Free the names!

I see absolutely no reason to NOT allow multiple people to have the same name. We can have the same exact costumes and powers already.

I play "over there" and have some fairly iconic, if bland by your definitions, names. I've never come across another Pulsar, Wildcat, Ranger, Shellhead, Geo Mage, Brainstorm, or Maelstrom since launch. Are some of these shared? Probably. Will I see one of them one day. Maybe. Will I freak out about it? No.

The great thing about a system like this, is if your unique name really is important to you, you can keep calling yourself Dechs Kaison, etc.... and you're going to be fine. Stay away from the Red Eagle's and Superior Man's, and you'll still get to be a snowflake.

It's probably not likely that this is on the dev's radar, and that's fine. But, if this ever came around, it would make naming all my new Praetorian characters a lot easier....

(Also - they have a name filter "over there" as well, and you're not likely to be able to take Cyclops, or Wolverine, or Batman, etc.....)

It's not enough to suggest to a business that there's a potential benefit to changing things if the supporters can't, or won't, fully take into account the concomitant disadvantages. In order to persuade a business owner to fix what a given customer perceives to be a problem, one must first convince them that it's a problem for them, too. Asking a business to do anything requires them to commit time/staff/resources/costs, so there has to be a more persuasive reason than handwaving away potential drawbacks. When taking an action risks the business losing clean profit - in this case, the low barrier for a former returning to play their old characters - it looks even less favorable to their balance sheet.

Contacting inactive players is a good marketing strategy in general, but this approach could be taken as holding a ray gun to the character names ("Resubscribe or Captain Ersatz gets reconned!"). Until NC Soft shells out for a proper focus group study that tells them they can expect a significant number of players leaving because of name issues, prudent business sense dictates that they shouldn't risk alienating potential returning customers - which MMOs love - when they already have invested in new features (Going Rogue, Incarnates) that definitely appeal to attracting back former subscribers. It's a bottom line issue, nothing more or less.

{I see on preview that while I've been recycling some of my points from the previous thread to underscore this argument's repetitious nature, Memphis Bill has posted one of his epic Copypastas.}

Actually a lot of them are! There is a nifty little feature in the game called /getglobalname, and it has a few functions.

1) It gives you the global name of the character with a name you are looking for, if you use often for a name, you can sort of see if that player actually plays, I have been doing this for dozens of names, everyday, at different times of the day, for a couple of years. These names never appear online, so yeah they should be eligible to get released.

2) It can show up "blank" meaning the particular name you are searching for belongs to a person that's hasn't played since BEFORE we were all given global names, which was like what, six years ago?! I don't care what level these characters are, if they haven't been used in six years, they really aren't going to be used on that account ever, no, they're not coming back after six years, and anyone that says there is a chance of them coming back is really just being silly.

If someone hasn't played in six or seven years, all of their names should be released, regardless of what level they are, because really, they're not coming back. Really, any account that has become inactive for over two years should get all their names released, regardless of their level, not just level six characters, their level fifty characters too.

It's the type of game this is, it is a Superhero game, super heroes don't need to be name xXFyre GirIXx(the "l" is a capitol "i" because xXFyre GirlXx with a real "l" in Girl was taken) if Fire Girl stopped going on active hero duty five years and doesn't plan on picking up the cape again. It's not fair.

They've run a name purge before, so we know they can do it. I really don't see any possible argument against running it again. It worked the first time, and made tons of people happy to find that name they've been looking for, why not just do it again?

It's not that I need to be a unique snowflake. I don't want anyone else to run around with my name. In the real world, we call this identity theft.

Actually, it wouldn't make your Praetorian characters any easier. You can still only have one MarvelZombie@MarvelZombie. I could run around as a praetorian version of MarvelZombie@Dechs Kaison, but you could not make a second MarvelZombie, as the second one would not be a unique name.

I just picked the name Cyclops as an obvious iconic name. I'm fair certain, though, I did see that Cyclops was allowable on that game, and since they allowed you to see characters offline, I paged through about a hundred of them.

It works out rather well, actually.

1) you default it to just "name" on display, with "name@global" appearing only on mouseover. (the other game originally defaulted to full display unnecessarily) If two of the same "name" appear in the same channel at the same time, a subscript appends to the name to make the difference apparent.

2) when using a /tell, autocomplete shows all the name@global variants that are online, IF there are any online. It defaults to the one you have friended or that most recently appears in your chat window.

3) You really find that you don't encounter the problem much. The odds that two of the same name are in the same zone or channel at the same login time turns out to be remarkably low, unless done intentionally. I ran into the problem more frequently at a workplace that had three "Daves" out of 160 employees.

