[Spoiler Warning] The writers are just screwing with us, now.

That would be The Great Space Coaster.

well aren't you a bag of rainbows

I'm surprised that there hasn't been more raging about not being allowed to become as powerful as Darrin Wade

Sometimes it's funny. You speak only for yourself.

Considering the problem of villains being typecast as replacement heroes in essentially all co-op content, cheekily making fun of that does make me into a bad of rainbows and unicorns. When a player points to a systemic flaw in a game and makes fun of it, it's funny because it's true. When a developer points to a systemic flaw in a game and makes fun of it, it's frustrating because he's part of the team that introduced the problem in the first place.

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.

Devs don't just hate vilalins - they taunt them too

Villains can never win and co-op doesn't make sense if it's villainous. Those are just the facts of life.

And then six-slot it with Mocking Beratement...


And not nerdraging for not being as powerful as Wade because... doesn't he get whupped with a healthy dose of Boot to the Head?

It also thinks this is okay, which makes me cringe whenever I see it.

Your "facts of life" are wrong. Villains can very much win, and they do that many times in their existing arcs. Villain victories cannot change the status quo any more than hero victories, granted, but you can give villains victories that still don't alter the universe at large. Again, Dean McArthur and Vincent Ross are good examples of how this can be done without demoting our characters to servants in someone's larger plot.

And while it's true that co-op content can't be evil or else it stops being co-op, it's also true that it doesn't always have to be rebranded heroic content, either. The writing team seems to see co-op content as hero content that villains are forced to take part in, which is the problem. This doesn't have to be the case. On the contrary, in order for content to be co-op, it needs to be morally neutral. Not grey, neutral. There's a difference. Grey morality is the kind of morality that's a combination of good and evil at the same time. Neutral morality is a story where morality does not play a role.

A morally neutral story is one where something needs to be done and the means by which it must be done is relatively straightforward. Say a new zone shows up that has riches hidden in places. It has a series of story arcs revolving around finding a huge vault full of riches, and the story isn't about saving people or hurting people so much as about gathering clues. Why you're after the riches is never addressed. This is perfect for co-op content as far as I'm concerned, because it's content characters will involve themselves in for reasons OTHER than morality.

In fact, espousing those "facts of life" as you do just shows lack of imagination, I would say. And with this, I need to thank you for helping me pinpoint exactly what's so wrong with so much of City of Heroes' content of today - it lacks imagination of any sort. It's just applying cliché formulas to cliché stories while adding nothing terribly interesting in turn.

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.

Correct

Yes - but only after he's killed 2 major heroes, terroized 2 major world cities, vaporize several thousand American sailors, trashed a whole fleet, built a floating island to take him into space, and semi-merged with a world-devouring god - it's a level or two above a mayhem mission

You are quite incorrect. Everyone knows that you take the good, and you take the bad. You take them both!!! Only then do you have the facts of life.

Only because we saw it via cutscenes or "already done". :P


I still say the devs should have written and posted some fan fiction to explain all the goings on. It would have helped to clarify what was going on behind the scenes. Even an e-comic special for a few issues would have been nice (and yes, well aware how much work a simple e-comic can take, while a 6000 word fan fic can get written in a day with enough inspiration).

Meh... hopefully the Devs have learned a few things (as was implied in the Ustream chat today) that they'll avoid some of the pitfalls seen in SSA1. Won't hold my breath for truly independant villianous missions for the redside, though.

wait a minute, you mean the facts of life are all about you?

You got the future in the palm of your hands, all you've got to do to get you through is understand. You think you'd rather do without? You'll never make it through without the truth!

Buh... That... Uh... No... I... Why???

I think you missed the part where "irregardless" is labeled as a "nonstandard" word. And the part at the bottom that goes even further, saying it's "an erroneous word that, etymologically, means the exact opposite of what it is used to express [blah blah blah]". Not exactly a resounding endorsement, if I've ever heard one

We've been saving Paragon City for eight and a half years. It's time to do it one more time.

Originally Posted by ShadowNate ;_; ?!?! What the heck is wrong with you, my god, I have never been so confused in my life!

Actually, compared to what happens when they try to be grim and serious, I think I'll take trying to be cute and funny.

That poor, poor Chicago, man

Living in Chicago, kicking Mot's *** was all sorts of satisfying.

Some of my characters

Meh. That's been around so long and is used so commonly that it's generally considered, not correct, but "acceptable".

I find it hilarious. Like hatefully-resigned-to-being-happy Skeletor in the He-Man and She-Ra Christmas special.