Back to Article Navigation

Written by Nexus

With the Closed beta soon to start and the forum community swelling with new members its been a bit hard to find the progressive ideas that attempt to redefine and revolutionize game theory and immersion for Champions Online.  But being the very determined people that we are we found some.

First up is Jeer’s in game Newspaper idea:

Foreword

===========

Developers within Cryptic have repeatedly said that they wish to give players a feeling of accomplishment within a somewhat static world. They have stated that, while you cannot kill a boss or group of individuals for fear of losing the time and effort they invested, they hoped that the experience itself would be rewarding to the player. What I propose is an in-game newspaper system that will allow players and members of the community to have a real impact on the game, with their game triumphs being outlined in articles for their entire server to read. While they might not be able to finish that boss for good, they can tell about their experience and influence the world though this medium gaining a sense of accomplishment from the players themselves rather than the game.  There are key elements that would make this idea a success; fan-driven content, developer support, implementation and distribution. There are also many who would oppose putting in such a system whose points will be outlined and countered at the end of this article.

Players and the Paper

The first key concept of the newspaper system is that it would be fan-driven. These groups of people, separated by their respective servers, would create server specific content that relates more closely to their audience. These articles can range from PvP massacres to PvE boss events. This medium also opens up more direct source for community interaction, allowing event coordinators to advertise to a larger group of people and consequently get more participation. This act of advertisement is usually done through the forums, but there is a constant struggle to keep certain threads on the first page so that they are viewed often. These threads often fail, falling off out of sight for potential members. Newspapers would be constant from their release on, allowing for a static article that requires no “bumping” or constant care by the group’s creator.

Servers would naturally have to elect some form of “editor” or group of editors who would screen the articles being submitted the paper for bias news.  The more articles submitted, the more support from these editors would be required to insure the validity and non-bias nature of those submitted. Articles should not be screened for anything but these two conditions, both censorship and flaming would be unfair.  Papers would need to be released at regular intervals, with time in-between for news to happen and editing to occur. Two weeks is one limit that has been proposed that the paper could have to allow for editing and articles to be organized.

Developers and the Paper

Second are of course the developers and their role in the newspapers. Developers would have two distinct options when it comes to their own content within newspapers; no articles of their own allowing for full fan-driven content or general update news and other profiles for their own creations. The first option is one that would allow developers to create the newspaper and leave supporting it to the players. By doing this, developers take on no load beyond the initial creation of the paper and, while they admittedly miss an opportunity to include the fans who do not have time nor the inclination to read the forums.  The second option is one of general news for game changes, updates, or profiles that they want to create. This second opportunity would not have to contain the server-specific articles that would be player driven; giving developers a direct voice to the community that would prefer not to read the forums or dig for pertinent information. Developers have already begun creating profiles for their respective NPCs, showing that they are not only willing to spend time creating back stories for character, but to devote time to make the world more rich.

One other key feature that has garnered fan attention is the inclusion of PvP rankings. These PvP boards could be easily included in the developers weekly articles, included on the front page of the “PvP Section.” This would let players have a concrete source for rankings that could not be disputed for the period the paper is released. Many large guilds, such as The Lords of the Dead had repeatedly stated during their stay at City of Heroes/Villains that the lack of support for PvP was a driving force in their leaving. This system would allow such large guilds to vie for power, keeping competition alive being driven by the developers themselves through the use of these rankings.

Implementation and Distribution

Another key concept of the paper is the implementation method that the developers choose. The idea itself is to have an in-game paper. This would allow players to read it without having to navigate away from the Champions Online experience. By implementing a simple HTML interface, developers can create a fully functional newspaper with different sections and menus available. Pictures would also become easily implemented, with a chance for videos or podcasts to be included. This simple interface would have only a top banner, spanning the top containing the name of the paper “The Millennium Rag” or equivalent. On the side, traditional links to sections of the newspaper with the middle being filled with a “headline” story. This implementation method would contain very few problems as HTML is generally a stable source for code and allows a wide range of options for text.