In the real world, we call this REALITY.


My name is not common, but there are six in my state with the same name. There are 100+ in the US that have listed phone numbers. Should I call the police and have them arrested?

edit: scratch that idea. Just realized that one of them is my dad... and I'm pretty sure he was here first.

Yeah, out here your name is only part of your identity. In a superhero game, your name is your identity.

If I am Super Sparky Flame Man, I don't want some other Super Sparky Flame Man getting the credit for the people I've saved. If he's a jerk and doesn't actually save people, I don't want to be blamed for it.

Considering how popular she is, would you really want the name Fusionette if you could have it? Unless you are trying to play as the CoH Fusionette, no you don't want to deal with her reputation.

I know for a fact this is wrong. I know because I recently made a document file to record names I have verified are available that I might want to use someday. I've only just started, and there are a bunch of names that are one not-uncommon word, and/or iconic. And I'm not holding these particular names on alts, either; I just made notes to myself in case I feel like basing a character on one of the names.

Sure, I can't use every name that occurs to me. But that would be true even after a name purge.

Fits for a quote about any topic!

This actually just occurred to me.

I'm pretty sure the math behind-the-scenes is:

Is:
Number of people who will never come back specifically and because we took 'their' name...

Greater than:
...number of people who will leave because they can't get 'their' name?

That's a reeeeally hard question. I certainly admit I have no idea how to answer it. I have a gut feeling, but I have no idea how you'd gather actual data on it.

(For the record, I feel the answer is, "You'd have more people that would never come back - although both numbers are quite small." But like I said, I have no evidence to actually support that hunch.)

Edited to add: I think all trial characters should have [TRIAL] appended to either the front or end of their name anyway, to avoid taking up "real" names. Upgrade the account to lose the [TRIAL].

Anecdotes and claims are not data, and as such, they don't advance a discussion in any direction. Unless there are figures to be cited - and Paragon Studios almost certainly has more extensive ones than a single player can produce - this isn't evidence.

Unless you can produce an affidavit from "Fire Girl", then you're not in a position to say what's fair to that player. Paragon, as an MMO developer and business, has to take into account a much larger picture than what a few vocal players on the boards claim is fair.

There are plenty of extensive discussions on this topic where the counterarguements have been presented, e.g. this one. Starting still another similar thread should oblige the OP to take into account at least some of what's been written already, e.g.

In order to persuade a business owner to fix what a given customer perceives to be a problem, one must first convince them that it's a problem for them, too. The suggestion that the company should undertake any project that could potentially turn away returning customers - which are the best kind to get and which businesses always hope for - is contrary to their bottom-line interests. Unless there is a convincing argument that NCSoft will lose more money by not executing a name purge, that their current paying playerbase will demonstrably drop off without one, the status will stay quo.

I agree that in text-based chat, the name is the sole identity and that duplicates can lead to confusion (without the global appending) when it comes up. In my real-life example of multiple Daves, we all came up with our own aliases for them (Dave J, Dave, the owner, Dave the audio specialist, etc.) In chat, we don't have that, but the optional hidden "@global" has a somewhat proven track record for working.

In game though, as per this:

Well think of it this way- yes, they have a superhero registry that in-game lore suggests would require a unique ID. I guess its internationally regulated and recognized... not a stretch, really, when you have guys in tights flying around. But why the HELL would villains respect such a registry?

Heck, I could see a more likely case being that masked crusaders DO choose overlapping identities, DO get into conflicts with others stealing their name and besmirching their reputations, and DO find that, or... no matter how badly they want to be known as "Atomic Angel", everyone calls the OTHER heroine "Atomic Angel" and just refers to you as "AA."

.... And don't we have cross-dimensional evil/good versions (and nemesis clones) of you ALREADY damaging your reputation as part of the actual lore of the game? Why is it a stretch to think that someone else that's NOT a dimension-crossing-alternative-version-of-you / clone-of-you / automaton-so-good-that-can-reproduce-your-powers might choose the same name as you?

In lore context THAT's the jumbled mess we have, so... again, why not?

Yeah, but he finishes it up by saying his opinion is to run the script

I'm not even personally invested in it -- I'm out of slots on my server anyway unless I buy more (which I'm unlikely to do), delete characters (I'm more likely to keep their name and find a new concept) or switch servers (I'm happy where I am). I just don't see a good reason to not run the script with a wider net. A good reason to do so would be that this game is losing people faster than its gaining them if the quarterly DOOM! posts are to be believed and measures to help existing customers create and become invested in new characters or help new customers create characters are worth more than worrying about people who left the game five years ago... but might return any day now and ragequit when their name is gone.

