ooglymoogly wrote:

An excellent, informative post - nicely done. One question - what is the picture? I can't lighten my screen enough to make out the details and don't have the wherewithal to play with the picture in an editor on this computer, but it looks vaguely like a robot/armor toon standing in line at a retailer that's closed for the evening.

[IMG]http://i68.tinypic.com/2epq3qh.jpg[/IMG]

BiotopeZ wrote:

The second-most annoying thing in an MMO is having to watch those stupid "Bob "Robby" Roberton just won a blah-ditty-blah from a limited edition no-one-cares lockbox!" splash across the middle of your screen while you're trying to pay attention to an epic threat enemy. No lockboxes means no mandatory splash messages (that are only there so people know it's possible to win something non-shitty after their twentieth failed attempt).
Of course, the number one annoying thing is people advertising for in-game currency exchanged for real money by third-parties that constantly make new accounts. "Adjksoa shouts: 5$ = 50,000 gold at w e s u c k t o t a l l y .com! fast devilerlivery garntied fast noscamm" What's even worse is when they start pm'ing everyone on the server and no matter how many of them you ignore, more keep popping up, because they make a new account every ten seconds. Hopefully the mandatory startup cost will prevent that, too.

This. So much this. Hated that in STO so bad.

I don't think we're expecting the cost of an account to stop gold spamming; we're more expecting it to help pay for the GMs' time to hunt the spammers.

Cobalt Azurean wrote:

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:
I don't think we're expecting the cost of an account to stop gold spamming; we're more expecting it to help pay for the GMs' time to hunt the spammers.
looks at his dusty, blue banhammer hanging over the fireplace mantle
Hunting spammers, eh? I'm game.

Go. Hunt. Kill spammers.

Great update!
This is yet another reason why I support MWM: reasonable people making reasonable decisions because they are players too.

suggestion for a booster pack to be sold. Facial expressions and a talking emote. all emote driven.

Shadow Elusive wrote:

We will not be doing lifetime subs, that's the official word. They were tried, and were found not to work so well from the business end. We want to be fair to you guys...but also fair to us :)

Thanks for restating this. Again while lifetime subs might be convenient for players they typically suck for the game company and that issue alone was probably going to keep me from buying one even if you offered it.

I think an annual subscription deal would be a good compromise between still providing MWM with long-lasting income versus player convenience.

stonejaguar wrote:

oh well, no lifetime subs.. bummer. [b]but maybe yearly subs for discount?[/b]

That worked for CoH - I paid for it annually 6 or 7 years in a row. Instead of like $15 a month it averaged out to be more like $12 a month.

MeSoSollyWan wrote:

Doctor Tyche wrote:
ooglymoogly wrote:
An excellent, informative post - nicely done. One question - what is the picture? I can't lighten my screen enough to make out the details and don't have the wherewithal to play with the picture in an editor on this computer, but it looks vaguely like a robot/armor toon standing in line at a retailer that's closed for the evening.
It's a robot standing in line at a retailer that's closed for the evening.
Is that robot another placeholder asset? Or one your team developed and will be used in the game?

It is a modular system, part our own, part purchased, and will be available in game.

Grimfox wrote:

So buying the ninja booster

Boring.

Quote:

could also net you the giant shoes from the clown booster.

YEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

stonejaguar wrote:

I actually disagree that lifetime subs are bad idea. if you build it into your financial model and make it priced enough to make it worth it in the long run, it would be good idea. I would be willing to pay upwards of 400-500 dollars for a lifetime sub for a game that is solid and I know I will enjoy. but I will be satisfied with a subscription superhero game that I love without the lifetime. just an option I would prefer

I've purchased two lifetime subscriptions for games that each cost several hundred dollars. I haven't played either one of those games for years now.

I'm not suggesting that MWM would be doomed to failure if they offered lifetime subs. I'm just saying if you ACTUALLY expect you'll be playing CoT for years you'd be doing more to support MWM in the long run if you kept paying for a periodic subscription than you would in one lump sum.

I get that lifetime subs are a convenient option for players but that's about it. MWM doesn't need single lumps of money ASAP, they need semi-guaranteed players to stick around for years.

