Gangrel wrote:

Radiac wrote:
Redlynne wrote:
You want us to play Simon Says?

You could call it that, although actual Simon Says with emotes would probably be more fun. you could have rules like "it only counts if it's on Broadcast channel and I have to type Simon Says do this..." then you could put it on local or some similar channel, or type S1mon Says" etc.
You could also use the WASD keys to follow instead of having a special tray I guess.

Guild Wars 2 had this as part of their Halloween event... which you do with the /emote commands. Kinda fun to be honest for the 2 or 3 times that you HAVE to do it. You also have roughly 10 seconds to type in each emote that you are meant to do, so not exactly *twitch* speed either

I don't recall a time limit on it, but FFXIV has some /emote to NPC for quests.

I'm okay with having emotes in the pwoer trat as an option. I wouldn't want them to go there by default, and I'd likely probably not put them there myself, (if anything I'd put macros that use an emote with a battlecry or something in those slots), but I'm not against it in theory.

Cinnder wrote:

Segev wrote:
Is there a reason why emotes shouldn't be able to be loaded into the "power tray?" I make no comment as to the technical ability to do so; I am just curious if, as players, that would in any way be bad thing.

Works for me as long as we have a greater number of power trays than we did in CoX, and can put them wherever we want on the screen. For some of my more RP characters I kept some macro buttons in their power trays to perform dialogue/emote combinations.
If we are going to have any situation-specific power trays (like the ones we had in some later TFs and Night Ward) I strongly request that we be allowed to configure their size and position. I didn't use the standard UI layout in CoX, which meant when these non-configurable special trays appeared they would cover up other parts of my UI.

Ummm... remember the powers tray?
[img]http://i.imgur.com/XPFQsrp.png[/img]
I didnt like it for storing Marcros and Emotes because i couldnt name them properly

instead, I would have liked a vertical tray that I could have some more text (and has a re-sizable width?) like:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/Pw3tF4P.png[/img]
(if i could, id use: ALT + Number to activate an Emote / Macro / ... )

Maybe thats just me. :{

Of course, some missions could AutoPopup a new vertical Emotes Tray (above) for that Dialog Exchange with an NPC?!?
So, the NPC version doesnt use ALT + Number key, just waits for a Mouse Click? :)
But that might confuse the regular folk that wont take the time to learn to RP with. :<
Plus, if MWM makes it Exportable, and Importable, most SG's will Demand you use their Defaults. :{

How about turning the "interact with the glowie while being attacked" on its head? Minor variation: The AV has announced his plans to launch his city-killer missile and fled the control room. A string of minions start appearing from doorways and running toward the various control consoles to enter the final launch sequence. Our Hero has to run around the room taking them out before they can enter their code. Maybe a progress bar shows on each terminal screen so the hero has to prioritize which to target. Kind of a whack-a-mole/plate-spinning mashup :)

I'd like to see some scenarios where the Hero has to make a harrowing choice: ""Haha! You can't save the Mayor AND stop my DeathDroid! Which will it be, Hero?" (But maybe, just maybe, you can) Given your archetype and skill set, you may want to do one of the tasks first over the other. Maybe there's a weak spot you can exploit that allows you to do one very quickly, giving you enough time to accomplish both. Maybe you found/were given some device that would allow to slow one or the other down, if only you could figure out which one?

Tracking missions, where you have to follow or pick individuals out of crowds. For instance: Go the Fair and find the person with the purple balloon, it's filled with a deadly toxin. Oh, and don't cause a major panic and stampede the crowd. Or, "Go to the comic-con and find the guy dressed as Anthem and give them this code phrase." Of course there are dozens of cross-dressed Anthems at the Con, right? How do you know which is the right one? (could be some hilarious responses)

I recognize that some of these "blending in" type missions are going to be tough for big lizard-skinned/android/demons. This would also be true for the "Mission Using Your Secret ID" idea that Redlynne proposed, (although I LOVE that idea) What if you don't have a Secret Identity? Just throwing out some suggestions

I would LOVE a save one or the other mission! I'm sure someone would whine about not wanting to be in the impossible choice predicament but meh to them :p But if they did put something akin to a tiny chance to succeed I would put in certain power requirements to unlock the "OKAY YOU CAN!" option :)

WarBird wrote:

They Emote Tray discussion deserves and belongs in its own thread.

