The problem with how Tyrant is defeated.

I should have been more specific - I don't get how "heroes" can feel anything distinctly different from "villains" when those are in-game concepts that define fictional characters incapable of independent thought. I know that it's describing players who play heroes, instead, but that's the type of "us vs. them" distinction I couldn't get even when City of Heroes and City of Villains were pretending to be different games. It's all one game and we're customers to all of it. What's bad for one player is bad for all players because all players are customers to the same content.

If villain content is actually co-op content is actually hero content that villains get to participate in out of pity - and it is - then that's bad not just for "villains" but it's bad for players in general because part of their service is sub par. If new content for heroes that is actually co-op content isn't up to scratch, that is a problem, too. That's bade for players in general, because not only are villains wrong, now so are heroes. That strikes me as the same kind of problem arguments that see players who perceive themselves as playing underperforming ATs (Blasters, let's say) relishing that another AT is having such a hard time with something that those who are playing it at the time are enraged.

Bad experiences are never a good thing for the game. If we should relish something, it should be highlighting the problem and pushing for a solution. The game sucking equally for everyone is not one such solution. The game sucking for as close to nobody as is reasonably possible is.

And that problem, by the way, is co-op content. I am sick and tired of co-op content. Instead of inventing a whole other side of the game so that they now have to create content fore three separate paths AND a new level range with Incarnates, the developers should have stuck with just heroes and just villains and divided work between those. Because with the current policy of co-op, villains are never going to get that all new zone to themselves like they've needed since I7, because a zone for JUST villains and NOT heroes is not going to happen. Universal content simply isn't.

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.

I'd buy you a beer for that post if I wasn't flat-as-a-pancake broke.

That is exactly what I meant. I'm one of those people who loves to get into the a truly evil role. Every time I get the opportunity to make the citizens of Paragon City flee in abject terror for their pitiful, virtual lives, it pleases me. My characters are thieves, murderers, and megalomaniacs, just like any good comic book bad guy.

So why. Why on God's green earth am I putting so much effort into not only saving my world but saving someone else's. Praetoria can burn for all I care, Tyrant and Hamidon can settle their own issues over who gets it because I sure as hell don't want it. I an only justify myself with the "Save the world so I can conquer it later" excuse so many times before I have to trade in my blackened cowl for a pristine white cape.

And before anyone says it, and I know you will, "You don't have to do Incarnate content!" Bull***t. First off, what self-respecting villain is going to pass up more power? Secondly, yes I do. At least for now, because there is no other option to get Hybrid. I admit, DA is thus far proving to be at least better. I still got to remove a pair of old thorns in my side (Kadabra Kill and Sigil), and I don't know where the story will take me from here but at least it's better.

Of course this is all reminding me of how poorly Shadow Shard was handled. Why do Heroes get exclusive access to it? It would have been the perfect way to introduce a non-cooperative zone, with Heroes and Villains working towards two seperate but similar goals: Heroes to take down Rulaaru for the good of mankind, Villains to harness his power for themselves. You know, like Darrin Wade finally did. I still haven't done the Villain version of SSA1, so I don't know how it goes, but if the Hero version is any indication I'm guessing it's saving the world...Because Recluse said so.

Long story short: Co-op is infuriating because it ignores the villain side of the equation and shoehorns us into a heroic role. I take some small satisfaction in seeing someone complain about how co-op is being unfair to heroes. Even if it doesn't solve the problem, I'm still an a**hole.

A round of Enriche then. On me.

I like that we get a glimpse of what could have happened to us in Marcus Cole's arc, when Lord Recluse and his band of villains and small army get wasted and are forced to retreat. And that was without him buffing on the nuke. Yeah, it looks like the heroes and villains of our earth hadn't really thought that final fight through all the way. It was sort of, this is our last chance, so let's go in regardless of how prepared we are.

There's nothing evil about our defeat of Tyrant - we even managed to capture him alive

You're not there to siphon off power? Or steal powerful objects/technology? Or maybe you figure if you eliminate Cole then Hamidon will overrun Praetoria and wouldn't that be glorious chaos and destruction? Of course, with Cole out of the way, Praetoria is ripe for you to loot or take over instead of allowing Hami in.

Or maybe you just like that you might be able to go kill some people? Perhaps you egomaniacalness wants to prove itself against a truly tough foe, worthy of your greatness?

I guess it would be nice if the devs added some of that into more of the stories for you to read, but I can't really see why they need to when it is so much better to allow me to come up with my own reasons, rather than shoehorn me into one of many possible reasons.

Except we're always told that we're doing good.


You know how almost every redside arc starts with your contact promising you power if you run some errands for him and then ends with the contact screwing you over? Yeah, nothing's changed.

I've mentioned this before. Several times, in fact.

I always kinda thought that was the point.

Villains show that there's no depth they won't sink to in order to gain power, but ultimately are defeated when they inevitably turn against each other in a bid to be the only one with power.

Heroes, on the other hand, team up to battle the greater evil, but can't completely defeat it because there are lines that they won't cross, being heroes and all, which allows villainy to survive to plot another day.