Godling wrote:

Doctor Tyche wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:
Doctor Tyche wrote:
cybermitheral wrote:
Sorry if I missed this in the article or the forum but with the Booster Pack Bonus Item will it be possible to get a duplicate of an item I already have? If so do I get nothing or do I get a Star value or something else?
They are not items, but unlocks. As such you cannot get a duplicate
Color me skeptical, but if the extra bonus random item is truly random, how can you ensure it will not be something we've already unlocked?
Because it is an unlock. It's not "pull from full table of contents" but "random selection from account's lock-table". Add in-game currency, bonuses like double XP time, extra character slot, or stars to that bonus drop, and even if you have everything unlocked, you still get something.
So would all the unlocks from the booster sets be available in the cash shop? That would clearly mean that the boosters are boosters and not lockboxes that come with their own key
thats the one particular I see missing here.

That is the idea, yes, allowing people to purchase a la carte or packaged.

Planet10 wrote:

Respectfully, how the hell does reopening the door for lifetime subs maintain a consistent message?
Shadow Elusive mentioned in this thread that lifetime subs were off the table (post #88).
Doctor Tyche mentioned in the linked thread that lifetime subs were off the table (post #23 March/April QA).
The MWM quote from the comments section of the KS post leaves the door wide open without committing to anything one way or the other. How the hell is "keeping it fluid" to be interpreted as clear OR consistent? They did not use any language to support your claim, your statements are just filling in the blanks that they are creating. If they are not going to support lifetime subs, why not just use specific language to deny the request? Are they that soft bellied that they cannot be seen to disturb their KS supporter base? I have raised this question a few times already in this thread and it has garnered NO RESPONSE from anyone from the MWM team. So that leads me to believe that they have placed lifetime subscriptions back on the table for debate. I do not support it (lifetime subs), but something as simple as making a definite post on the KS comment section is too hard to accomplish apparently.

Talk about making a mountain out of molehill. You seem to be the only one who jumped into full-blown "conspiracy theory mode" about that KS post "leaving the door [b]wide open[/b]" for lifetime subs in this game. At best it was classic non-committal Devspeak.

Why are you so incredibly stressed out about a specific detail of this game at a point when ALMOST NOTHING about it is set in 100% stone yet? Regardless of anything -any- Dev has said up to this point practically any of it could still change or be modified in some way. Do you realize how much CoH radically changed between its "pre-beta" and "post-beta" phases?

Let's play a hypothetical just for the fun of it: You've stated you don't like lifetime subs - nothing wrong with that. But what happens if CoT actually -does- end up offering a lifetime sub? Would you refuse to play the game? Would it fundamentally change your plans with regards to this game? Frankly how could it possibly affect you personally one way or the other? Sure it might mean MWM decided to do one specific thing you don't like, but do you really think MWM is responsible for making sure you're 100% happy with the game? It's impossible to make everyone happy about everything. *shrugs*

One more time I'm perfectly satisfied (based on EVERYTHING every MWM rep has said thus far) that the likelihood of having lifetime subs as an option for CoT is practically nil. Sure, for all we know the Devs [b]-might-[/b] collectively change their minds about it in the next few years, but even if they do it won't be in spite of you either way.

Take a chill pill on this - almost NOTHING about CoT has been irrevocably established yet, least of which I imagine is the overall subscription system.

Lothic wrote:

Take a chill pill on this - almost NOTHING about CoT has be irrevocably established yet, least of which I imagine is the overall subscription system.

I believe they won't implement a lifetime sub. No I won't have some sort of mental breakdown if they do. For the most part I don't care if they do or not as I am not going to financially benefit from the decision. I understand that any non-standalone game has a limited lifespan. I am not hitching my life (and joy/despair) to the success of this game.

I am disappointed that the overall team organizational structure did not project a concise and unified response on the matter. There is a sense that there is a left hand did not talk to the right before the messaging occurred.

Edit: Not everyone checks every single KS or forum post. There was a question in the KS comments. The question had already been essentially answered on the forums, but the response on the KS page was either misleading or vague. Do the backers that only see the KS post & comments not deserve an accurate response? (yeah, this is a bit over blown, but you get my point) Why isn't the messaging consistent? The forum posts are definitive. The KS comment is vague. Are we holding MWM to a different standard because they aren't a traditional fulltime gaming company?