+1

But I'm too lazy though. :P

So no Kobayashi Maru missions?

Nadira wrote:

Brand X wrote:
I would LOVE a save one or the other mission! I'm sure someone would whine about not wanting to be in the impossible choice predicament but meh to them :p But if they did put something akin to a tiny chance to succeed I would put in certain power requirements to unlock the "OKAY YOU CAN!" option :)

Bioware is fond of these. Me, personally, not so much.
My husband showed me a mission in Mass Effect where you have to choose between two companions as you can not save both.
And in SW:TOR at least one class has to choose who gets to live and how gets to die... while they beg you on your radio to save them.
Sophie's Choice is hearbreaking for that reason too.

That SWTOR option is why that mission for Trooper is so memorable. I'd say the only real problem with it, is iy gives you Dark/Light side points depending on your option, when it says "Save Jax and the other MAY die!" "Save the others and Jax will die!" Then if you save Jax all the others die, and you get dark side points, when before if you killed to save the few to save the many it gave you light side points.

Segev wrote:

It's worth noting that we are not supported by our work with MWM and CoT; we have day jobs which demand our time and attention and, in all honesty, have to take priority if we're going to keep roofs over our heads and food on our tables. Thus, we are working as fast as we can, but there are only so many hours in a day, and everybody on the project is already putting in more than 40 hours a week of work just by virtue of being on the project.
This isn't a plea for sympathy, by any means. It's merely an explanation as to why we take the time we do. We make up for lack of budget by having people who are dedicated to the project who are willing to work on this in addition to whatever it is they do to support themselves. But that does come at the cost of man-hours our people can really devote to this. We are making progress. I'm actually quite excited by where we are.
Sorry I can't give more heartening promises; all I can say is, if we continue to work at this pace, there WILL be a City of Titans, and I have high expectations that it will be sustainable. I, personally, will make no date promises. But it does look good to me.

This sounds very encouraging!

Brighellac wrote:

I think you're just trying to aggressively push your idea of how heroes should behave.

I am really getting tired of this accusation.
Please point out what I said that was aggressive or pushy.
Or are you, as I suspect, deliberately throwing a false accusation at me, as a way to dismiss what I said without bothering to think about it?

Interdictor wrote:

TheMightyPaladin wrote:
If I run into a situation where I'm forced to choose who to kill, I will log out and won't finish the mission.
If it keeps happening I'm probably going to stop playing.
That kind of content simply can not, and seriously should not be fun.
Sure it can - if you're playing a villain or Punisher-like anti-hero. I don't think anyone should be forced into a particular alignment, and the possibilities of a villainous redemption or the fall of a hero would be cool to play out, if that's your thing.

I'm really sad to hear you say that.
OK I was wrong to say it can't be fun
But I was right to say it seriously Should Not be fun.
There is something very wrong with finding enjoyment in something like that.

Interdictor wrote:

TheMightyPaladin wrote:
That's why the Devs are expected, and in some cases required, to censor certain content.
(Swastikas)
Gesundheit!
The devs are in NO way required to censor the Swastika. Of course if the devs want the game to sell in Germany then I guess they will have to find a away around that (like Cryptic did with the Fifth Column/Council).

That was sort of a joke but they are required to censor some content IF we want a T rating, and I've been lead to believe that they do want one.

The Hero's Dilemma (save one, but not both) is a long standing part of comic book lore. It happens to both the white knights and the gritty vigilante. It may not be a fun decision, but that does not make it an unrewarding one. Sure, there are cases where the hero manages to save everyone through acts of extreme awesomeness, and hell, that would be awesome to pull off in the game. I'm just saying everything does not have to be fun in a game, but it does have to be rewarding.

If the choice is whom to save, I can save one then, sadly accepting my limitations, let the other go. But that's not how the question was posed. Choosing whom to Save is something I can live with, provided it doesn't come up too often. I can NOT accept being forced to choose whom to kill. That is a different sort of choice altogether and one I have no right to make.