In the MMORPG market, "returning customers" are the ones who hand over a check month after month, year after year for game access. Not the ones who leave for two years but might, maybe, someday return.
That's kind of silly. People directly affected by something are often the worst judges of "what's fair" to them. I might sign an affidavit saying it's "not fair" that I have to pay taxes but that doesn't make it true or credible.

I do, with modifications, primarily because it hasn't been run in years and we've got a fair number of trials and whatnot that are sitting inactive that won't be converted. (Like my "test-trial.") Trial accounts should, frankly, have the fewest amount of "rights" as far as keeping names. If they don't convert quickly, they likely *won't* convert, and I think 90 days there is fair.

I do also think that there should be an option to voluntarily delete the account and/or free the names if inactive. I mean, if I finally decide to quit the game for good, I've got 290 some characters. Now, while I doubt most of them would have names people would be interested in, I'm sure there are a few people WOULD be. But deleting a large number of characters by hand is tedious - and I'd probably just say "the heck with it." Being able to tell customer service "Hey, wipe my account clean" either on the exit survey or via email (with some sort of verification) would be nice. Same with people who just aren't coming back - give them the option or a way to clear their account voluntarily. or if there's absolutely no way of getting ahold of them and a reasonable attempt has been made after several years, automatically.

See my Guides and Tutorials

If that were true, then no MMO producer would bother with the "welcome back" free specials, which are offered by numerous ones, including Paragon. Potential returning customers are low-hanging fruit, especially compared to enticing new ones. And to reiterate, unless Paragon can be convinced they're going to lose current customers without a name change, the status quo trumps.

I'm suggesting that there's more than one side to the "all the good names hav been taken" discussion than the people who are arguing that absent players don't have a stake in a vocal minority are claiming to be what's fair.

For what it's worth, trial accounts that never picked up subscriptions don't have much pull with marketing, but even those have more value than a cold call. (Personally, I don't think they should get to hang on to names in perpetuity, but I can't claim to speak for, say, Black Pebble.)

From an ebil marketer's perspective, requiring a departing player to relinquish their claims to a superhero name after a period of inactivity would be an acceptable method of retaining a customer. Psychologically, it's considerably harder to give something up if there is a cost. (Some people are of course averse to such strong arm tactics, though.) And not to name names, but when I finally quit a certain wartorn online world, they made me jump through all manner of hoops to confirm I was cancelling my account.

I never said they don't want anyone to return. But your coveted "best customer everyone wants" returning customer in this case is the guy who "returns" month after month after month, not the guy who leaves (and doesn't pay) for years on end. The former is more valuable than the latter.

If you were running a bar, would you tell your nightly customers "Hey! No sitting on that bar stool! There's a guy who sat there once and left here three years ago and you never know when he'll be back, but man I want those returning customers"?

Depends, was that guy Eric Clapton or John Petrucci? Then yes.

Otherwise, hell no.

The returning customer is only a better potential customer than a cold lead. But unless losing existing customers are a problem, there's no reason to do anything that would create a barrier for a previous customer to return. Outside of entreprenneurial ventures, business stay in business by practicing conservative decision-making, especially in an economy like this.

Or, colloquially, unless you can convince Paragon that their naming policy is broke, they ain't gonna fix it.

It would be nice, but it's a little late in the game for that. I would really prefer they look into it if there ever is a CoH2.

Well, if the character's theme involves having one eye, it's probably a pretty good name.

As opposed to being told "Sorry, there's already a Fire/Ice blaster on this server wearing red & blue..."?

But they have done Name Purge(s) in the past, so it is something they do again, so they KNOW their naming policy requires a purge every, at least, couple years, they just haven't been doing it.

And also, yes, I know people that have left the game over frustration from not being able to find decent names for their characters. Naming your character is the last stage of character creation, and one of the most important parts. There is no reason to hold down names for people that are NOT coming back, and forcing people that are currently subscribing, and new players, to have to go through hundreds (not exaggerating) of names before finding a somewhat decent (not good) name for their character.

Really, no one is going to come back to a game after six or seven years of not playing it. If City of Villains didn't bring them back, and City of Heroes Going Rogue didn't bring them back (it's been almost a year) they are NOT coming back. So using this as your argument really doesn't work. I know some people come back after years of inactivity, but it is really infrequent. Are the five people who come back after years of inactivity (if they just came back to check out the game, they may not like what they see and leave, a lot has changed in the past few years) each year really worth not running a script to make new players and current subscribers want to stay longer? I don't think so. I don't think anyone thinks so.