Doctor Tyche wrote:

Huckleberry wrote:
Doctor Tyche wrote:
cybermitheral wrote:
Sorry if I missed this in the article or the forum but with the Booster Pack Bonus Item will it be possible to get a duplicate of an item I already have? If so do I get nothing or do I get a Star value or something else?
They are not items, but unlocks. As such you cannot get a duplicate
Color me skeptical, but if the extra bonus random item is truly random, how can you ensure it will not be something we've already unlocked?
Because it is an unlock. It's not "pull from full table of contents" but "random selection from account's lock-table". Add in-game currency, bonuses like double XP time, extra character slot, or stars to that bonus drop, and even if you have everything unlocked, you still get something.

And... what about if a have unlock a prop with a badge in a free statuts (so, unlocked for one character). Then i purchase a subscription for 3 else months. Does the extra object can be an object already unlocked with one of my "free" character or does it unlocked for all my characters or does it not belong to the loot unlock table ?

Lothic wrote:

I would hope that MWM would be able to relate to its customers (or in this case future customers) in a manner that's consistent and clear as possible. But as we all know no organization is perfect all the time precisely because humans themselves are not perfect all the time. Even the "big corporate" gaming companies sometimes (often?) make misleading or inconsistent statements about their policies and features.
I can almost accept that it's SLIGHTLY unfortunate that one out of three given statements about lifetime subs for CoT has left open (at least as far as you're concerned) the very vague possibility that the issue is not fully settled yet. But once again given the current timing of where things are with this game (very, very, very pre-beta) I essentially don't truly accept that ANYTHING is totally settled until I actually start seeing concrete features in actual products. Does it truly matter that one guy out of three might not have all the facts about a specific detail of the game when the game itself is easily more than a year from launch? You talk about holding companies to certain high standards - what you're asking for here is hyper-perfection where NOTHING of the kind is called for.
I only hope you're not a school teacher - it's hard to see how anyone would be able to get passing grades in your classes with your apparent expectations of quality from others.

If it was a game feature element, I would accept the pre-beta argument. It is a decision that will not be impacted by development between now and release, so it lands more into a finalized category.
It does in fact matter that one guy out of three doesn't have the current facts sorted. It indicates that there might be a communications disconnect within the outwardly facing portion of the organization. The person who made the KS response either tried to satisfy a KS backer question with a vague response or did not know who to ask before formulating a response (or know where to look). Or it could be an honest mistake (but then why hasn't there been a follow up?).

The volunteer nature of the company means that you may not be able to fully shape the workforce to your needs/standards. The organizational structure also might not be fully defined or understood by all. And there are the differences in experience and performance between individual contributors. Maybe the lifetime subscription decision hasn't been disseminated amongst the rest of the company (or it hasn't been logged into the permanent record).

And if I was a teacher, a 66% accuracy rate means someone would be getting a D.
(or alternately, 33% accuracy and you get the F)
[youtube]cv157ZIInUk[/youtube]

At the end of the day, if it's something you get for free as an additional bonus, I won't really care what it is or if it's a global unlock for something I have on one character, or whatever. I would be just as happy getting a pack of items I wanted at a discount price with nothing else added in at all.

IMO, it's a bit much to get all would up over something that I would get for nothing.

TitansCity wrote:

Doctor Tyche wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:
Doctor Tyche wrote:
cybermitheral wrote:
Sorry if I missed this in the article or the forum but with the Booster Pack Bonus Item will it be possible to get a duplicate of an item I already have? If so do I get nothing or do I get a Star value or something else?
They are not items, but unlocks. As such you cannot get a duplicate
Color me skeptical, but if the extra bonus random item is truly random, how can you ensure it will not be something we've already unlocked?
Because it is an unlock. It's not "pull from full table of contents" but "random selection from account's lock-table". Add in-game currency, bonuses like double XP time, extra character slot, or stars to that bonus drop, and even if you have everything unlocked, you still get something.
And... what about if a have unlock a prop with a badge in a free statuts (so, unlocked for one character). Then i purchase a subscription for 3 else months. Does the extra object can be an object already unlocked with one of my "free" character or does it unlocked for all my characters or does it not belong to the loot unlock table ?

It would be unlocked globally, that is for all of your characters. It would not affect the one character who had unlocked it through game play any more than if you had purchased it in the store.