In real life I can make the right choice, and accept the consequences, secure in the knowledge that, even if everyone else condemns my actions, my conscience is clear, In a story, we can see a hero make the same kind of painful decision and be on his side because we the readers (or viewers) know that he made the right choice. but in this game, God isn't the judge of right and wrong, and we can't even be sure that it's possible to do the right thing.

In the game, we are going to be given a specific set of options to choose from.

Even if I'm gifted with the wisdom of Solomon, and can clearly see a different course of action, that I would prefer to take, no other option will be available. The mission designer can Force people into situations where there is no right choice.
This is something I've feared ever since the shades of grey alignment mobility was first introduced in COX.

The worst part of it is that, because the choices can be made deliberately ambiguous by the mission designer, I won't have the option of playing the righteous Paladin who knows what to do. The mission designer can hide (or just fail to reveal) vital information that effects the morality of a decision. This was constantly going on in Praetoria and that was kind of the whole point of the place. You were damned if you don't, and damned if you do. There were NO real heroes and being a superhero wasn't really an option. That is what I fear.

I do not want to be a pawn, who gets deceived into doing evil, for most of the mission, or even for many missions and then turns on his masters when he learns the truth. That can make for an interesting story, but it makes for a terrible game. Because if I have to play through the game I'm the one being manipulated. I'm the one who fought for the wrong side and possibly did terrible things, that I now have to live with.

Superheroes shouldn't get manipulated.
In the words of David Crosby:
"And the reason why she loved him
was the reason I loved him too
He never wondered what was right or wrong
He just knew"

I don't have a problem with people who want to play morally ambiguous heroes. That's the reason we have a background story attached to our heroes, and I'm cool with having an alignment system that effects how NPCs see us and react to us. I'm also cool with allowing people to change their alignment if they want to. But that kind of thing should be our choice, our Clear choice, Not something we're Forced or Tricked into.

I know I'm not morally infallible.
But I like heroes who are
And I'd like the option to play one
without being sabotaged by the system

Brighellac wrote:

And I think you should have the option to do so.
I just would like the option to play a hero who makes mistakes, sometimes awful ones, but strives to reject his darker urges to do the right thing or
A vengeance obsessed vigilante or
A gentleman rogue or
A temptress who pulls heroes to the left hand path

"

All of that is fine with me. As I already said:
"I don't have a problem with people who want to play morally ambiguous heroes. That's the reason we have a background story attached to our heroes, and I'm cool with having an alignment system that effects how NPCs see us and react to us. I'm also cool with allowing people to change their alignment if they want to."

I don't think that a system where choices are forced on us really adds anything valuable to that.

oOStaticOo wrote:

Manipulation is a tool that is used all the time. We are Manipulated by advertisements, by politicians, by religious leaders, by our peers, by our family, by our loved ones. Why should one expect a hero to be any different? Even the most noblest of heroes can be manipulated. In order for there to be good there has to be bad. One cannot experience good without experiencing bad. Otherwise, how would one know what good was?
With that being said, the alignment system will no doubt tug and pull your character back and forth between good and bad. As it should. It is now up to the player to decide how much good and how much bad their character does. I hope that there is no way for a character to be truly 100% good or 100% bad. For, to my knowledge, there should only be two people that truly are.
Now I'm not saying that it should be extremely difficult to make good decisions, or bad decisions. Just that there should be some give and take to the whole process. It's a delicate balancing act that has to be played.

If the devs agree with you, I will not be playing this game.
I don't like being manipulated. I don't think anyone else does either.
and the fact that it happens is no excuse for doing it.

or it can just make us not want to play the game

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

or it can just make us not want to play the game

Paladin - the "do what I want or I'm not gonna play the game" posts do not add anything to the discussion, it just makes you come across as childish.

You could always have a thing where the player can use a mic to say their character's name or a voice program that lets you phoentically determine how your name is simulated - and then insert your name here modulated to sound like the actor. If it didnt come off quite right, people would at least laugh every time. Of course, that would increase the amount of GM bans needed because people would be way more interested than usual in naming their duperhero "Fartknockers Man"

Brand X wrote:

Nadira wrote:
Plexius wrote:

In general the missions in The Secret World are absolutely top notch, and should be studied by any game developer aiming at a game which incorporates story telling through their missions. Forget about SW:TOR and its much vaunted voice-acting. The stories are nice and on occasion interesting, but they are downright primitive next to TSW.

