if there could be several levels for killing the basic civies, that would be great. as a general measure of how bad we are, we might need to get to a certain civie killing badge in order to net certain contacts.
go. hunt. kill helpless.
—
What a man thinks of himself, that is what determines, or rather indicates, his fate. - Henry David Thoreau
Go Hunt Kill Skuls. ;)
[img]http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb291/CountessRavenstein/City%20of%20Heroes/states.jpg[/img]
sees a old man fishing on a tall bridge edge.
*BUMP*
What a man thinks of himself, that is what determines, or rather indicates, his fate. - Henry David Thoreau
..... That movie needs to be made.... that needs to be a thing and it needs to be a thing now......
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
Letting players hurt/kill civies that would raise the game's rating above T in the USA which is why we couldn't in COV iirc
Issue 0 CoH player barely let my subscription lapse before NC Soft called it quits; my incarnate gear *Sniff*
Global: Chance Jackson; Triumph: Liege Cheetatron X, Fight of Your Life, Down Right Fierce, Infernal Samurai, Time May Change Me etc
Yeah, the rating would go up. Killing civilians would be so cool though. I would just make such a badass villain that slaughters everyone. I would especially love this if the civilians were annoying in some way like the children are in Skyrim. I'm not ashamed to say it but the first mod I downloaded for Skyrim was the mod that allowed you to kill those little shits. They tried to bully me around but I got the last laugh.
I think as long as the game doesn't let you just overtly walk down the sidewalk shooting/slicing random civies left and right I think there could be all sorts of "indirect" ways of killing innocent bystanders. The trick is to do it without directly showing the bodies.
For instance there could be a set of badges for "general mayhem". That mayhem could include setting fires to buildings or blowing up buses/trains. The net effect is that you'd probably be "killing" a bunch of civies without actually seeing them directly.
To put it in movie terms consider the destruction caused by Superman and General Zod in the recent Man of Steel movie - based on how many buildings got smashed up they probably collectively killed something like 20,000 people during their final fight but the movie "got away" with that by not really showing a bunch of bodies everywhere.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Real villains ruin civilian's lives, rather than murdering them. Blowing up buses is for Terrorists.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Indeed. In my opinion, villainy should have [i]style[/i] and not focus on depravity. As I have said before, the expected PC villain should be of the kind that, even if we do not want them to win, we want to survive for the next plot, not the kind of villain who is so disgusting that we want to die for good in a messy way.
And really, how is killing helpless civilians an accomplishment? If you go after victims who cannot fight back, for no reason but sadism, you are nothing more than a petty, cowardly bully; it is like beating up a straw puppet and proclaiming yourself champion.
[url=http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/] Save the endangered Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus from Extinction![/url]
In a nutshell you guys are subjectively deciding what the definition of "villain" should be for another player. There's something fundamentally wrong with that no matter how well intentioned you might be.
Even if I might agree that "randomly killing innocent civies" is not the kind of "sophisticated villainy" I might usually choose when I'm making a villain for a game like this I think we need to at least acknowledge that amongst the overall spectrum of villainy that "random brutal homicide" is a legitimate subset of it. If we (Devs and players) want to effectively prevent it from being possible then we have to tacitly accept the usually unacceptable notion that we as a collective gaming community have chosen to censor an optional character concept, even if it's generally accepted that doing so is uniquely reasonable in this case.
Something to think about - unintended slippery slopes (of excessively unjustified censorship) can come from things like this.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
'Random brutal homicide' sounds like a repeatable mission, maybe Newspaper. I suppose there might be the equivalent of a 'super-powered drive-by shooting'... And, I guess, 'terrorist' is a legitimate form of villainy.
I guess I just hate encouraging pointless violence. Or rewarding it.
Be Well!
Fireheart
Well again I don't usually create "random pointless violence" type villains when I do create villain characters. But I guess my main point here is that even if it's not desirable we really have to be careful about censoring an entire class of villainy like this. Think of what it would be like if we collectively decided that "heroes using utility belts" were socially unacceptable - would we suddenly prevent everyone from making "gadgeteer" type heroes?
I'd agree that allowing for "random brutal homicide" might be hard to implement in this game directly, but I think some of that could be handled in relatively "non-graphic" or isolated ways that would be better than outright pretending it can't/doesn't exist as a possibility.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]