I want to punch Aaron Thiery (spoilers)

Guy Gardner approves this message.

You seem to be arguing that since the game can now present us with a choice of two or more responses, and text that varies based on those responses, that it (or the creators thereof) should anticipate and implement all possible responses. I am sure that you are intelligent to understand why this is not possible, let alone practical.

Like yourself, I have been playing this game for many years (long before branching dialogue was implemented). In that time, I have had several experiences in which my characters would act in ways not supported by the game engine and/or the text of the mission clues, popups, briefings and debriefings. In nearly all of those cases, I did something (IMO) very simple: I ignored the one-size-fits-all story the devs came up with and wrote my own. I decided what my character did; anything to the contrary was ignored. The amazing super-power that allowed me to do this is called imagination.

The responsibility of the devs is to make this game the most fun for the most people, allocating their limited resources as best they can. To my considerable disappointment, it seems that the percentage of the playerbase that actually reads the text and cares what it says is very small; the portion who are dissatisfied with the options given is smaller still. To expect the devs to cater to this fraction of a fraction is, IMO, beyond foolish... especially when, for no extra investment on their part, every player has the ability to come up with their own stories and ignore what they (the Devs) have written for them.

You seem to want mechanical, coded support for all of your character's decisions - like a vast railway yard, with switches that you can throw to shunt them from one track to the next siding, hopefully arriving at your destination (which is the deterministic product of all the choices made along the way) without ever getting derailed. And if someone had a list of all those choices, they could follow it like a script (or a walkthrough for a Bioware game) and retrace your path to arrive at exactly the same point. Personally, I'd rather have a toy car and a big flat space with lanes marked off in paint, that I can follow when I like and go off-road when I wish. I don't know where I'll end up, but it'll be fun getting there.

You want to punch him in the face? Then say you did! That's how it happened for your character. No one is going to argue otherwise. (Frankly, no one but you and maybe the people you play with will care.)

I think Sam is just asking for a middle ground option rather than selfless duty to uphold the law or kill him where he stands.

It actually has been done before. There's the Hero/Vigilante tip where you either save people from Arachnos (Hero) or tackle Westin Phipps directly (Vigilante). Taking the Vigilante option; you get to Phipps where you are given three choices: force him to admit his guilt where he protests his innocence, convince him to reveal himself willingly, both of which are understadably fruitless or option 3: cut the talking and just beat the crap out of him. You know he's a monster, you want him to get beaten so there's the choice.

I must admit to wanting him keel over in pain having facepunched/crotch-kicked him. Smug git that he is.

Originally Posted by Dispari I don't know why Dink thinks she's not as sexy as Jay was. In 5 posts she's already upstaged his entire career.

This is the point, though. Since GR, there is meant to be a grey area, not just the black and white.

That's all the choice you get, though; be a 'proper' hero, or be an outright ****** or 'justified' type and kill him.
There is no third option. And that is lame.

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

You have seen 'Rib' Cracker, right?

I hate to break it to ya, kiddo, but you just failed biology. They ain't no ribs

Originally Posted by Zwillinger GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.

Originally Posted by Captain_Photon NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.

I wanna punch Darrin wade too. Just not in the face. Repeatedly. With a Super Strength Brute at damage cap.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

I see your Guy Gardner and raise you one Batman.

Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

What you imagine has absolutely no currency.

There are two reasons for this. The first is simply that the game is what it is, and gluing feathers on a rat won't make it a swan. If you have to keep mentally editing the text to make it comport to your expectations, or even to make it make sense, you end up in "Click Here To Fight Mobs Land". At which point you seriously have to ask if maybe you might get better entertainment elsewhere.

The secondary reason is that the devs will take the story in the direction they want, not in the direction you imagined. Sure, most of the time your fanwank isn't going to matter, but if (e.g.) the devs decide to re-use Thiery (yeah, so what if there was an option to kill him, Bobby Ewing was dead too) then you're Jossed.

set up to be likeable and then killed as a morality pet? given one liners that would make diablo cody gag? or having my sexual orientation inexplicably changed?

on topic, this time its a third option, someone will want a fourth, and a fifth, or some element of the third and fourth option wont quite fit your character as you have conceived them. The calculated risk of allowing branching dialogue has made a sort of rp xeno's paradox that each option given will make some people more sensitive to smaller variations in the game as presented and tha game as they have conceived, and thus that much less likely to ever actually reach their in-game conception. Sometimes there simply is no option other than forcing your story and ignoring some of the official canon unless you want to place your character's personalities in a constant state of open flux.