I think this of FFXIV. Just wonderfully done imo when it comes to the various ways to mission.
As for voice acting, don't care for it really. For one, voice acting means they never say my character's name. Second, in the case of FFXIV it forgoes my character talking. Lastly, I may or may not care for the voice acting, which could have me going *Sigh* with a scene.

As is often the case, I can see both sides of the discussion. Some people, Like Paladin, don't like the idea of morally ambiguous heroes. Manny people who read Superman do so because he seldom wavers in his stance on many moral issues. DC Comics stays away from many of the stickier moral questions (abortion etc) for this reason.

On the flip side, many people LIKE the reality of the morally tough question. It helps them immerse in the world they're playing in when the choices resemble, even distantly, real life choices. Some of these choices, many of them in fact, can be tough ones. Such people read the grittier comics or the stories where the hero simply can't save everyone no matter what.

Personally I feel bad for Superman writers or the writers of any comic that has gone on so long. There is SO MUCH history to wade through and consider that I feel that the writers are constrained by history. "Hey Chief...I got a great idea for this plot where..." "Can't do it unless you take into consideration that thing that happened three years ago." How frustrating would it be to hear that over and over? Worse, new writers try to change things to suit their own vision and now the character that may have been loved for a decade or more now goes into rewrite tailspin and the readers and fans hate it (*cough*... Spiderman...* cough*).

I have confidence that the Revs, many of whom have felt these very same feelings, will figure this out. Their pledge to not force anyone into PvP encourages me to believe that they'll write stories that everyone can enjoy. Anything you, as a player, fall into that you don't like and they'll have an opt-out button of some kind.

There is no right or wrong here as long as everyone realizes that their view is not the only view and are willing to let others enjoy the game too.

No I don't mean "For Me"'.
In case you haven't noticed I don't feel the need to water down everything I say by pointing out that it's just my opinion.
I assume everyone here knows that already.
You obviously know it since you wanted to point it out.
I think it's condescending and insulting be told the obvious so I don't do it to other people.
I mean what I said and that's all I mean.

TheMightyPaladin wrote:

No I don't mean "For Me"'.
In case you haven't noticed I don't feel the need to water down everything I say by pointing out that it's just my opinion.
I assume everyone here knows that already.
You obviously know it since you wanted to point it out.
I think it's condescending and insulting be told the obvious so I don't do it to other people.
I mean what I said and that's all I mean.

yes, and the point was, you were wrong. :p

I think the biggest mistake this game could do is cater to those who want CoH back.

No alignment system? But it's a great idea! It might even play out better than TOR's story chat options, as the alignment system can keep going. The story chat options tend to feel like they all get you to the same spot regardless and lots of choices you make get forgotten. Alignment system means you keep changing or staying the same!

oOStaticOo wrote:

Brand X wrote:
I think the biggest mistake this game could do is cater to those who want CoH back.

And I think you are dead wrong.

And I agree with the sentiment that CoH should stay CoH.

CoT is something original and amazing on its own. I'm trying to focus on what was great about CoH and I sincerely do not live in the "bring back CoH" bubble. The CoH people I sincerely hope come back, but even more than that I hope new players and lovers of other MMORPG feel at home in Titan City

oOStaticOo wrote:

Brand X wrote:
I think the biggest mistake this game could do is cater to those who want CoH back.

And I think you are dead wrong.
That is the reason why this game is being made.
People want CoH back.
Granted we can't have it back, and granted there are things that are not possible to bring back due to litigation. But we can strive to recreate a similar game that we all once loved and lost.
If I wanted to play a different MMO that isn't CoH, I would play it. I don't want that. I want to play CoH, or at least something as close to it as I can get.

I loved CoH. However it got cancelled for a reason. Not enough people where playing it. CoT needs to be profitable enough to keep updates coming at a decent pace or it's just going to see a drop off of players (which it would likely see anyways...but we want to try to keep as many as we can, right?)