I wish I had something meaningful to add to the Finance-update discussion but when I'm liking everything I'm hearing there isn't much to say!

Maybe a comment about character slots. I'm fine with six slots to start with. Getting a slot as a L50 bonus sounds like a solid incentive, and I'm fine with altaholics like myself supporting the game with some slot purchases now and then to feed our voracious alt-hunger.

Baalumbral wrote:

I'm fine with six slots to start with. Getting a slot as a L50 bonus

Why does "everyone" keep thinking that City of Titans will have a Level Cap of 50 on Launch Day?

It has been repeatedly stated in a variety of locations that City of Titans will launch with a Level Cap of 30.

Interdictor wrote:

The devs said the character slots are unlocked at 50, not 30 or "current max level". So unless the devs have other plans, we will not be able to unlock extra slots for free until the level cap is raised to 50. How long that will happen after launch I have no idea, but until then the starting 6 slots will have to be enough. But then we can buy some from the store as well in the meantime.

This may have been their intent, but it was not what was said in the update:

Quote:

you will unlock a new character slot each time you level a character to maximum. Every character that hits level cap will unlock a new character slot.

Thus the question, which maximum level?

McNum wrote:

Tannim222 wrote:

Yes but 30 isn't "The level cap" it is "the launch level cap".

Question! Will the unlocking level rise as the level cap does?

Interdictor wrote:

The devs said the character slots are unlocked at 50, not 30 or "current max level". So unless the devs have other plans, we will not be able to unlock extra slots for free until the level cap is raised to 50. How long that will happen after launch I have no idea, but until then the starting 6 slots will have to be enough. But then we can buy some from the store as well in the meantime.

CoH launched with a level cap of 40 and it only took [b]two months[/b] (when Issue One was released) to go to 50. Based on this I doubt there's going to be a huge amount of time where CoT's level cap is less than 50.

Interdictor wrote:

Lothic wrote:
CoH launched with a level cap of 40 and it only took two months (when Issue One was released) to go to 50. Based on this I doubt there's going to be a huge amount of time where CoT's level cap is less than 50.
Agreed - it's probably just going to be a matter of months. What I wonder is if there will be an incremental step to 40 and then 50, or if it will go straight to 50.

Honestly, itnreally depends on how much testing time we have for the upper-tier powers, including basic pet AI.

Undoubtedly, we're going to be swamped with tons of data to crunch with more active players once we're launched. There's bound to be the odd bugs, both large and small that we somehow missed through every stage of develoment. And there will be plenty of adjustments to be made for both gameplay and back-end systems.

Given our team size, and depending on the above circumstances, we may have to stagger the level cap increases from 30 to 40 and 40 to 50. If we're very fortunate, and launch goes incredibly smooth, we'll be able to handle the data crunch analysis, adjustments, and internal testing all at once.

Tannim222 wrote:

Undoubtedly, we're going to be swamped with tons of data to crunch with more active players once we're launched. There's bound to be the odd bugs, both large and small that we somehow missed through every stage of develoment. And there will be plenty of adjustments to be made for both gameplay and back-end systems.
Given our team size, and depending on the above circumstances, we may have to stagger the level cap increases from 30 to 40 and 40 to 50. If we're very fortunate, and launch goes incredibly smooth, we'll be able to handle the data crunch analysis, adjustments, and internal testing all at once.

This is why the alpha and beta exist, aren't they ? ;) Will you envisage to prepare a list of area to test (combat, conversation, mission, UI, power slot enhancement, costumes, etc) and give people a way to feedback properly during the alpha and beta ? (Of course, it will not cover 100% of the tests but it will help ! and giving some "arrivals" for the tests allow the user to know if it's a normal result instead of a feeling that is not the attemted result...which will make you lose time in studying the feedbacks)

Redlynne wrote:

Baalumbral wrote:
I'm fine with six slots to start with. Getting a slot as a L50 bonus
Why does "everyone" keep thinking that City of Titans will have a Level Cap of 50 on Launch Day?
It has been repeatedly stated in a variety of locations that City of Titans will launch with a Level Cap of 30.

