Time for COH 2.0?


Anti_Proton

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDeepBlue View Post
I'm not sure why we couldn't just have this. Just fold the storylines and powers over from 1.0 to 2.0. I think this is what people are really wanting.
You have to remember, in order to do this on a new engine, everything would have to be re-coded. It is the same reasoning behind why they have told us that re-doing something that already exists will take as long as creating something new. They wouldn't be able to just take the code for the Ice Blast power set (for example) and just copy and paste. If it were that easy, I am sure the game would be quite different than it is right now.


@Winter. Because I'm Winter. Period.
I am a blaster first, and an alt-oholic second.

 

Posted

I agree with Johnny. COH2 likely won't happen. The amount of money it would take to makef a COH2 that meets/exceeds the same standards that COH has set would be astronimical, and based on current subscription numbers, it wouldn't get near the return needed to make the investment worthwhile.

They could make a 'lesser' COH2, but would anyone want to play that?

The current game has a lot of life in it still; they just need to keep catering to the game's strengths. More costumes and hairstyles, new powersets, more options/mods for current powersets, more content (but they need to avoid playerbase-splitting content ideas like Praetoria). We could go for years on that.

One thing I would love for NCSoft to do is make a single player game that has the same setting as COH MMO, and essentially the same ATs, but modified and expanded so that a player can customize and interact more than is possible in an MMO (think Fable or Skyrim, but modern and for supers). I wonder what the market for such a game would be...


 

Posted

Well, I see a couple people obviously didn't do anything more than read the title and respond. For those that did - and yes, even disagreed - thanks.

For those that didn't, let me give you an example of a (continually re-)broken system - the tailor. How many times has that been reorganized? How many times have they broken it by adding pieces - or worse, a new category? I almost hate logging into servers I don't go onto very often, because if I visit the tailor, I'll have to grab a screenshot ahead of time and play "Hunt the face/other costume piece" to fix my character's look. A COH 2.0 (and I do agree, it would need a new name - not least because I'd hope it would be world-spanning) would have the structure supporting the tailor/character creator designed from the outset to be more flexible (and hopefully keep the internal name of pieces even if the label gets changed or position gets rearranged.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by houtex
The content is what keeps most people interested. THAT is what needs to keep being expanded. I'm fine with the graphics as long as they keep adding things. I don't need eyecandy, although it's nice, I want STUFF. Things to do, powers to learn/try, stories to read/tell.
I don't disagree. Decent content will have me overlook quite a bit.

My actual issues with graphics right now in this game?
1. Characters. I *love* our character customization. I love that my character is MINE. Not just to not look like "Blaster #298744602," but it's easier for me to get into a character (with a fairly loose background - even the Kheldians have a fairly general background with a lot of room to work with) and RP them. I just don't get that attached to characters in other games.

Which, actually, I think is a strength of COH. While they... er, "borrowed" from Champions (PnP,) the wordl we play in is wholly their own. CO took (obviously) Champions - or at least the trappings of it, but not enough to satisfy fans of that IP. DCUO, quite obviously, is tied into the Dark Horse universe.... er, wait, that other one... Marvel? No... wait, I'll get it...

That said, I've been REALLY jealous of how newer games characters look. Not CO - that looks like Stretch Armstrong. I don't see our characters looking "plastic," but that fits THOSE characters perfectly, to me. (Yes, I played with it for a while after going free just to see if the look would "grow on me," as I was told. It didn't.) But from Aion and newer? Those are some nice looking characters. With things like faces that can change expressions. Skin that looks skin-ish. And fingers. I fully admit to jealousy there.

2. *Inconsistent* graphics. I thought I'd explained this but looking back apparently not very well. Going from Atlas or Praetoria into almost any other zone is visually - a bit jarring. I know it takes a lot of work, so I'm not in any way advocating the dev team make "Issue 23 - Ultra-look Upgrade everywhere!" But that shift *is* there.