Which is what makes Tyrant truly dangerous -- while the Praetors are certainly willing to interfere with each others' plots and backstab one another, Tyrant not only can get them all singing the same song, but is willing to work with them, even to the point of granting them some of the power he's channeling from the Well.

(Another good example from outside CoX: the Justice Lords from the animated "Justice League" series. A group that combines a willingness to cross boundaries that 'regular' heroes won't cross, plus the heroic advantage of working together. Even Batman observes that the JL can't beat the Justice Lords unless they cross "some kind of line".)

--
Pauper

Excellent.

We have them all fooled.

We've had them fooled since the RWZ opened up to co-op and haven't made our move yet.

It's even "cheekily" poked fun at by the writers. We're not wolves in sheep's clothing by in-game standards, we're sheep in wolf costumes in sheep's clothing.

Then why is there a villain alignment in this game if all you do is get screwed out of real villainy/cornholed into doing hero work?

That was a pretty epic bit of text, though

No it wasn't. It was garbage and showed that the writing team thinks it's okay to make jokes about the lack of actual villainy in redside content.

I'm STILL angry that you, as a player-character villain, admit you're doing the greater good TO ANOTHER VILLAIN.

um..what else are you supposed to do? go do your own thing until rulawade put his plan to wipe out all superhumans into motion? (unless wade actually kept up his end of the bargain villainside..which i doubt)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq-XaBmRsg8

Some very important Sun Tzu quotes.

I've had this discussion before.

It would have been great for villains to at least play along with Wade and stab him in his trenchcoat-wearing back. Instead, we're immediately forced to play hero. No option to help him out until his guard is down, no option to just punch his smug little face in during a crappy monologue and try to steal something from him before he Rula-Hulks out, not even an option to beat him down on the moon and then Recluse just to show how brutal you are.

Nope. None of that. Just a "play nice again, little villain."

I suspect you read my post, realized its brilliance, went back in time and made a post that appears earlier in the forum's time stream.

But all real fans know that I posted first.

**Note - Spoilers for high-level redside content below!**

Because, in the world of comic books, real villainy *is* all about getting screwed out of success by your so-called 'friends' just as you're on the brink of triumphing. Or (and there should really be an arc about this somewhere), it's about actually succeeding, and realizing that success isn't nearly as satisfying as the struggle to succeed. (See the Fantastic Four story arc where Dr. Doom finally succeeds in conquering the world, humiliating Reed Richards, and rescuing his mother, then realizes how incredibly boring ruling the world actually is.)

You'd think that would be obvious once you get to the level of the Arachnos Patrons, since no matter whom you choose to serve, you end up betraying that Patron's ultimate plan for personal success on behalf of Arachnos, then that Patron directs you to betray Lord Arachnos himself.

To paraphrase Raymond Chandler, if comic book villainy is at all realistic, which it very seldom is, it is written with a certain sense of detachment, otherwise nobody but a psychopath would want to write it or read it.

--
Pauper

Unless you run Dean MacArthur and Leonard Silman. Then you get to do some real villainy (you even get your own incompetent lackey whom you want to knock around a bit) in the form of stealing scientists, cloning ideas and a full cloning lab just to make copies of yourself. It all goes horribly awry when Protean shows up, but it's not like you as a player haven't stuck your hands in someone else's money bag when it was doing well. You then go on to hand Protean his teeth for crossing you.

Come on! Why can't we get more stuff like that? "Cloning? MINE. Man, these clones ROCK! What's that? You want my clones? *PUNCH* No way, I'm the boss."

You could choose to read it as, "Wink, wink, 'the greater good'. Man, we get away with so much when we claim that ********!"

Art is in the eye of the beholder, not just in the hands of the artists (especially role-playing games, where give and take between players and GMs has always been required).

Not that I am opposed to the idea of helping the big bad until the very end, stabbing him in the back, foiling his plans, and taking some of the uber for ourselves.

You know, if it had been worded differently I might have been able to mold that into my character. If the dialogue option had been "Alright, Scirocco. 'For the greater good.'" I'd be less upset. But the defeatist tone of "Alright, fine, for the greater good as usual." is just too heavy for it to be anything other than what it is: forcing us to play nice AGAIN.

When it comes to roleplay, nothing in the game forces anything on me. If I don't like the story as written, I'll change the little pieces that bother me.

Heck, it is easier in this game than in table top games. In table tops games, I actually have to care how the story exists for my friends, in CoH, I can pretend as I need for my own benefit.

Do I like when the story as written is how I prefer it? Duh, of course. Do I figure this GM has to write a modestly static story for tens and hundreds of thousands of individuals and can't craft it specifically for each gaming group? Pretty much.

That said, I would encourage the devs to allow more dastardly stuff in the villain plot lines. Vincent Ross is a great example. Heck, the enemy in that could have been CoT or Mu instead of Legacy Chain, and my villain could have saved the world (or at least Sharkhead) from those evil morons and it still wouldn't have changed the fact that I was working primarily for myself, with a little bit of aiding Vincent in his quest for vengeance.

SSA1 could have been more villainous with us still stopping Wade in the end, I agree.