I'll admit to colloquially using "L50" among a group of former CoHers who knew exactly what I meant instead of what was said in the article, "level a character to maximum". I know the level cap will be 30 at launch, you know the level cap will be 30 at launch, lets move on.

My question is, why in the world did you feel this nit was worth picking? What I said wasn't even wrong, when the level cap is eventually upped to L50 that will be when the bonus slot is granted, the only time what I said isn't applicable will be for the comparatively limited time period until the cap is pushed up to L50. Did this just seem like a good excuse to up the post count?

Posting to the CoT forums is increasingly feeling like daring to raise your hand in a law class and every other young gun is eager to show you up over the most trivial of details, which is fine when the speaking has a need to be laser-precise such as the legal profession, but why are we holding a forum for discussing announcements of an alpha product to such a high standard? And its not just this this case, elsewhere in the thread we have a pedant obsessing over incredibly minor dev statement inconsistencies on the plans for lifetime subs. Look, I know we're all impatient and eagerly awaiting the game but could everyone chill out instead of coming to the forum looking to snipe? Do we *want* to make a toxic forum community?

Tannim222 wrote:

Level max is 50. We literally have't built out beyond that level.

I for one hope it remains that way.

BTW, I really love the idea of unlocking a new slot every time we get to max.

I think on these forums it's mostly just a personality thing, like Cobalt is saying.

Some people enjoy critiquing and debating points large or small. Some people hate ever to argue about anything. And then there is every type in between.

There are occasionally posters who seem contrarian and inflammatory, but mostly I think it's just folks who are put together different upstairs trying to get along.

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

Gaming attracts rules lawyers, who are no less pedantic than real lawyers

What about people who seem to think MWM has committed [b]crimes against humanity[/b] by not being 100% consistent in their communications?

Planet10 wrote:

Lothic wrote:

You're like a kid who sees someone trip over a small crack in the floor and then keeps harping on the poor guy's momentary embarrassment by asking if he's having a stroke or if he trips all the time. Just let this little blip go - it's really not THAT important all things considered.

Why is it important to your response to try to demean me? Apparently I hit some nerve, talked over your head or belittled you in some way. If that is how it is going to pan out I'll just use more simplistic language so as to not confuse you in the future.

Now you're assuming I'm trying to "demean" you. All I'm doing is pointing out you've wasted an incredible amount of time an energy hyper-analyzing (and hyper-criticizing) something that's almost the very definition of "trivially unimportant". I simply hate people wasting good argumentative energies on things that are completely undeserving of them. The only "nerve" you hit in me is that I feel sorry for you.

Gods help us if the folks of MWM ever collectively "miscommunicate" again... at least we know you'll be there to jump on their case again.

P.S. I [b]still[/b] don't think what the original KS post said even REMOTELY implies/affirms lifetime subs are "still on the table". Devspeak is vague for a very good reason and all I can assume at this point is that you fell for it hook, line and sinker. Talk about the need for more simplistic language so that -certain- people don't get confused and/or agitated.

MeSoSollyWan wrote:

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:
Six slots to start, and a new one for every level-capped character? I wonder how many I'll buy before I get a character to fifty... ^_^
Folks, please remember that at launch the level cap is 30. You might be cranking out capped characters faster than you expect
Even within this same thread we have different devs giving different informations.
Lin Chiao says at launch you just need to hit 30 for another slot.
Tan's post suggests that won't count though, and "cap" is only 50, meaning we can't use that method until after the devs bump it all the way to 50.
So.. Which is it? Do I believe Lin's "30 at launch" comment for a new character slot? Or do I believe the latter post from Tan suggesting that unlock method won't be available at launch?

My answer to that would be we have over a year (at least) before the game even launches. Things like this won't even matter to your "individual plans" for playing the game at this point. Either we'll get a free character slot at 30 or 50. Who cares at this point? We didn't even get a free character slot for hitting the level cap in CoH - people should be [b]focusing on[/b] that.

I've already pointed out (earlier in this thread) that the amount of time we're going to be playing this game with a level cap LESS THAN 50 is probably only going to be a few months tops. Will that "weird in-between" time make much difference to any of us years after launch?

And here I thought I was supposed to be semi-famous in these forums for bickering/quibbling over super-trivial details about this game...