Indeed and well said my friend.

Yes everything should be modernized. This is supposed to be a next generation MMO after all. I simply think we need to take what was shut down and improve upon its system based on what was done wrong in its past as well as CO's and DCUOs. I'm not too keen on caring for every other fantasy or what have you MMO out there however.

For example the recent expansion for WoW has essentially left the place barren with most people huddled in garrisons. The game was damaged quite abit and lost another chunk of subscribers yet the forums still had plenty of people who applauded what was going on. I'm not saying we shouldn't try to be attracting crowds in other MMO genres but I am saying that a good chunk of them don't have opinions that are going to make the game better in reality. I have also played Tera and such but only bring up WoW because it seemed most relevant.

This reminds me of the original Wing Commander mission structure. There were basically three columns of missions you were in. If you did well enough you go sorted into the "good" column and the war is going well for the humans. If you did badly, you got sorted into the "bad" column and the wat was going badly. If you did okay, you stayed in the "middle" column. The nice thing about that was that two "good" performances in a row would shift you "good-ward" twice and get you from "bad" to "good" by going through the intermediate step of "medium" first. I could see something like that working for this game on a per-arc basis, or even for TFs, which would make a lot of the content more repeatable in the sense that it could be done in a number of different ways.

You could even mix it up a little in terms of sequencing. For example, let's say you have a 6-mission arc. If you do really well in mission 1, it triggers you to get a helping hand from the hero you rescued who shows up in missions 4 and 5 to help out, etc. If you DON'T manage to rescue that hostage, you don't get that, etc. MAybe instead you get their sidekick who is less useful, can't be stealthy, and tends to get into trouble more *cough*Fusionette*cough*....

Segev wrote:

There is a strong enough yearning for the niche CoH filled - and which none of its competitors fill now - that CoT has a following as a potential to fill that niche. We do aim to fill that niche. We are not CoH; we are not remaking CoH; we could not remake it if we wanted to. We are making a game about superpowered heroes, villains, and those in between, and we seek to fill the yearning people have for comic-themed action and adventure. Thwarting bad guys and executing brilliant plans. Using your powers to solve problems as only those with superhuman abilities can.
Telling a particular genre of stories and, we hope, letting you shape them into something personal and powerful and great fun.
Or just running around and being superpowerful because it's fun.
Regarding my comments on the "hero's dilemma" as a failure mode, I don't think people quite took away from that what I meant.
Let's say you're on Mission To Stop the Mad Mime. You do not successfully thwart the first half of his plan (which in most MMOs would be "mission fail" and time to start the mission over...or would have been the only option and would be a successful mission despite your plot-based failure). In a game where failure is an option, however, having failed the last one gives you a different next mission than if you'd succeeded. Having failed, perhaps he got away with kidnapping your plucky young mortal friend and the police chief. Now, your mission involves choosing whether to save both of them, or to stop the Mad Mime from permanently silencing half the city and save one of them (and which to save). Because you failed - got the "bad end" - the last mission, this mission features a hard choice.
If you'd succeeded the last mission - gotten the "good end" - the Mad Mime wouldn't have his hostages, perhaps, and so your mission would be instead to stop him from silencing the city while racing against a different clock (maybe he has his Silencer set up in two locations...but you can in theory get both taken care of).
So it wouldn't be that you're faced with the Hard Choice just because the writer decided to force you into it; it is a failure mode wherein now your task is to salvage what you can, having been bested by the bad guy earlier in the arc.
This is just me musing, mind. I'm not on the composition team.

Let me just go on record to say I love everything about this idea!

I feel a deep sympathy for those who are forced to program it and write it, however. Branching storylines quickly become exponential trees of infinite work. I know. At Writing.com I have started and deleted many because after 30 or 40 chapters just keeping track of the storylines took too much time. It was much easier to contribute a chapter here or there to someone else's headache, or when I felt ambitious a single branch.

Trying to manage the work of others was even harder than creating my own. Some people just do not understand things like plot, character development, and rules of a genre.