Quote:
And it'll be horribly gimped from the powersets and such, in such an order of magnitude it will be Co* Issue 3 or so, with better graphics maybe.
I honestly don't know what you mean here. Are you talking about the number of powersets? Or that they'll be designed with ED like mechanics from the get go instead of what they were in issue 3?

Quote:
But what I will absolutely leave and never come back for is this: If you abandon all the hard work I've put into these characters, if you abandon all the lore that's been read and learned, if you make me start over... I just walk away.
Know I quoted this out of order. But I have to wonder - did you play Diablo I? II? WIll you play III? I know it's not as much of an investment in the characters - but with that kind of spacing between "eras" in the game, it wouldn't really make sense to have the same characters.

I do, to a point, agree - but on the other hand, I tend to develop "legacies" of characters anyway. I don't think it'd be as hard for me, personally, to start fresh in a new game.

But - like you said about yourself, that's me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Butane
I don't honestly think our devs truly get why we like this game
There are times the playerbase itself won't agree on why we do. But I don't disagree with this. I mean - the biggest example for me on this is the Incarnate System itself. Hey, they found a way to let us play past 50 without raising the level cap - Great! Then they locked costume pieces and basic emotes away behind it... er... um... And there was that "We didn't expect anyone to want a solo or small team path" admission. Huh? Yes, larger raids are great, people asked for them - but there are times one's not going on, or your schedule doesn't mesh with your server's raid schedule (official or unofficial.) Or you *just* miss the raid (sucking enough people that there are only 1-2 left,) and would prefer not to just stand around - but want to make some progress Incarnate-side (remember the "Casual-friendly" and "Bite-size gaming" descriptions?) How they missed that, I don't know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrueMetal
There just doesn't seem to be enough interest in super hero MMOs to support a lot of them. Just look at how 'great' other more recent super hero MMOs are doing.
... but is it because they're "super hero MMOs" or because of other issues? I think both of the others ended up shooting themselves in the foot, quite honestly.

Cryptic (a) hired Roper, JUST after the Hellgate: London debacle. When his name was tied to "being flagshipped" and he looked arrogant and out of touch. He had a rather vocal anti-fan base. You could have tied his name to a cure for cancer that also increases intelligence by 30 points and keeps you from getting overweight, and people would avoid it. And (b) was playing up that they'd also be console-playable... until they couldn't be, which really irritated and disappointed a lot of people (and what did it do to the game itself? I think that's part of what the issue is.) I seem to recall some other PR mess just after launch, too, but dont' really care enough about that game to make the effort to look. (Hey, I'm honest.)

DCUO - again, console (which is the touch of death for me in most games, to be really honest - very few seem to have that and work properly on a PC,) plus, at least when I messed with it, it seemed to be "Regular MMO with superhero trappings" - including the loot that utterly destroyed your look in a very few levels. Which is what lost it for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrible_dell
The brand isn't strong enough to support a sequel.
I'm not honestly sure if I agree or disagree with this. Not least because we've barely ever been advertised, and not a lot of muscle was put behind ti when we were. (No, I don't think an occasional article on "Let's pick a random MMO site this quarter" is an improvement.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uberguy
Everything, almost
I don't disagree that a lot of what made COH so fun is stuff that other games would see as broken - or that they haven't figured out how (or tried to) adopt. Splitting look from loot? An enhancement system? Not paying for power upgrades? (As in, "You get FaceSlap 1 for 5 gold, Faceslap 2 is 30, by the time you get to faceslap 10 you're paying 5 million for training on just one power.") Getting decent movement early instead of jogging to level 20?

Yes, I think a lot of what makes COH COH is, or was, a "happy accident."

Unfortunately, that also goes for the negatives (see "Not even considering power customization, so we baked in the colors, now we have to hack this apart to fit that in where we can," for example, or the previously mentioned tailor reorganization changing looks.) Minus the "happy" part of the "happy accident."

I agree it would be hard to keep the personality (best word I can think of) for COH. I'd hope they'd be able to.