Interdictor wrote:

MeSoSollyWan wrote:
Even within this same thread we have different devs giving different informations.
Lin Chiao says at launch you just need to hit 30 for another slot.
Tan's post suggests that won't count though, and "cap" is only 50, meaning we can't use that method until after the devs bump it all the way to 50.
So.. Which is it? Do I believe Lin's "30 at launch" comment for a new character slot? Or do I believe the latter post from Tan suggesting that unlock method won't be available at launch?
It has been mentioned by the devs multiple times that we get the free character slot when we hit 50, which is going to be the level cap for our characters. When the game launches, we will only be able to reach 30, max. After launch, the devs will open up the upper levels, and when we can reach 50 we can start taking advantage of the slot unlock. At least this is how I understand it. People are getting too focused on the term "cap". The level 30 thing is only a temporary limit - not the true level cap of the game.

Yeah this has pretty much been my understanding of it as well - level 50 is THE level cap of the game so the reward of the free character slot only makes sense to be tied to that level. The [b]temporary[/b] level 30 cap is only likely going to be around for the first few months of the game so -anything- that might or might not be related to that threshold is going to be temporary regardless.

Either way people are still going to get a free character slot every time they "max out" a character. Anyone who manages to level up a bunch of level 30 characters in the first few days of the game will probably be "motivated" enough to come back when the cap is finally set to 50, finish leveling all those 30s to 50s and get their free slots then. This whole "thing" is not really that big a deal either way.

Redlynne wrote:

You can lead a man to water, but you cannot make him THINK.

Eh, it actually doesn't matter to me if the "free character slot upon reaching the level cap" thing will work at 30 or only at 50.

My point is that the level cap will only be less than 50 for a relatively small portion of the overall lifespan of the game. Let's not get super hung up worrying about how the game will behave when the level cap is NOT 50 because that will only be for a few months tops. When this game is a few years old I'll bet that half the people playing at that time won't even realize that the level cap was ever anything but 50. *shrugs*

For absolute simplicity's sake it'd be easier if the free character slot happened only at level 50. Sure that'd mean that technically no one would get it until the game finally allowed level 50 characters to exist but so what? Like I said before CoH didn't offer free character slots AT ALL. Consider the fact the CoT Devs are even talking about giving us free slots for -any- level threshold as simple unentitled icing on the cake.

Planet10 wrote:

Lothic wrote:

You're like a kid who sees someone trip over a small crack in the floor and then keeps harping on the poor guy's momentary embarrassment by asking if he's having a stroke or if he trips all the time. Just let this little blip go - it's really not THAT important all things considered.

Lothic, I challenge you to explain your "You're like a kid... " quote. Use whatever verbiage you want to squirm your way out of any possibility of interpreting that as a slight on my character.

Well you're like -someone- who's just picking on another person's mistake (in this case a fairly trivial pseudo-miscommunication) just for the sake of picking on them. Since kids are, as a group, usually too immature to know that doing that is not a socially acceptable thing to do I simply used that useful noun in my analogy. You're the only one who can take abstract words like these and assume they are a direct personal insult against you. If you want to interpret them as a "slight on your character" I'm not going to encourage or stop you either way.

Planet10 wrote:

Or if you are not up to that challenge, try to argue that "Lifetimes: We have several plans, but we're keeping it fluid until closer to launch." is an affirmation that there is no remote possibility that Lifetime Subscriptions will occur wrt CoT.

I actually GRANTED you the possibility that some time in the next few years the Devs may change their minds and decide to offer a lifetime sub. I conceded that possibilty to you for no other mysterious reason than neither one of us can predict the future.

But I will continue to stand firm to my many decades worth of dealing with the English language in general and "Devspeak" in particular that the statement in question is one that HEAVILY leans AWAY from confirming that lifetime subs are even still a thing being considered. If it makes it easier for you change the colon after the word "Lifetimes" into a question mark so it reads thusly...

[b][i]Lifetimes? We have several plans, but we're keeping it fluid until closer to launch.[/i][/b]

Now if the person writing that wanted to stress that lifetime subs were still something the Devs were actively considering don't you think he/she would have written the response to that question more like...

[b][i]Are we going to have lifetime subs? We are considering those among several different plans, but won't know until closer to launch.[/i][/b]

See the difference? There's a perfectly good reason why that statement was -not- written that way: plausible deniability.

