Champions Online: The No-NDA Merged Edition

[Sjofn]

CoH did have fine villains except for those undead freaks near the newbie area, oh and once you got used to Council of thorn animations they werent exciting either.

I liked the story for the ... undead puking faction (I cannot remember their name), but I haaaaaaaated fighting them. Council of Thorns was kinda meh, and I fucking hated Orange Bagel, so they were definitely the winners of "villains you fight the entire game that Sjofn will do everything in her power to avoid." Although if the Tsoo were the full level range, they would possibly be the winners instead.

I guess part of it for me is that I could see building a backstory for my heroes as to why they really, really want to defeat X villain group once and for all. I even had a few villains I modeled on the notion they wanted to be in X, Y or Z villain group. I can't see myself doing that in CO. But that's fine, because I can personally take or leave lore in MMOs. I will enjoy it if it is well done, I will laugh at it if it is poorly done, and I will notice but not care a LOT if the rest of the game entertains me if it is non-existant. :P

[UnSub]

Vahzilok.

I appreciate that CoH/V has a dark heart to its lore. Early on you are finding the dead bodies of civilians harvested for their organs and things like that.

ChampO doesn't have that to (imo) its detriment. But it is certainly easier to just make any character you want without trying to fit it in the game.

[Kageru]

Then again champions has more outright cringe-worthy villains groups. Foxbat's legion of pudgy comic book slobs, old guys with dreadful comb-overs, clockwork orange rip off's, furries and the bizarrely geared china-town mobs. They all feel a lot more like cosplayers than a remotely believable villain group.

CoH also won in terms of variety. Most of the villain groups had some sort of progression in both the mob appearance and variety. And mobs would often have a variety of power sets giving them some additional personality. I mean the Tsoo, a relatively minor villain group have 38 different appearances with individualised power sets according to the wiki.

[Simond]

You do all realise that the Champions storyline, villains, etc. are directly lifted from the three decade old pencil & paper RPG, right? And the reason they're generic is that Dr Destroyer, Grond, et al are supposed to be expies of Dr Doom/Hulk/etc?

[Khaldun]

Yes. We already mentioned it. Not a point in its favor. Wasn't with the PnP either really, but I didn't use the Champions source material itself when I ran a campaign, partly because it was so cringe-worthy.

[Tannhauser]

For about ten years(!) Champions was our game.  We had two artists in our group so we always had new heroes, new villian groups.  We never used the cardboard Champ campaign villains or heroes either.  Three of us ran campaigns and we loved the Hero system.

The pc game is good, great graphics, fairly cool powers, heck I even like the crafting.  But it just isn't sticking to me.  I don't have that MMO itch to log on and do stuff.  I think the wide aggro range bothers me as well as the lack of missions.  It's like potato salad without enough vinegar; not enough kick.

[Ingmar]

You do all realise that the Champions storyline, villains, etc. are directly lifted from the three decade old pencil & paper RPG, right? And the reason they're generic is that Dr Destroyer, Grond, et al are supposed to be expies of Dr Doom/Hulk/etc?

I'm well aware. Doesn't really excuse the flatness, IMO.

[Malakili]

I don't have that MMO itch to log on and do stuff. 

I've been hearing this a fair amount about this game.  Its really too bad, because the game is FUN, but the very fact that its pretty accessible and doesn't require constant play to "keep up" means that you (and I, for that matter), don't feel compelled to log on.  Sometimes I go a couple days without playing at all,but its still there waiting for me when I am in the mood, and for me that is worth it.  If you are looking for the type of MMO to be YOUR game, by which I mean, the one game you spend most of your time to the exclusion of every other game, Champions definitely isn't that game.    The problem Cyptic is running into, I think, is that people expect every MMO to be THAT game.

[Khaldun]

Well, yeah. Because every month they cost $15. You want to charge me that, you maybe don't have to be that game, but you need to be a game I feel some desire to play more than every once in a while. I get a desire every once in a while to play Civ IV, but I'm not still paying $15 for it.

[Malakili]

I wasn't saying it shouldn't be that way, I'm just musing on the fact that MMOs HAVE to be that kind of game to be successful just being a fun game isn't enough on its own.  Though, I realize a lot of people think CO just plain isn't fun, and thats fine, not every game is fun to every person.  But this was in the context of 

The pc game is good, great graphics, fairly cool powers, heck I even like the crafting.  But...

[Tmon]

Well, yeah. Because every month they cost $15. You want to charge me that, you maybe don't have to be that game, but you need to be a game I feel some desire to play more than every once in a while. I get a desire every once in a while to play Civ IV, but I'm not still paying $15 for it.

I like that I don't feel like I have to log in every day to keep up, I find it well worth the 50 cents a day I have to pay to keep it around.

[Malakili]

Well, yeah. Because every month they cost $15. You want to charge me that, you maybe don't have to be that game, but you need to be a game I feel some desire to play more than every once in a while. I get a desire every once in a while to play Civ IV, but I'm not still paying $15 for it.