That said, I'm not really asking for the "body of a supermodel for my wife," as you put it. It's more like my wife has a bad heart, is diabetic, has a family history that makes her very high risk for cancer, and a childhood accident cost her a kidney, and if I could I'd love to have all those internal bits put right.

For COH to do this, it would be as much work as starting from scratch with a new game - more, even, if they tried to retrofit it into the existing game. So... why not do it before they find they've pushed the engine in COH 1 too far and can't do more?

Edit:
Heh, bit more action while I'm typing this up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socorro
The amount of money it would take to makef a COH2 that meets/exceeds the same standards that COH has set would be astronimical, and based on current subscription numbers, it wouldn't get near the return needed to make the investment worthwhile.
I... don't think I agree. COH itself didn't have huge numbers - but we had a decent, sustainable playerbase for a long time, which is what paid it off and got NCSoft to reinvest in the game. We'd have to avoid having some suit or beancounter with expectations of "payback in the first 6 months or else."

Of course, the MMO landscape itself is different now - but I think part of that IS from having people with the above mindset. And the economy. And the expectations of there being a "free" option... which, honestly, I'm not fond of seeing for a new (or new-ish) game.


Wanted: Origin centric story arcs.
If you've only played an AT once (one set combo) and "hate" it - don't give up. Roll a different combo. It may just be those sets not clicking for you.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandX View Post
Oh, another thing they could do with a CoH 2.0 is combine some of/change some of the ATs.

Brutes and Tankers become one. Lower damage mod, but with Fury/Bruising.

Scrappers become the ST DPS with the ability to choose between becoming like a Scrapper is now, or a Stalker.

Blasters lose the Manipulation aspect and gain Defense Secondaries. While they're ST is good, they become more about taking out mass smaller enemies. Less ST DPS than a Scrapper, but AOEness of yumminess.

Defenders/Corr's become one! I'd likely go with the idea that Blasts are secondary, but they now have Scourge.

And other changes like this, to basically consolodate the ATs.
Off-topic slightly, but just wanted to point out how much I hate that idea. It just...no. Just no, really. Especially the merging Tanks and Brutes. When I want to Tank, I Tank. When I want to Broot, I Brute. Mixing the two would just be horrible.


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

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
CoH ended up being wildly entertaining almost because it's designers missed a bunch of the marks they were aiming for. A lot of things they did, like how buffs and debuffs stack, they did the way they did seemingly because they were both (actually) noobs at MMO design and kind of bad at math (or at least at mapping their math to gameplay).
Yeah, having played a Certain Other game, I agree that City benefitted from accidents of fate and development time. A game where everything was working as originally intended and properly balanced probably wouldn't be as compelling.

Having such a weight of history that you can't just completely follow a Vision(tm) may actually be the greatest feature of all.

Besides if they redo City they'll probably try and PvP-balance everything from the start, or appeal to console gamers or some ridiculousness like that and that's not going to go anywhere good.


@Mindshadow

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormbird View Post
I... don't think I agree. COH itself didn't have huge numbers - but we had a decent, sustainable playerbase for a long time, which is what paid it off and got NCSoft to reinvest in the game. We'd have to avoid having some suit or beancounter with expectations of "payback in the first 6 months or else."
I don't think you can avoid the immediate payoff thing in this economic environment. "Well, we're going to throw a ton of man-hours at it and see where it goes" is going to be a hard sell.


@Mindshadow

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Egos_Shadow View Post
I don't think you can avoid the immediate payoff thing in this economic environment. "Well, we're going to throw a ton of man-hours at it and see where it goes" is going to be a hard sell.
As a new studio, yes.

But if you can point to "We paid off well enough to be bought and reinvested in," I think that helps. I'm not sure how much given the current economy, admittedly, but I'd imagine prior success gives you a bit more leeway.


Wanted: Origin centric story arcs.
If you've only played an AT once (one set combo) and "hate" it - don't give up. Roll a different combo. It may just be those sets not clicking for you.