The problem seems to be you're interpreting the classical non-committal Devspeak as some kind of absolute affirmation instead of what it really is - a very casual dismissal of the entire idea. Let me put it this way: If I were a Dev and a player asked me about some game detail that I was reasonably sure was NOT going to appear in the game but I didn't want to come right out and say that for fear of pissing the player off I would probably use the EXACT same kind of language the KS post used. It's vague while still leaving the "hope" the player might get what they want at some point in the nebulous future. It's totally non-committal so if by some miracle lifetime subs DO appear in the game later on the original statement in the KS post is not proven right or wrong. It's the [b]PERFECT[/b] Dev response for the situation at hand.

Planet10 wrote:

Edit: I don't see anyone else refuting my claims (Dev or not)

No one else is jumping in on our little quibble here only because unlike the BOTH of us they have enough sense to realize this little back-n-forth is essentially pointless. The only reason I keep responding is that you seem to be easy enough to get a rise out of. *shrugs*

Planet10 wrote:

Edit: You can attack my talking points all you want. I welcome it. But if you are going to attack me directly or indirectly I expect you to man up and lose with some sense of dignity.

I never attack the "person" behind the words directly or indirectly but I will shred your WORDS to within an inch of their tiny little lives. If you don't want to be taken as a socially irresponsible child don't attack a (relatively) innocent company rep for not using the exactly precise words you think they ought to use. Calling people out for not being "perfect" doesn't really help your case for wanting the Devs to be more concise.

You put a spin on the KS post (which is one of many ways to interpret it), but the argument that communication between the poster and the other portions of the MWM team is not in sync hasn't been refuted. That is the issue here. I asked the question a couple times over a couple days and nothing was said one way or the other. I'd like you to expound further on what makes you think I am "socially irresponsible". I outlined a sensible line of reasoning and pointed out a disjoint in the application of the communications strategy. This issue is not a big deal, but if the practice continues in the future with something substantial there will be a problem.

Lothic wrote:

I never attack the "person" behind the words directly or indirectly

Lothic wrote:

You're like a kid who sees someone trip over a small crack in the floor and then keeps harping on the poor guy's momentary embarrassment by asking if he's having a stroke or if he trips all the time.

Ok Lothic, so if you are comparing someone to a child and spinning some narrative, you are not attacking a person?

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

And I have no idea if that's even implementable. I'd assume we could add a "got_free_slot_at_cap" flag for every character in the database to keep track, but that might cause other problems.

Not sure what other problems you imagine that could happen but as it's simple binary flag (like many badges, exploration, rare kills and such) it would just check if it's set or not. If not set then set it and award any associated rewards, and if already set then do nothing and just move on.

Since you'll have to define somewhere what the level cap would be then just use that to determine when to check.

Minotaur wrote:

Amateur, I had >250 on my main account :)

Fireheart wrote:

Only one account, 180+ characters.

I never said it was impossible to have more than 100 alts in CoH. I just made the point that players with more than 100 alts -might- have needed some outside counseling like from AA... Altoholics Anonymous. ;)

Minotaur wrote:

Very early in the CoT design process (it may well have changed) I was told a maximum of 4096 chars were available per account.

I'm quite sure the software could handle allowing players to have up to 4096 characters per account. But in all reasonable practicality I think the "hardwired limit" for this should be set far lower than that.

At some point having "as many as you want" is just too much. I can arguably see having a few hundred alts if you're really into trying to have "one of every kind" imaginable. But eventually you'd have so many (>500?) that it might take like a week for you to even log into each of them for 5 minutes at a time. At that ridiculous point all the extra hundreds of alts beyond that would probably only be used as "inventory mules" to be able to carry around excess billions worth of loot. I'd say effectively having more than several hundred or so would just be an exploit waiting to happen.

Lothic wrote:

you've decided to pick one of the least significant issues imaginable to plant your flag on. It's nonproductive at the very least.

It's also not the first time this has happened.
Nor, sadly, does it look like this will be the last time it happens either.

Redlynne wrote:

Lothic wrote:

you've decided to pick one of the least significant issues imaginable to plant your flag on. It's nonproductive at the very least.

It's also not the first time this has happened.
Nor, sadly, does it look like this will be the last time it happens either.