Segev wrote:

There is a strong enough yearning for the niche CoH filled - and which none of its competitors fill now - that CoT has a following as a potential to fill that niche. We do aim to fill that niche. We are not CoH; we are not remaking CoH; we could not remake it if we wanted to. We are making a game about superpowered heroes, villains, and those in between, and we seek to fill the yearning people have for comic-themed action and adventure. Thwarting bad guys and executing brilliant plans. Using your powers to solve problems as only those with superhuman abilities can.
Telling a particular genre of stories and, we hope, letting you shape them into something personal and powerful and great fun.
Or just running around and being superpowerful because it's fun.
Regarding my comments on the "hero's dilemma" as a failure mode, I don't think people quite took away from that what I meant.
Let's say you're on Mission To Stop the Mad Mime. You do not successfully thwart the first half of his plan (which in most MMOs would be "mission fail" and time to start the mission over...or would have been the only option and would be a successful mission despite your plot-based failure). In a game where failure is an option, however, having failed the last one gives you a different next mission than if you'd succeeded. Having failed, perhaps he got away with kidnapping your plucky young mortal friend and the police chief. Now, your mission involves choosing whether to save both of them, or to stop the Mad Mime from permanently silencing half the city and save one of them (and which to save). Because you failed - got the "bad end" - the last mission, this mission features a hard choice.
If you'd succeeded the last mission - gotten the "good end" - the Mad Mime wouldn't have his hostages, perhaps, and so your mission would be instead to stop him from silencing the city while racing against a different clock (maybe he has his Silencer set up in two locations...but you can in theory get both taken care of).
So it wouldn't be that you're faced with the Hard Choice just because the writer decided to force you into it; it is a failure mode wherein now your task is to salvage what you can, having been bested by the bad guy earlier in the arc.
This is just me musing, mind. I'm not on the composition team.

Love it! Trust the Joker and end up saving Harvey Dent and creating Two Face or don't trust him, save Rachel and no Two Face ever created!

About the only way I expect, once the game is up and running, to see it at risk of shutting down is if we literally cannot afford to keep the (literal and proverbial) lights on. There are sad stages between "successful and thriving" and that depressing turn of events, though, so just keeping it "around" is not enough to satisfy us. We want it successful and thriving, because that will make the game ... well, thrive. ...that's redundant. I'll shut up now.

Honestly, I expect that as a bare minimum. I have high hopes that we'll be - for a small studio, at least - fabulously successful. Not because I'm thinking "we'll be millionairs" (though that'd be nice), but because I see this as a truly viable business structure if we do it right.

But yes, even if we are only able to get enough income to keep the proverbial and literal lights on, we will do so. We won't shut down just because it's not "enough" profit, as long as there are enough people interested to put in the work to keep it running.

oOStaticOo wrote:

Right, but I don't see you guys completely killing CoT just because it isn't making ENOUGH of a profit. No profit and driving you completely in the red, yes. Some profit that is enough to keep the lights on, no. I seriously doubt that if you design this game much like CoH did that you won't have enough people providing you with enough money to keep the lights on for the game. That would be worst case scenario, in my mind. I would think that you will have enough people to help keep the lights on and even provide a small profit in the process.

Will just have to hope your right. I just have less faith that the game will get far without a decent profit.

The difference I do see, is they said they plan to have it setup to where even if it closes down, people can still play it.

Going back to the original post's main subject, I remember doing things in CoX (like the TPN Trial) where there were things you had to do and things that were "distractions" that required some people to do this, and others to do that, in some reasonably orchestrated fashion. More of that would be good.

specific examples:

The potted plant: You must preserve the potted plant and make sure it doesn't get destroyed by the baddies while defeating the end boss. Minions spawn every so often and try to attack it. It's a living thing, so it can be healed, but it is immobile and cannot attack.

The generator: The generator powers up the end boss's equipment in some way and must be destroyed to debuff the boss or make his/her invulnerability drop. Attack the generator until it is destroyed.