 

Posted

This game has too much story to finish up and too much in it currently to launch a 2.0

Imagine starting CoH 2.0 with the amount of content that CoH had when it launched in 2004. Think about it.

Yes, dividing the playerbase/community would be bad.

If ever it were to happen, considering this is a Superhero MMO - the universe would have to fail, collapse, and be "rebooted" with most of what we know retconned out of existence So, I'd imagine in that scenario, CoH 1.0 would have to shut down for CoH 2.0 to launch.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormbird View Post
As a new studio, yes.

But if you can point to "We paid off well enough to be bought and reinvested in," I think that helps. I'm not sure how much given the current economy, admittedly, but I'd imagine prior success gives you a bit more leeway.
It depends on wether you see "CoH 2.0" as a major effort to revamp the current game engine, or in terms of introducing a new game with some continuity of lore. The former is totally supportable by that logic, sure. The latter is a bigger gamble. I can't imagine that they would run the two games side by side which means they'd have to accept the loss of some current subscribers (I'm saying this as a software developer who has run into this in several situations - you will lose people in that situation simply because being 'forced' to change fills some people with inchoate rage; some people will not migrate versions even when the billing is the same and the new version is objectively superior, much less when either of those factors is different) in exchange for rolling the dice that they can tap a larger market with a new game.


@Mindshadow

 

Posted

For all of you saying that a City of Heroes 2™ would only attract people from the current player base, you're wrong. You're not "Dominatrix serves Tyrant" wrong, but you're 2 + 2 = 3 wrong. I keep one Twitter feed for all mentions of City of Heroes, and when the news got out that "City of Heroes 2" had been copyrighted it just EXPLODED! It got a whole lot of people exicted, and that's a whole lot of people who don't currently play the game.

City of Heroes is remembered fondly by a lot of people, and that's part of the problem. They remember it as a game from 2004, a really nice game for its time, but its time has long passed. Now personally I think that the folks at Paragon have done a remarkable job continually breathing new life into a nearly 8 year old game, but the perception out there is that, alas, it is an 8 year old game. But if you create a City of Heroes 2™ you combine the fondness people feel for the (again, perception here) old game with "new shiny hotness". That alone would make CoH2 one of the most eagerly anticipated games out there.

Of course there are major caveats. There's no guarantee that a new game built from the ground up would actually be any good. And for all of you saying "don't paint yourself into corners a second time", well, new corners will have to be made. It's just impossible to anticipate every single thing customers will want 5+ years down the line. It's a fact of programming life that by making any design decisions you paint yourself into a few corners, some of which you may not realize until after you try to go back and make modifications.

So City of Heroes 2™ would not automatically be a better game. But to say it wouldn't get a whole lot of interest outside the current player base is just ignorant.


AE Arcs: #10482 N00b Rescue Duty, #164100 The Four Treasures of the Tuatha De Dannan

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Night-Hawk07 View Post
I'm sure the reputation of the dev team behind that game didn't help matters. They get brought up in Game Development 101 as an example of what NOT to do.
They only got that reputation after they divested themselves of the CoH franchise. That Certain Other game was actually eagerly anticipated because it was from the makers of CoH. When they wiffed on that game and other projects of theirs, then their reputation took a nose dive, but not before then.


AE Arcs: #10482 N00b Rescue Duty, #164100 The Four Treasures of the Tuatha De Dannan

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Zuercher View Post
They only got that reputation after they divested themselves of the CoH franchise. That Certain Other game was actually eagerly anticipated because it was from the makers of CoH. When they wiffed on that game and other projects of theirs, then their reputation took a nose dive, but not before then.
I have to admit, a lot of my trepidation about CoH 2.0 comes from playing the Certain Other game and hearing about our Distinguised Competition. I'm not sure the ill humors which suffused the development community (particularly console-itis) have fully run their course, and might manifest themselves again in any CoH revamp.