Incidentally, I've found that lifetime subscriptions in MMOs seem to lead to a more enjoyable experience, regardless of the game itself.  Its expensive in a chunk, yeah, but it sort of "frees" you from having the "am I getting my monthly free worth" mentality, and just lets you play the game and enjoy what comes.  This really has nothing to do with Champions Online at this point (the game did offer a lifetime, but whatever), but its a point I've been thinking about for a while.  When you are in for the long haul, nerfs, buffs, changes, etc, just come as the come.  It totally changes the way I view an MMO when I have the lifetime, and it, generally, makes the experience WAY more enjoyable.   I've heard this from other people as well, and I don't know if anyone here has done it before with any games, but I'd be interested to know if people share the same experience.

[ghost]

I enjoy my LOTRO lifetime sub.  I don't think I would enjoy a CO lifetime sub. 

[Kageru]

It makes far more sense to subscribe for the month it takes to finish the CO content and then come back in 6 months to see if the game is still there and has new content. And I think CO is going to find a lot of people are going to be taking this approach. Asking people to grind unity missions for a year and a half is ludicrous.

Although in the case of CO I think not subscribing at all is an even better decision.

Bloodmoon will be the litmus test though. If it doesn't demonstrate some clear directions and a decent chunk of new content there'll be a lot of subscriptions lapsing I think.

[Tannhauser]

MMO's are a great entertainment value, like 50 cents a day someone said.  But FE and CO don't compel me to log on.  UO, EQ, DAoC, LOTRO, WoW, all of these hooked me.  Maybe I'm just getting old but this latest generation just isn't doing it for me.

I signed up for Gamefly, going to hit 360 games hard for $15 a month instead.  Maybe take a break from MMO's until ST and Cataclysm come out.

[Montague]

So apparently the latest patch has diminishing returns on attribute bonuses (ED anyone?) and Fire is the latest build to be nerfed into the ground with the Conflag "fix". I don't think I've ever been so glad that I cancelled a subscription before. 

[Malakili]

So apparently the latest patch has diminishing returns on attribute bonuses

Its actually a mixed bag.  I'm not totally against it.  It encourages you to diversify you stats a bit instead of just stacking your 2 super stats as high as you can.  Also, the way they are changing different stats, its not all the same or just a general nerf like diminishing returns, they said something like stacking, for instance, Dexterity will give better return than before above certrain numbers.

I don't know that they needed to make any changes in this regard at all to be honest, but it isn't a big to me.

[Khaldun]

For really stacked Ego/Dex builds, the crit percentages and sizes are apparently quite substantially down. So glass cannon type builds are now much less effective.

Patch implementation continues to be somewhat under the industry standard (and said standard isn't exactly going to win prizes for meticulousness), considering yesterday's "oh, whoops, we broke the instance spawning" goof.

I unsubbed over the weekend, got until early November. It's a combination of weak live management practices that I really don't feel like subsidizing and a feeling that they just really didn't do what they needed to do in terms of designing a game to go with the character system and the combat engine, both of which are pretty fun, and that they're not capable of coming up with that game over time.

[Kageru]

They make a system where only two stats (whichever superstats you picked) contribute towards damage, the game is 99% about doing damage and wonder why people stack those stats? Seriously, that problem should have been addressed in their earliest design meetings rather than live. And knowing them it will be a invisible cap so people who don't browse the forums won't realise they're gimping themselves.

[Khaldun]

Well, the thing that's really frustrating is not only did they hit a common and completely sensible build strategy, but because of the way recons work, you can't change the way you've got stat-stacking set up without getting to the earliest layer of a character design, which means a full recon at the top expense level.

[Malakili]

Well, the thing that's really frustrating is not only did they hit a common and completely sensible build strategy, but because of the way recons work, you can't change the way you've got stat-stacking set up without getting to the earliest layer of a character design, which means a full recon at the top expense level.

I really blame their shitty closed beta for this.  A lot of this stuff needed to be hashed out months ago by players who actally had a chance to test game mechanics over the long haul more than 2 days a week.

[Lantyssa]

Ahem.

Now do y'all understand why I was so critical?  It was about the rot which was infused throughout the project.

[Kageru]

Over-investment in shiny graphics (though I guess that's easier to sell to investors) and under-emphasis on actual gameplay design. Then amplified by a really crappy beta and no one collecting and acting on gameplay feedback. Warhammer was pretty much exactly the same I suspect.

[Khaldun]

Yup. And I really am just not patient any more with the "all MMOs are like this at launch" excuse when I can see that it's about a preventable lack of proper organization and procedure or not thinking through design decisions which were not inevitable or a result of resource limitations on the project. These are the things which should be steadily better over time in an industry, the mistakes the people should stop making. With a lot of solo games, these kinds of technical problems and procedural failures have been locked down more and more unless we're talking about the real ass-end of the market. There's something about MMOs that seems to invite a contempt for doing it right. Doing it right doesn't mean you don't make more complex mistakes, that you don't misjudge some game mechanics, and that you magically overcome limitations to your resources (the lack of content is a by-product of that: if you're not going to invest in the development past a certain point, you're not going to). But it does mean you avoid a lot of constant low-level failure.

