, and have a good reputation, and then someone else makes one, becomes a griefer, and unless someone can remember the full Dark Salacious Fearful Death Knell then the newer Dark Fearful Salacious Death Knell could ruin a reputation.
(Last reply for the night, as I'm up way too late and want to miss the sun. This argument against CO's system just came up tonight, which is why I'm mentioning it.) |
And its one of the reasons I said I'm not sure I entirely like the idea, I just think this one is better than the original Global@Local one. Both ideas have the problem you specify, but my variant doesn't appear to have it to a noticeably higher degree.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I wouldn't want some corny prefix added to my name so that someone else can have the same name I have.
I don't want my global tacked on to the end of my name (I hated that "feature" in CO) so that someone else can have the same name I have.
I'm against any dev effort to free up names. I'd rather that payroll go to more powers, zones, content, etc. You see, you people not getting your names are STILL here... and unless you all decide to quit in large numbers no one really cares.
Now, don't think I wouldn't benefit from a name purge. I have a list of names ready to (try to) grab if a purge gets announced. I know someone with a list of names OTHER people want to use as trade bait if they get freed up (and I'm sure there are others who'd do the same).
I'd just rather see the dev payroll go to something else than devising purge systems and all that nonsense. I'd rather see a jetpack costume piece for everyone rather than see some dude get to name his character "Lightning." The most recent purge would only clear names that didn't even see a sewer run in a single afternoon, anyway (lvl 6 and lower or something). Very few of those Holy Grails would be freed up.
So, I went into McDonalds today and ordered a Big Mac. They said I couldn't have one, there weren't any left. I looked behind the cashier, and saw several on the shelf. "There's some right there," I said. The cashier shook his head and said, "Oh, no. That one is reserved for a customer that came in yesterday. He might be back today for one, so we're holding it for him. That one there is for a customer we had last month, and this one is reserved for a customer we had two years ago."
Now, if this happened to you, would you settle for a Quarter Pounder, or just leave and go somewhere else?
Quote:
I really wouldn't want a month old Big Mac, let alone one that had been sitting there two years.|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
So, I went into McDonalds today and ordered a Big Mac. They said I couldn't have one, there weren't any left. I looked behind the cashier, and saw several on the shelf. "There's some right there," I said. The cashier shook his head and said, "Oh, no. That one is reserved for a customer that came in yesterday. He might be back today for one, so we're holding it for him. That one there is for a customer we had last month, and this one is reserved for a customer we had two years ago."
Now, if this happened to you, would you settle for a Quarter Pounder, or just leave and go somewhere else? |
The same goes for old names. If Ascendant stopped playing for a year and got purged, would I really want to make a character named Ascendant? I mean, think of the baggage (being hounded for autographs wherever I went, Ghost Widow calling at all hours asking me why I never return her calls, not the mention the outrageous lawyer fees!)
Seriously though, I've already encountered cases of mistaken identity where names have been similar to others and people confuse them. This has also happened with costumes, because despite the incredible number of possible combinations, there are still certain sets and pieces that go together better. Imagine if huge numbers of names are purged from their former owners to be recycled. Better to keep the recycling to low-level throwaways that never make a name for themselves, as the devs have done in the past.
Of course, I still maintain the position that creativity is the real solution to this problem. There are all the names needed out there, it's just harder over time to come up with them.
"When heroes fail, the Angels will save you."
MASTERMIND NUMERIC KEYPAD PET CONTROLS
HAMIDON NUKE RAID GUIDE
Quote:
That's a poor way of putting it. Access to a name in an MMO is sort of like owning or renting a house. The whole burgers on reserve thing makes it sound ridiculous, rather than just annoying or, depending on perspective, stupid.|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
So, I went into McDonalds today and ordered a Big Mac. They said I couldn't have one, there weren't any left. I looked behind the cashier, and saw several on the shelf. "There's some right there," I said. The cashier shook his head and said, "Oh, no. That one is reserved for a customer that came in yesterday. He might be back today for one, so we're holding it for him. That one there is for a customer we had last month, and this one is reserved for a customer we had two years ago."
|
So to put it a different way, imagine a house. A nice place to live, close to where you work, in a pretty good neighborhood. You'd like to rent it and move in as soon as possible, but the owner refuses. When you ask why, they tell you that, while the current resident hasn't paid his rent in months, the owner can't kick him out without any warning, even if you have the money for the first three months in cash.
To take the metaphor further, the owner may be required to give the current resident a warning of, say, two weeks to move out before the resident comes home to find their junk on the front lawn.