At least some people fight lost causes for the inclusion or exclusion of tangible in-game features which may or may not add overall benefit to the playerbase in general.

This particular quibble is about whether the Devs are either 100% collectively certain that a given feature will not be offered for the game or if they're only 99.9% sure. Beyond that the "feature" in question would be completely optional regardless and not even actually affect in-game gameplay in the least. I doubt a better example of splitting hairs just for the sake of splitting hairs could be found.

I did not know that Some Yahoo, but I appreciate what you are trying to do cause this thread is a Wash.

Some Yahoo wrote:

Trivia time: Did anyone notice that in DCUO, they had Wonder Woman use the Firefly line "Curse your sudden, but inevitable betrayal!" on Circe in one of the level 60 missions?

No, but I noticed it in one of the level 30 missions. ^_^

Lin Chiao Feng wrote:

MeSoSollyWan wrote:
Even within this same thread we have different devs giving different informations.
Lin Chiao says at launch you just need to hit 30 for another slot.
Tan's post suggests that won't count though, and "cap" is only 50, meaning we can't use that method until after the devs bump it all the way to 50.
So.. Which is it? Do I believe Lin's "30 at launch" comment for a new character slot? Or do I believe the latter post from Tan suggesting that unlock method won't be available at launch?
For the time being, believe Tan, because this is closer to game mechanics than web development. But like with anything else, it could change, possibly without notice, though it will be locked down before launch.
And I'll personally advocate for a level 30 slot unlock at launch, because I think people will fill those six slots faster than we'll get level 50 out the door. But then again, that possibly cheats people who didn't "fill their stable" before the level cap is raised to 50. So we'd have to make it where you get the extra slot only once for a given character hitting the level cap. For example, if your character hit level 30 when that's the level cap, and you get a free slot, then after we raise the cap to 50 and you get that same character to 50, you don't get another free slot.
Old players would still have the ability to have a large number of 30s-40s without paying for more character slots, so maybe this is still unfair and have to be junked.
And I have no idea if that's even implementable. I'd assume we could add a "got_free_slot_at_cap" flag for every character in the database to keep track, but that might cause other problems.
Which is why everything has to be taken with a grain of salt. Sorry for the confusion.

Lin thank you so much for your response!

I definitely was not looking for an apology at all, just some clarity between the two dev posts. I understand we're still a year+ away from any of this, really, and that anything is subject to change.

So, thank you again.

A little detail from back when I was doing the research that developed into the decisions involved here - I was taking an online course on supply chain design, which heavily involved creating mathematical models for the flow of goods, services, and raw resources. While I didn't do as well as I would like on the course, the tools I learned how to use had a heavy influence on the reasoning behind why certain decisions were made.

rcarnevali wrote:

After reading about this, I like the approach you're taking. I especially like that you recognize the ways other MMOs try to milk players and desperately want to avoid that. When COH went free-to-play, I still maintained a subscription because I loved it so much. I'll keep my VIP status going on this one too.

I find it very amusing that you should phrase it that way, since my cousins grew up on a very active dairy farm. Now that I think about it, many of the things that I (and others) learned regarding animal welfare ended up being incorporated into how we've gone about doing things. We want to minimize the possibility that things will prove stressful or other negative experiences, and as such we tore the standard expectations apart to learn the full details of why they didn't work.

The model we're using is the result of research that we began doing well before we even had the Kickstarter, and I think it shows. Especially because some of the things that we're tracking are aspects of player satisfaction that most game companies don't seem bother giving any attention beyond the marketing department.

Terwyn wrote:

rcarnevali wrote:

After reading about this, I like the approach you're taking. I especially like that you recognize the ways other MMOs try to milk players and desperately want to avoid that. When COH went free-to-play, I still maintained a subscription because I loved it so much. I'll keep my VIP status going on this one too.

I find it very amusing that you should phrase it that way, since my cousins grew up on a very active dairy farm. Now that I think about it, many of the things that I (and others) learned regarding animal welfare ended up being incorporated into how we've gone about doing things. We want to minimize the possibility that things will prove stressful or other negative experiences, and as such we tore the standard expectations apart to learn the full details of why they didn't work.

I wonder what Temple Grandin would think if she knew her ideas were being implemented in the realm of online gaming?!