Unused name suggestion

Don't care move on because I am.

Oh, there absolutely is. The idea that you somehow automatically deserve the names more than those who got to them first just because they aren't currently playing.

That's not an opinion, that's an assumption of fact. Which can, in fact, be wrong.

Your bolding and under lining has my very confused at to what you are getting at, but I've taken the precaution of closing all my blinds and turning off the lights.

I am of the opinion that this is also wrong.

Apparently not.

While I generally voice strong opposition in threads like this one, I don't see a problem here. Any account that hasn't been touched in over 5 years probably should be fair game. Realistically, the majority of people wouldn't even be able to dig up their original account ID and password (or their serial codes, etc).

I was getting at that you are neither a nerd, nor a wizard, your quite smart, and have no trouble navigating the forums without acting like the OP.

Just because the game isn't that great overall doesn't mean it has zero good ideas. I happened to of loved the name policy about CO, and I don't see how borrowing good ideas from other sources will cause CoH to do poorly.

And thank you for the hostility. I was just trying to make a simple suggestion.

Aside from the fact that the name freeing script was run after those characters were created. So as long as the names met the criteria of the script they were freed up already. The ones that weren't were never intended to be released by the program the devs made.

And whether or not we agree with the devs they have made it clear they have no intention on running that script again any time in the near future.

Mocking dismissal of a bad idea does not equate to hostility.

They read the forums, though, and they pay attention to customer feedback, which is essentially what this is. If they see an especially strong or consistent leaning in the playerbase toward a particular thing, such as a name purge, it's possible they'll change their minds, or at least reconsider it before coming to the same decision instead of dismissing the idea out of hand.

Mocking in and of itself is hostile. Next time, rather than asking me to provide "any other bad ideas from failing competitors I'd like to see ruin this game" why not tell me why exactly it's a bad idea and how it would actually cause our game to fail and leave it at that?

Believe whatever you like if it helps you feel better.

Or you can use the search tool to look up all the reasons that have been given over and over in all the other threads where this was brought up instead of asking others to do it for you.

And if the best defense for this idea you can come up with is CO does it, well that's easily refuted by the fact games like WoW, SW:TOR. LOTRO, DDO, don't allow it and in fact have even stricter naming policies than we do in that players are only allowed to use one word names. And those games all have larger populations than CO.

Those aren't superhero games. Give Chewbacca or Samwise Gamgee a different name and the character would be essentially identical. Give Batman or Wolverine a different name, and you've just changed a fundamental aspect of the character. Fantasy (or fantasy-like) properties can get away with names that are basically gibberish as long as they sound good. Superhero names are typically supposed to mean something specific. A "correct" name means more in this genre than in most, just like a "correct" appearance does.

Having a lower population doesn't mean everything another game is doing is wrong or that every single idea it uses is automatically a bad one.

(And please, everyone, spare me the exhaustive list of superhero characters whose names don't mean anything in particular like Cable and Etrigan. I'm speaking in generalities here; that's why I used the word "typically.")

Why would the GMs know better? They don't just service this game, and they certainly don't keep up with the individual comments of each game's devs/community service reps.

They did exactly what they're told to, namely, "Refer suggestions to the suggestions forum."

Dismissing it as a bad idea without giving reasoning beyond "CO had it! lulz! CO SUXXORZ!" is, however.

And it's clear from this thread that your feedback is a minority voice. They also have history of having run their script before and saw the results from it.

The genre isn't relevant. The fact that they have larger populations and stricter naming policies and still haven't run out of names is the only thing that matters.

And so would any character in this game. The name itself means nothing until it's established with a unique character.

Exactly. Which is why unique names are the right thing for this game. I'm glad you agree with the devs that allowing other players to duplicate established characters names would fundamentally change the aspects of those characters.

Poppycock and balderdash. There is no such thing as a "correct" name.

Yes everyone ignore all the evidence in the super hero genre that disproves Doc Roswell's argument about there having to be "correct" names. The only names that count are the ones that he approves of.