The computer: You must find a code in the early parts of the trial and enter it into the computer to bypass the security and allow the team to get the drop on the end boss. The code can be any alphanumeric string of some length, you might find it all at once or bit by bit. The instructions might be to enter it backwards or just the last 3 digits, etc. So you don't just click on the glowwie, you click on it, and it pops up a window that asks you to type in the code or whatever part of it is asked for in whatever order. This will require the PLAYERS to keep track of the code. Different players might find different parts, you might find the same part twice, etc. Communication is key on the team with this and you'll need to type while you interact with the computer, so its a lot harder to do other things like attack.

The lock: You found the Key in some earlier part of the trial, or maybe you found A key, not THE key, or maybe you found multiple keys. You have to try out different keys on different locks, or maybe you got clues as to which one opens which, etc. When you click on the glowwie it pops up a window with one of more locks and a tray of one or more keys you can use on them, you have to drag the correct to to the correct lock and slot it in. Get it wrong and the vault won't open, etc and you have to try again, starting from the beginning.

The circuit board: You have to repair the console and get to working to avert the doomsday weapon after the underboss smashed it. You click a glowwie, it pops up a window with a graphic of several different shaped slots and you have to fit different shaped microchips into them. The chips can be rotated 90 or 180 degrees. This would be like doing the "put the square peg into the square hole" kids puzzle, only the chips are labeled, numbered, some are the same shape, you might need to put them in in a specific order, you might have more chips than you need, you might have one that's "universal" and can slot in anywhere, etc.

The reactor: The reactor will overheat and cause a meltdown if you don't keep it cool. Use cold powers (anything that does "-slow as a secondary effect" damage type), temp powers you might have picked up, objects that look like harmless window dressing that might help (the fire extinguisher, the water cooler, cold pack in the first aid kit, etc). The reactor doesn't require constant attention, but it can heat up quickly if not checked frequently.

The sample analyser: While the team keeps the boss busy, you have to run through the map with a temp power and take samples of different exotic crystals/fluids, etc encountered in the trial. Each sample can be analyzed at the analyzer station in the boss room and ONE of them hold the key to defeating the boss. Or maybe you have to analyze them all to get it to work, etc.

The ubergun: You have to collect the various parts of the ubergun then assemble them correctly and charge it up to defeat the boss. This requires getting all the pieces, which were probably glowwies you had to find earlier, and the person who clicked the glowwie got the part, or maybe they got a temporary buff or temp power instead (like in the abandoned sewer trial, you don't know what you get until you get it). People will have wanted those golwwies so there needs to communication to get the parts to the one person who is going to assemble the ubergun (uses player-to-player trade function, like trading SOs to the person standing next to you in CoX). Assembly requires interacting with a glowwie in the boss room and you have to fit the pieces together, then you have to wait while it charges and make sure it doesn't get destroyed in the meantime.

The portal: Demons/robots/something are flooding into the room through a magic portal or teleporter, etc. It can't be attacked, but you can disrupt and close it by correctly arranging the magic runes or re-tuning the hyperwave antenna to jam it, etc. You click a glowwie and have to use trial and error to move a set of objects around on a board until the portal starts to close. This could be as simple as having Enhancement slots in a popup window and a tray of crystals or whatever that you drag and drop.

Some of these are getting redundant, but you get the idea.

I don't know how much in the way of "arcade action" can be done with these sort of "click the glowwie, it pops up a window" things, but depending on how hard it is to code, you could have some more "dexterity/timing" based games too, such as:

The Missile Command: Enemy spies have launched the missiles and aimed them at the missile base itself! Oh noes! You quickly get to the command terminal and click it. A window pops up, you see a radar screen with incoming missiles on it. Use the A and D buttons to rotate the "Anti-missile missile gun" clockwise and counterclockwise and the click the "FIRE" button with the mouse pointer to shoot exploding shells at incoming missiles. The longer you hold down the button, the longer the timer/fuse is on the shell. Then it will sometimes load a "smart bomb" shell that explodes when it gets close enough to a missile to take it out. Some shells explode bigger than others, etc.

The ion chamber: You click a glowwie and it pops up a window, there's "magnetic selector" in the center of a "chamber" . Ions shoot into the chamber from a pair of inlets, one on the left the other on the right. As the ions get to the magnet, you have to shoot them either up or down based on what they are (good isotope versus bad isotope, etc). Every once in a while an ion of reversed polarity comes at you and it will react the OPPOSITE way to the magnet.