@Mindshadow

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Zuercher View Post
For all of you saying that a City of Heroes 2™ would only attract people from the current player base, you're wrong. You're not "Dominatrix serves Tyrant" wrong, but you're 2 + 2 = 3 wrong. I keep one Twitter feed for all mentions of City of Heroes, and when the news got out that "City of Heroes 2" had been copyrighted it just EXPLODED! It got a whole lot of people exicted, and that's a whole lot of people who don't currently play the game.
There is some appeal in sequels. The fact that a game/movie did well enough for a sequel to be produced is incentive for some people to become interested and pay attention.



.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDeepBlue View Post
I'm not sure why we couldn't just have this. Just fold the storylines and powers over from 1.0 to 2.0. I think this is what people are really wanting.
There are a lot of factors, ranging from efforts to expand the game to new players (a new graphics engine and overall performance boost alone will not be viewed as likely to do this), to the fact that the new game will be made by new people with new ideas. Even if the current devs worked on CoH 2.0, they aren't the original ones, and they certainly have ideas about things they would do differently.

Briefly, if you invest in the creation of the new thing from the ground up, a variety of forces are going to ensure it really is a new thing, and not the old thing with a coat of chrome and a larger carburetor.


Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormbird View Post
That said, I'm not really asking for the "body of a supermodel for my wife," as you put it. It's more like my wife has a bad heart, is diabetic, has a family history that makes her very high risk for cancer, and a childhood accident cost her a kidney, and if I could I'd love to have all those internal bits put right.
This is where we disagree, strongly. Most of the issues with this game are cosmetic. The only ones I would say that have the "cancer risk" aspect are core to its game mechanics (buff stacking and the like), which are what I think are the most fragile aspects of its personality. I despair of anyone putting together a non-"broken" system like this that I would actually enjoy the way I have this one. Because, and I'll be brutally honest here, I enjoy this one in large part because it's broken. That it had that and all those other things I liked, ranging from character customization to the comic book genre, was just a perfect storm, IMO.

Like a couple of other posters, I'd rather take the bad with the good, because I really don't think the bad is that bad, and I have such strong doubts that the good would be translated into a successor.


Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickRiptide View Post
If you looked back to 2004 you'd realize that you're already playing CoH 2.0.
Pretty much this.



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

 

Posted

Just to toss in my 2cents, with the new/returning players I see on a daily basis I think COH 1.0 still has quite some life left in it. I think with keeping in mind some of the financial issues going on the last few years, having a game that has less demanding requirements opens up the player base to those who can afford to spend some time/money on this game but can't work in a top of the line PC to run a game that would make their current rig explode in defiance. Personally, I think there are still alot of lore/stories that needs to be explored before any thought of a sequel really take hold.


Thanks to everyone that helped make me a welcomed part of the community, and for giving me over 3 years of some of the best gaming I've been able to take part in. May the next game bring many friendships and maybe reconnect to some old CoH friends.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
I have never, ever played a sequel to any video game that was anything other than someone else's vision for what the first game should have been, but wasn't. Sometimes the sequel has been a fine game, but if I really liked the original game, I have never once been happy with the sequel, because it was missing things from the original game that were part of why I liked it so much.
That seems a bit too absolute, Guy. A great many sequels to existing games are pretty much the same game all over again, but with a few new weapons. Almost all of UbiSoft's Prince of Persia games are the same game with more levels and a new gimmick, as are most Modern Warfare games. Need for Speed is coming on, what? It's 12th instalment or something? And they're still essentially remaking old Need for Speed games like Hot Pursuit and Underground. Unreal Tournament 3 is almost the exact same thing as UT2004, which is almost the exact same thing as the original Unreal Tournament, it's just that their graphics keep improving. Hell, even Portal 2 feels more like Portal: Again, Only With More Stuff.