Not even close to the point. The point is that, if someone honestly wants to see something happen, chastising them for posting their suggestion on the grounds that "the devs already said no" is both unfair and short-sighted. Go back and read my comment again, but try to separate it from context of this issue specifically. The forums are a form of customer feedback. Any company with customers will, if they're to be successful, pay attention to customer feedback. McDonald's has said not to ever expect the McLobster that's so popular in Asian markets to make its way to North America, but don't think they wouldn't turn around on that without a second thought if they saw strong and consistent support for it show up in their methods of obtaining customer feedback. Whether that hypothetical support exists or or not is irrelevant to the point that if it did, they'd listen.

Such open hostility! It'd be frustrating if it weren't also a little funny. Okay, let's hit some points:

• Genre is most certainly relevant; the "rules" for particular genres are different, and thus games emulating those genres are presented and approached differently. That's why, for example, in superhero games like this one, your costume and your equipment (or equipment analogue, in the case of enhancements) are entirely divorced from each other. In all those other games you mentioned, getting a new sword or new armor changes not only your character's abilities, but how he looks using those abilities. Not so in this game, where changes to your character's appearance are, with a few exceptions, independent of his capabilities. Naming conventions are another way the genres differ.
  Unless you'd prefer this game use a graphically-represented equipment system more akin to the one those games and their utterly massive populations use, too?
• Again, I was responding specifically to your facile argument that "if CO does it, it's automatically bad, that's why all these other, non-superhero MMOs with more subscribers don't do it," not advocating for a CO-like naming structure. To be totally honest, I don't know a whole lot about how things work over there, nor, again, do I really have a horse in this race anymore as the name purge issue is one I've largely given up on. But facile is facile, and the logic of your statements didn't stand up even to passive scrutiny.
• Many players would love a chance to "establish" their character with a name they feel is "correct" (and yes, there is in fact such a thing -- in this case, one that sounds good to the player and is meaningful in the context of the character's powers, outlook, background or theme) and are being prevented from doing so by... let's say someone who played the game for a few months when it launched, then moved to WoW the day it was released and never came back. Or who hops from MMO to MMO as new ones are released, abandoning old ones as new shinies hit store shelves. I don't have hard data or anything, but I feel pretty confident in saying that players with habits like that are exponentially more common than the ones who stick with the same MMO for seven-plus years, and even more confident in saying they're vastly more common than the ones who disappear from any given MMO half a decade or longer before suddenly reappearing and expecting everything to be right where they left it.
• That any game hasn't "run out of names" is meaningless. I'll bet the name "XHNNIUBIUWSWSJIHO" is free on most, if not all, servers, in every MMO in existence. That doesn't lend any credibility to an argument that their naming policy is flawless and couldn't stand to be changed, or at least looked at with an eye toward "should this be changed?" before deciding the answer is "no."
• I'm not interested in a list of exceptions and fringe cases that don't prove or disprove anything. For every superhero character someone could name without a codename (Etrigan) or with a codename that doesn't mean anything (Cable), I could name ten or more who do have names that actually mean something specific -- and, again speaking generally, the less-obscure characters out there, the ones that nearly everyone knows even if they don't really care about superheroes, the ones that have stuck around for multiple years or multiple decades (as well as, let's be fair here, most of the ones who appeared a few times and then faded into disuse), are the ones whose name is in some way iconic or indicative of who they are or what they do. Sure, Xero's name doesn't really mean anything, but how many people can tell me who Xero was (that's right, was, because the character hasn't been trotted out in forever) without Googling it? Making up a pseudo-word that sounds right and calling it a "name" is the rule in fantasy; it's not unheard of in supers, but it's certainly not the assumed practice.

Wrong. It's exactly the point. If you want a change that the majority is against or indifferent to....face it, you ain't getting that change.

"Disagreeing with you" and "explaining why it's not likely to happen" =/= "chastising you". That's just your ego talking.

Nobody said anything about me being chastised. You should probably go back and re-read this thread. Specifically my first post in it.