Maxwell's demon: You have to open a door to let fast moving particles go from the right side of a partitioned volume to the left, while at the same time letting slow moving particles go from left to right. Eventually the system reaches the desired temperature difference and your work is done ;)

The facts that some people will try very hard not to think about what they're doing, not to communicate with others, and not to even CONSIDER following orders on a team are all true, but so what?

1. Some people have complained that not all group content in CoX necessarily NEEDED a given group size to actually DO it, yet required a team of X people to be allowed to begin. Those people would argue that the dedicated soloists should be allowed to at least TRY to do everything on their own if that's their play style choice. If some of this "teamwork required" stuff requires a team of X size to begin the TF then actually NEEDS that many to be able to successfully pass a given part of the TF, then that at least justifies the need for the content to be "team size gated" if nothing else, and I'm okay with that.

2. The content designers are on the hook to make it fun. This is not the same as making it "easy to do", "easy to get done right the first time every time" or "easy to solo". If durdles want to durdle around durdling up a TF they're free to do so. This is really no better or worse than people refusing to slow down for the rest of the group in straight-up "clear the map" crawls.

3. If the popularity of the thing is low based on something other than time it takes to complete, you can usually award more swag at the end (Reward Merits in CoX for example) to encourage more people to try it. Or give that TF a reward at the end that ONLY it gives, like the Statesman TF or the Hamidon Raids had in CoX.

4. I think everyone would agree that if it's SO hard to do as to be unenjoyable even by those who did it successfully, it's a bad design. So like, if successfully completing the TF causes you to have play it in such a way that NOBODY is having fun, then that's bad design. But that's not the same thing as making it "user friendly" enough to do it easily the first time every time either. You need to strike a balance.

5. If people are going to turn off chat or ignore it while they play, you can't make them listen to directions. If they're apt to troll you by pretending they care and then screwwing you later at the crucial point in the mission, you can't really stop them either. Neither of those things are the fault of the designers. Sometimes the game sucks because of the people you're playing it with. None of that should dissuade anyone from writing up good cooperative content that requires teamwork, in my opinion.

6. Last year or the year before that, according to a programmer friend of mine, some guys hooked up a website that allowed them to essentially crowd-source a run through the game Pokemon. I allowed anyone with a web browser to send commands to the program just like playing it on a gameboy. Hundreds of people would send the same command at about the same time, the game would porcess all of them first received-first executed, and as you can imagine it was almost total chaos. The crowd DID eventually finish the game and "collect them all" though, so there's a light at the end of the tunnel for this kind of thing, I feel.

Okay, there are several parts to this as far as what makes it fun or frustrating for me. Whether its easy or difficult, simple or complicated, the goals need to be clearly defined beforehand and the mechanism either clearly explained or very intuitive. A boss battle shouldn't take multiple tries just to figure out the specific sequence of actions required to defeat the Big Bad. Getting it done quickly and efficiently might take some practice, sure. But I despise the type of scenario that doesn't make obvious sense and you only trip on the "right" way to victory by trial and error.

"Oh, I have to stand on this exact spot and hit that little glowie bit on the monster? Until he does THIS, then I have to quick run over THERE and shout YIP! YIP! YIP! (what does that do? never mind, that's just how you do it.)

If its a purely intellectual puzzle to solve, give me the necessary elements or clues. Don't make me do it twenty times until I figure out the specific arbitrary sequence you want.

If the reactor is heating up, give me an indicator that at least points out the big valve labeled "Coolant Flow." It doesn't have to be easy to get to, and I don't mind being attacked, etc. while I'm trying to do it. But let me know what the heck I'm supposed to be doing. Ah, but if I've got Cold Based Powers, maybe I could use those instead?

(as an aside I wouldn't mind some missions letting certain powers shine, as long as there's some balance with other missions and there's a way to accomplish it without them. This will bug some people, I know. "Wah! I want all the missions designed so that my plant-hybrid ninja warlock pacifist doesn't have to break character! Wah!")