I get what you're saying in general - you're talking about something like what happened to the Soul Reaver series between 1, 2 and Defiance, where not only did the basic gameplay change drastically (1 was like PSX-era Tomb Raider, 2 was more of a fighting game, 3 was like Devil May Cry), but their story was massively ret-conned between games and tied with the horribly archaic Blood Omen and terribly bad Blood Omen 2 in such a way that you're actually missing chunks of it. I get that, for instance, Half-Life 2 might seem like a stark departure from the original Half-Life in terms of general feel, one being about your classic "experiment gone bad" scenario and the other about "la resistance."

But still, look at something like L4D2, which is a carbon copy of L4D, but with new survivors, extra items and more maps. Look at Doom vs. Doom 2: Hell on Earth. Or those vs. Heretic, for that matter. Or Descent vs. Descent 2. Or all the NFL/NHL/Fifa games. Not every sequel has to be something completely different from the original.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
The successes of CoH 1.0 were due to some of the strangest quirks of fate imaginable. The designers set out with fairly draconian visions of combat balance yet managed to create a min/maxer's Monty Haul wet dream that somehow also included no real "loot". They thought combat would proceed at a fairly slow pace, but created one of the most FPS-like MMOs that would exist for years. They thought we would slog our way from mission to mission street sweeping as we went, but gave us relatively early access (compared to competition) to glorious and fast travel powers.

CoH ended up being wildly entertaining almost because it's designers missed a bunch of the marks they were aiming for. A lot of things they did, like how buffs and debuffs stack, they did the way they did seemingly because they were both (actually) noobs at MMO design and kind of bad at math (or at least at mapping their math to gameplay).
This I do agree with, however. City of Heroes really did end up being such an awesome game as a great big happy accident born of an inexperience development team which produced a frankly broken game that players turned on its head. It's exactly BECAUSE our game is so broken and exactly because it's broken in such fundamental ways that it's impossible to fix without alienating most players that City of Heroes is so much fun to play. If ever we got a City of Heroes 2, I expect a lot of the coolest tricks will be closed up.

Maybe the power designers of the new age are smarter than to do that. After all, the way Synapse balanced Titan Weapons, I have to wonder if they haven't decided to embrace the players' power trip and empower us to be badass, "1 hero = 3 white minions be damned." But considering how strongly Jack Emmert fought for this, considering the lengths Matt Miller has gone to get us to team up (up to and including not wanting to let us invite our own characters to SGs because SGs are for many separate players) and the lengths to which Castle went to not let us fly too far ahead of the power curve, I really don't think City of Heroes can happen a second time now that the lesson has been learned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDeepBlue View Post
I'm not sure why we couldn't just have this. Just fold the storylines and powers over from 1.0 to 2.0. I think this is what people are really wanting.
Because there's no point. Why didn't Valve release Half-Life: Source as a completely remastered version of the original Half-Life in the Source engine instead of having us wait on the fan-driven Project: Black Mesa which has been going on for something like six years now and still has nothing concrete to show for it? Why did we not see a Tomb Raider: Anniversary remake of Tomb Raider 2, which I feel is the vastly superior game?

Because if a development studio sits down to make a new game - and that's essentially what City of Heroes 2 would be - then it makes sense to develop a brand new game, as opposed to trying to ape an existing one. Sequels only really work for single-player games because then you're making a sequel to the story. But making "another game in the same universe" is, like the UberGuy says, making a brand new game. Much as I like some of the way in which City of Heroes is broken to create a cool, awesome game, I despise many of the ways in which it's broken and pisses me off. I've posted about a fair number of those recently.

It would be nice if we could have "a new engine" for City of Heroes, but that's just wishful thinking.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
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.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrCaptainMan View Post
No, it's not time for CoH2. The sky is not falling.
This.

Every so often, over the years, these threads pop up. I would think CoH 2 might turn out prettier (or might not based on other 'upgraded' games that could have been a sequel), but I can't imagine it wouldn't come anything close to what we have here, and I doubt it would be given the ammount of time it would need to get up to pace with this game before it crashed and burned.

Do you honestly think any new game, sequel to this or no even with the Dev's we have working on it, could have remotely the same ammount of systems, content, features, etc. that this one currently has?