Hopefully well see a revamp in CoH2-Vahzilok Boogaloo
@bpphantom
The Defenders of Paragon
KGB Special Section 8
Quote:
Pretty much, yeah. I'm not sure why I'm supposed to suddenly feel bad about people who haven't paid into the game for years risking losing their name because the e-mail comes at an inconvenient time. |
Originally Posted by Toony
I still don't see what it solves. It also negatively impacts those who can't get on during that two week period/don't get the email for various reasons. What if they're over seas stationed in Afghanistan or what if their computer is broken? Too bad, so sad?
|
You can come up with hypothetical edge cases for any scenario. I doubt the bulk of CoH's former players who quit 2+ years ago are currently in Afghanistan and that's why they're not logging in now.
Quote:
"So, have you tried contacting this so-called 'resident'?"|
Originally Posted by Kiana Wolf
So to put it a different way, imagine a house. A nice place to live, close to where you work, in a pretty good neighborhood. You'd like to rent it and move in as soon as possible, but the owner refuses. When you ask why, they tell you that, while the current resident hasn't paid his rent in months, the owner can't kick him out without any warning, even if you have the money for the first three months in cash.
|
"No, he just hasn't paid rent in three years. No idea where he is now."
"So you'll try contacting him now so I can move in and start paying you?"
"Nah, what if he comes back in another three years and is mad that you moved in? Can't risk that."
"..."
Quote:
"But, sir, I have a nigh-infinite number of apartments, any of which you can have now. Just not *that* one."|
Originally Posted by Jophiel
"So, have you tried contacting this so-called 'resident'?"
"No, he just hasn't paid rent in three years. No idea where he is now." "So you'll try contacting him now so I can move in and start paying you?" "Nah, what if he comes back in another three years and is mad that you moved in? Can't risk that." "..." |
It's not the best analogy.
Comrade Smersh, KGB Special Section 8 50 Inv/Fire, Fire/Rad, BS/WP, SD/SS, AR/EM
Other 50s: Plant/Thorn, Bots/Traps, DB/SR, MA/Regen, Rad/Dark - All on Virtue.
-Don't just rebel, build a better world, comrade!
Quote:
Wonderful job in double posting just to try and be funny.|
Originally Posted by Jophiel
"So, have you tried contacting this so-called 'resident'?"
"No, he just hasn't paid rent in three years. No idea where he is now." "So you'll try contacting him now so I can move in and start paying you?" "Nah, what if he comes back in another three years and is mad that you moved in? Can't risk that." "..." |
Yes, I'm aware the analogy isn't perfect. But it has to at least be on par with the reserved Big Mac. Also, while I'm sure you're only taking it so literally to make the joke, just let me point out that two week notice in the analogy does not translate to two weeks in our situation. Neither does being gone for three years in our situation translate to three years in the analogy.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Smersh
"But, sir, I have a nigh-infinite number of apartments, any of which you can have now. Just not *that* one."
It's not the best analogy. |
And I used the Big Mac analogy as a bit of a joke to make a point. I think the point got across, so the analogy accomplished it's purpose.
Quote:
Thanks! Name reservation threads r srs bizness.|
Originally Posted by Kiana Wolf
Wonderful job in double posting just to try and be funny.
|
Quote:
| Yes, I'm aware the analogy isn't perfect. |
Quote:
And then people with 30 character slots run in and create level 1's they never play of characters with names like "Voltage" and "Anarchy" and in about 6 months we're at the same problem we are at now with few names.|
Originally Posted by GreySquirrel
Keep in mind, they'd have to miss every free reactivation weekend for two years to not have their names re-reserved. The amount of names we'd get back is an unknown factor, but with somewhere in the neighbourhood of at least 75,000 inactive accounts, I think we'd get a lot of names freed up. There are a lot of old accounts out there that don't even have globals still; its a fairly safe bet that they're not going to be coming back for the most part.
|
If you want to wipe level 20's and under who haven't logged in in 4 years, go ahead. I don't think it will do much in the long run and is just a quick bandaid fix that won't do anything. If you want to erase the names of level 50's regardless of how long it's been, well, I can't get behind that. You'd be better off just banning them from the game because they're probably not coming back after you went and stole all their characters names because they didn't pay an upkeep.
I still see no-unique names being the best option. The only real problem people have with it is "But...but...I don't want someone to see my global at the end of my name, which they can turn off! Can't I just have that level 50's name?"
We could even expand the current prefix system so that my server-wide unique name could be The Unstoppable Violet Rumble and everyone would have to pick a unique set of prefixes to attach to their local name (the first player to pick that name could elect to have no prefixes, since that would be unique at the time).
The advantage of a prefix system is that it could be expanded or enhanced to make local names globally unique without resorting to forcing people to use global handles, allow people more freeform control over their visible names, and allow for a potential future where either shardless or cross-server teaming became possible. Those are things purges can't do.
I'm not sure I exactly like the idea, but I think it has promise and would likely be more palatable to more people. It can be sold as adding more possibilities rather than allocating existing ones.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)