[tazelbain]

Has a MMOG ever had as little content at launch as CO?

[Malakili]

Has a MMOG ever had as little content at launch as CO?

I dunno, I heard AoC was bad, but honestly I didn't play it at launch, and only did the free trial eearlier this year for the hell of it.  The problem with Champions is that they've made a game that isn't really bad, its actually fun (to me at least), but the fun is dependent upon doing missions, cause there is nothing else to do...yet they basically launched with enough content that even the most casual players should hit forty if they stick around for 2-3 months, and the people who level fast did it in a matter of days.

[eldaec]

Has a MMOG ever had as little content at launch as CO?

DAoC, SWG, EVE.

Arguably AO, Warhammer, Lineage II, GW.

Not to mention obvious failures like TR, Horizons, Hellgate.


I'm not suggesting 'other people failed' is a reason to buy this one of course.

[eldaec]

Patch implementation continues to be somewhat under the industry standard (and said standard isn't exactly going to win prizes for meticulousness), considering yesterday's "oh, whoops, we broke the instance spawning" goof.

If this were a real man's MMOG, patches would break your OS and stop your PC booting. Minor difficulties with instances just don't cut it any more.

[tazelbain]

I forgot about the no dungeons (thus little xp/equipment) for 35+ at DAoC launch.

I didn't see a lack of content with GW or WAR at release.  I see them as have mechanical issues.  No need to rehash WAR and GW would have gotten a better rep if PvP skill unlocking had been in from the start.

[Sobelius]

Has a MMOG ever had as little content at launch as CO?

I spoke to Emmert at GenCon and he said that they deliberately chose to make less content but handcraft it and do it well, rather than do what they did with CoX (randomized missions to fill in the 400 hours of content mandated by NCSoft).

I find it a fun solo game, especially because I love tinkering with costumes and powers. I had a little too much fun with the Miniaturization Drive power when I discovered it can shrink attackable objects. Running around shrinking trucks and lamposts as well as the street baddies just had me running around whacking on stuff like a total idiot.

[Khaldun]

Thing is, there's still a lot of almost-randomized missions even among the sparse ones, plus some template missions like "Kill X". The genuinely handcrafted content is pretty good to excellent, sure, but there really isn't anywhere near enough.

[ghost]

Shelved. 

[Typhon]

Thing is, there's still a lot of almost-randomized missions even among the sparse ones, plus some template missions like "Kill X". The genuinely handcrafted content is pretty good to excellent, sure, but there really isn't anywhere near enough.

You having that opinion seems to imply that they made the right choice: if/when they are able to create enough content, you're likely to be willing to return and give them a little more money.

I'm not really having a problem with the amount of content (slower leveling, no doubt), but I'm beginning to chafe at the engine annoyances (tab-targeting blows hard) and the lack of same-set power synergies.  If I'm staying within a power set, powers should have some sort of synergy with each other.  Example: all the melee attack powers in Might are largely replacements of eachother - take one, don't take more then one.

I'm also feeling bad for the poor saps that take melee characters into PvP.

I'm still logging in and playing though, but the blush is off the rose.  They could make me stay longer if the Haloween event is fun.

[Tmon]

I'm not really having a problem with the amount of content (slower leveling, no doubt), but I'm beginning to chafe at the engine annoyances (tab-targeting blows hard) and the lack of same-set power synergies.  If I'm staying within a power set, powers should have some sort of synergy with each other. 

About the same for me, my highest character is 23 so content hasn't been an issue.  I play an hour or two ever day or so, usually at lunch time or after breakfast, it's kind of refreshing to have a game that I enjoy playing but don't feel compelled to log in and play every night.

[Malakili]

I'm not really having a problem with the amount of content (slower leveling, no doubt), but I'm beginning to chafe at the engine annoyances (tab-targeting blows hard) and the lack of same-set power synergies.  If I'm staying within a power set, powers should have some sort of synergy with each other. 

About the same for me, my highest character is 23 so content hasn't been an issue.  I play an hour or two ever day or so, usually at lunch time or after breakfast, it's kind of refreshing to have a game that I enjoy playing but don't feel compelled to log in and play every night.

You know, I'm not really bothered by the lack of end game content, evne though I've had a 40 for weeks now.  I do however, have 4 alts now (highest alt level 21), and what is getting annoying is doing the same content over and over again every time.  I really do enjoy making different characters cause a lot of builds really do play very different from each other, but doing the same quests for the 5th time now is getting a bit old. 

I also really agree on the second part of your post.  It is nice to play a game that is just fun without feeling compelled to play.  While the lack of progression at end game probably takes away from that "compulsion" to play factor, its kind of nice not feeling like "Well, I want to play my alt, but I really SHOULD log on my 40 and do my unity missions for the day"  If I feel like playing my 40, I do them, if I don't, I don't, no harm done.


Also, the new Celestial Powerset looks cool, I'm looking forward to that a lot, I'm thinking of doing a Celestial/Sorcery build. I really like the hybrid nature of the celestial power set so far.  Link for people who haven't seen what they've released so far about it: http://www.champions-online.com/node/594383