What I would like to see is what they've been doing at about as fast a pace as I could expect. Complete overhauls of things that are dated or need work. I'm willing to bet some things seem to have been untouched for so long because small fixes just won't do the trick. I bet there will be a major base overhaul, but doing so without losing what we have in the new system is taking a lot of time to logistic out. I'm sure they'll even get back to PvP after they have a working model that they think will satisfy as many folks as they can, and get the guts up to deal with the abuse they'd get through the process...

And in all cases, when they have time. They still need to develop the new stuff too so the folks with ADD feel like progress is being made (Sure they revamped Atlas, added phasing tech and a cohesive story arc, even updated the Circle of Thorns... but seriously, when are we getting something NEW??)

Plus, and most importantly to me, if they did make a CoH 2 and I'd have to start over after all the years of progress and time I put into this game since Issue Two? Forget it.


"I play characters. I have to have a very strong visual appearance, backstory, name, etc. to get involved with a character, otherwise I simply won't play it very long. I'm not an RPer by any stretch of the imagination, but character concept is very important for me."- Back Alley Brawler
I couldn't agree more.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow View Post
That seems a bit too absolute, Guy. A great many sequels to existing games are pretty much the same game all over again, but with a few new weapons.
You're right. I didn't mean it to be that extreme, but I didn't really articulate what I was thinking. I've played games like those you mentioned, but I was never in love with any of them. As such, it didn't do much for me that their sequels were the original games with some fresh fixes, tune ups or content.

What I should have said is that I have never, ever played a game I loved playing that had a sequel that I also loved playing.

Probably the game I can say I most loved playing the most besides CoH was not an MMO, but an FPS, named Tribes. Perhaps tellingly, it had a very important characteristic in common with CoH: one of the most important things shaping its gameplay ended up being a complete accident - you could "ski" down sloped surfaces (very much like skiing in the Chalet, as it turns out) and use this to build speed. Especially combined with a form of rocket jumping, even the slowest, most plodding (and heavily armed) armors in the game could build up immense speed and cross large maps to rain from the sky on opposing forces. It made for insanely fast, three-dimensional chaos, and a very loyal but small group of people fell in love with it. Sound familiar?

Now, Tribes' unexpected physics engine side effect didn't pull the rug out of the player-vs.-player balance the way CoH's design errors did for the player-vs.-environment balance. But it definitely turned it into a radically different game than its devs imagined it was going to be. And its devs embraced it. Ours here have too, I think, but it took a long time.

Tribes 2? Not so much. They put skiing in, but explicitly tried to slow it down, because their new lead dev had a "vision" of large-scale unit combat that was incompatible with the original Tribes' mobility and speed. As a result, Tribes 2 felt like moving through Jello compared to the original. A bit like going into a PvP zone in CoH today and comparing how you move there to a PvE zone.


Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulkman View Post
Just to toss in my 2cents, with the new/returning players I see on a daily basis I think COH 1.0 still has quite some life left in it.
I really hope so. I would hate it if I lost access to all my characters, or would have to recreate my entire cast.

1.0joy


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenjoy View Post
I really hope so. I would hate it if I lost access to all my characters, or would have to recreate my entire cast.

1.0joy
Thats another point too, while I'm not above teaming my lowbie with some high lvl friends for a few easy lvl's, most of my toons got to where they are with a lot of time/effort and I still get a sense of accomplishment when I break out my first 50 and do some mishes with him just out of knowing the work that was put in to getting him there. I would be really hesitant to move onto another game and leave them behind.


Thanks to everyone that helped make me a welcomed part of the community, and for giving me over 3 years of some of the best gaming I've been able to take part in. May the next game bring many friendships and maybe reconnect to some old CoH friends.

 

Posted

Stuff I want in a super hero MMO, that just aren't feasible outside of a sequel:

-Total graphics overhaul to characters and environments. Fingers. Detail in faces. Non-static hair. We really can't do them without re-doing every animation in the game. If it comes down to that, you may as well be starting over. Same with ditching the old costume pieces and zone models.