I dont necessarily disagree with Sam, but i doubt that he or anyone who really makes specific and inflexible back-story for their character will be satisfied for a significant period of time because some other branch that is central to their character is now unfulfilled, so they will be dissatisfied again.

No, have your pet fanwank theory destroyed by Word of God or future stories.

I agree that in general we have to accept that there will never be enough options to cover all bases. In this particular case, though, I do think there should have been an option in between "send him to the Carboard Prison" and "kill him".

Nah, I couldn't make up superhero antics all on my own including background history and everything. And I don't think I could create a better "beating up mobs" system than this one. As a springboard for my imagination, where I accept stuff I like, and ignore or rewrite stuff I don't like, CoH works quite well.

I don't see how the writers' decision to re-use Thiery in a future arc would Joss a player's decision that their character punched Thiery in the face. Unless he's introduced with narration saying something like "You remember Thiery, and how you very patiently listened to his ranting and absolutely did not punch him in the face before arresting him". Even then, you can just ignore it. Not like they'll dock you XP for not playing along.

Uh... No, I'm not. I'm sure you're intelligent enough to actually read my post for what it says without having to "summarise" it into something I never said. I apologise if I come off as insulting, but I have a very short fuse for being badly misquoted these days. I merely said what I want, I never said the game was obligated to expect me to want it.

What, then, am I paying $15 a month for, if all I need is "imagination?"

No, I don't, and I never suggested so. I think you're putting your replies in the wrong thread.

I want to be level 50. Let's just say I am and not bother playing the game at all. It would save me a lot of money in the long run. I want a jet pack. Let's say I have one even though I don't and save the art team so much time and money.

That's not how it works. Games are a visual medium. "Do, don't show." I'm not playing a MUD, I'm not playing a P&P game. My imagination goes into creating my characters, but I want an actual game to play. I'm prepared to work within the confines of the game and simply pick and choose what I do based on what makes sense for the specific character. But I refuse to pretend that brown Dark Armour is sand or that Energy Blast is water. If I did, I'd never need to buy a costume set or make more than one character ever at all, if I could simply pretend I'm playing a completely different game.

And, incidentally, "just imagine it" doesn't work here, because what I want is to prevent Aaron from talking. Irrespective of what he says and what options I pick, I still have to go through no less than three whole, rather sizeable dialogue windows, possibly even four.

---

Please, stop trying to infer what I actually want by reading between the lines when what I want is written in plain text on the actual lines: I want to punch Aaron Thiery. I don't want to game to read my mind, I don't want the game to account for every possible eventuality, I don't want the storyline to be linear, I don't want my actions to have consequences. I want to punch Aaron Thiery. Any extrapolation you make from that is wrong, because I don't want anything beyond that.

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.

Could you please quote me on where I said any of the stuff you're ascribing to me? Specifically, where, at any point in time, I argued that BECAUSE this particular character I played had that particular backstory, that THIS is the reason why I wanted to punch Aaron? Because I never said this. All I said is that I have a character whose backstory would fit such an option, but it's not that character who needs a "punch" option, it is ME who wants that option.

Me, the player. Whether it fits my character or not, I, personally, as a real human being, want to punch Aaron Thiery. Considering that's physically impossible, the next best thing is to give an in-game option for an in-game character to punch him. It doesn't even have to be mine.

---

In fact, since people are so hell-bent on misquoting me, let's turn things around. Let's say that as soon as I confront Aaron, Matthew Habshy shows up. He's recovered and he's angry that Aaron put his wife in danger. Matthew would, I'm positive, be within his complete right to sock the ******* in the face, and I have an option - let Matthew do it, or hold him back so we can hear what Aaron has to say.

This, as a point of fact, is more or less a retread of the reunion of James Noble and Jim Donner, including Jim being badle injured but still able to stand up tall despite of it. Sure, I don't get an option to let James kill Jim as that would break the story, but the situation is the same.

Does THAT get the point across that this ISN'T a "my character needs this option" argument yet?

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.

Try leading Dean McArthur to her. He'll do it for you.

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.

Google image "Guy Gardner Bye bye Bats" for my retort.

Hnn.

Most of my heroes would want to punch him. I don't think most would actually follow through. It's a situation where he needs to be shut up but I'm not sure if getting physical would be quite the right way.

My Arcs
-----
Mission Architect Handyman

Aside from punching his face (which you discount) and arguing with him (which is a win for him regardless of the outcome), what else is there to do? Serious question here.

Also - I'm really not concerned about what the "right" thing to do is in this situation. There's really only one unambiguously "wrong" thing to do here, and that's to kill him... I guess two if you count torture, but that's besides the point. So long as the choice isn't unambiguously wrong, it shouldn't really matter if it's the most "right."

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.