-Destruction and environmental interaction. I want to punch people through walls. I want to rip a lamppost out of the ground and swing it at some one. I want collateral damage you'd expect from a super powered battle. I WANT TO THROW A CAR.
To do it right and not half-***, you'd have to redo every zone and map in the game, so again you may as well be starting over.

-A more flexible power and AT system. Deadpool, Ironman. You can't do characters like that who mix ranged and melee attacks. Even gadget guys like Batman, you're limited to their hand to hand capabilities only for the most part. Could be solved with Pool/Epic powers, if they were rolled them together and the devs created more of them and they were treated more like a Tertiary power set. But that's not likely from what I've seen.

-An extensive revamp to enemies AI and mission design. More elaborate missions that can be approached by a variety of play styles.

You get a mission that someone had been kidnapped and is being held in a warehouse.

Now:
You go to the mission door, click it. You enter into an instance of a stark warehouse map by the front door, all the enemies are standing around in neat little groups waiting for you to engage them one on one. The Boss is standing in the last room. The hostage stands there while you grind the boss down and then you lead the hostage out. End mission.
BORING.

What I'd rather see as an approach:
You go to the warehouse, gain entry via an unguarded skylight. Inside you sneak through the vents, making your way to the security room. You quietly take out the thug watching the security cameras and disable the alarms. From the security monitors you find out where the hostage is being kept. Then you make your way through the warehouse, avoiding detection or taking out anyone before they can alert others to your presence. You get to the boss, catch him unawares and fight them and the free the hostage.

Or, you could do the exact same mission with another approach:
You go to the warehouse and crash through the wall. Immediately the enemies start to swarm you amid alarms going off. You cut your way through the crowd and topple some machinery to block more from arriving. You free the hostage but the boss is trying to make a run for it in a delivery van. You block his exit, grab and flip the van onto it's roof and pull him out.


Now likely neither of those can be realized in an online MMO yet, but they should be what the devs aim for. The kind of complex and thrilling action you find in comics.

Guys standing around in static warehouses, waiting to be systematically defeated while you navigate a static maze of corridors (with occasional ambush) never screamed 'super hero action' to me. Neither do the current Trials, which are more like nonsensical dances; a series of hoops you must jump through to receive food pellets.




.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
What I should have said is that I have never, ever played a game I loved playing that had a sequel that I also loved playing.
OK, that makes sense and I'm not sure I can disagree with it. Not objectively, anyway. I loved all three Soul Reaver game's, for instance, but I'm not sure if they really count as three games since I was sticking with the same story through three different implementations. And while I liked the Sands of Time Prince of Persia game, Warrior Within proved to be a darker and edgier disappointment which I might not have touched again had The Two Thrones not actually framed it within a context where that mess having taken place built up to a decent conclusion.

Overall, though, I can't argue with you there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
Tribes 2? Not so much. They put skiing in, but explicitly tried to slow it down, because their new lead dev had a "vision" of large-scale unit combat that was incompatible with the original Tribes' mobility and speed. As a result, Tribes 2 felt like moving through Jello compared to the original. A bit like going into a PvP zone in CoH today and comparing how you move there to a PvE zone.
I only ever played Tribes 2, and even then only on a Trial (this was a long time before I had my own income), but it struck me as an interesting game for its time. I think its closest comparison now is Section 8 and Prejudice. It seemed like a fast-paced yet strategic game with interesting vehicle control and jet packs. I never understood what "skiing" was supposed to mean, though. Then came Tribes 3, I played it and I facepalmed so hard my ears were ringing all day.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcanaville View Post
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.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny_Butane View Post
An extensive revamp to enemies AI and mission design. More elaborate missions that can be approached by a variety of play styles.
It does seem like with a real AI revamp you'd have to redo a lot of the maps, or at least the spawn placement. That's something that you'd kind of have to do a pass through the entire content base on, unless you restrict the advanced AI to certain areas.


@Mindshadow