Distribution is the final concept that must be addressed. People have argued that the paper should be somehow tied to a “/emotion” command that was common in City of Heroes, namely “/newspaper.” While this distribution method has merit in that you would read the paper on the command, you have no way to view past papers. I propose that developers implement a small, manageable newsstand within one of the “safe zones.” This newsstand would dispense the bi-weekly paper, adding the item to the player’s inventory allowing for easy viewing. Should the developers then decide to tie the most recent paper to the “/newspaper” command, the player would not loose past papers that he or she may have contributed to or been included in.

Opposition

Opponents of the newspaper idea have argued several factors, some of which have already been contested in this article. Specifically the implementation method, developer time, bias news, and lack of news have been contested. I will counter these in order of appearance. The implementation method, as outlined above, would be in an HTML format. HTML allows for a stable implementation source with a wide range of features. The implementation method remains in the hands of the developers but HTML would be beneficial for both writers and readers. Developer time was stated both for the time it would take them to implement the paper itself, and the time there after they would have to commit to write for that paper.

Time for implementation does not have to be strenuous in the format that was outlined; however developer time should be committed to things that will bring the players and community a better experience. This idea will allow a higher level of immersion and generally keep communities of even small servers occupied and having fun. Bias news was another key issue that has been raised by opponents of the newspaper idea. These opponents claim that news would be naturally bias being that the players who write the articles would be players themselves. Using editors that devote their time to screening articles of bias nature, we avoid this problem completely. Also, using the bi-weekly method above, we give more time to the screening of articles to ensure the quality. Lack of news is not something that can be avoided.

There will naturally be times when news is short whether that stems from lack of player involvement or update short-comings. Should developers opt to write simple articles outlining updates and other NPC profiles, we avoid this problem. Beyond relying on the developers, if a server has a lack of news, they have the option of reporting of occurrences in PvP, a constant source of news.

The next is Watchfire’s Own DrGrabit

I would like to see established supergroups (been around for at least 3 months) receive a reward for both their continued loyalty to Champions Online and in recognition that they didn’t blow out like a candle before then.

The reward is called Danger Room!

This would be an item/privileged that is gained automatically after the established period of time for the group’s base.

The reward would be 3 part, 1st: The nemesis’ of the individual players in the group could be toggled by the individual players to participate in a “super nemesis group”. After all, every Justice League has to have their Legion of Doom, no? Once toggled, specific missions for the group start to appear featuring those bad guys. The missions would be given by the Supergroup’s base computer (doesn’t have to be that, but I haven’t been on the Beta, so I don’t know how missions are generated). The amount of bad guys who show up is equal to the size of the team. This DOES mean that the bad guys would be run by the AI of the game, so to make up for that the bad guys would also have additional agent-type cronies to help them out.

The 2nd part would allow the group leader (or whomever he or she gave permission to) to design a world threatening monster or an arch-villain and its agents. The power level of the beast/villain would scale up to the highest level (or power equivalent) of the most experienced hero in the team. The look of the guy would use the Champions Online character creator and power sets, with perhaps a few special powers or advantages only available to arch villains/monsters. Like with the nemesis group above, the missions would only be available in base for the team. The scenarios for the arch villain/monster would REQUIRE a full team to fight it.

The third part is an arena style play field where the heroes can select various enemy combinations based on who they have faced in the past scaled above/at/below their power level to practice against. Teams or soloing would be OK, and the maximum amount of bad guys can be set or they can be set to keep respawning for a designated amount of time.

When I originally posted the idea, most agreed it sounded good, but two dissenting opinions I remember was about power scaling the bad guys to the hero’s in the group so everyone could play and the other had to do with the definition of supergroup versus team. Here are my answers:

For either option to work properly, both the heroes and villains would need to scale up/down to a common level, chosen at mission creation (much like setting options for task forces in City of Heroes–again, not sure if this will work, its just my only basis of comparison right now).

Also, the supergroup leader(s) should be allowed to set thresholds over how long someone should be with the group in order to access this privilege (a drag down menu with weeks/months setting should be sufficient). This seems arbitrary, but it could be simply made into a level requirement as well.

Finally, there should be no lasting improvement/detriment for beating or failing the missions. That there are missions featuring these things is the reward, it is not intended as a farming opportunity. And it also means the missions can be played as often as they like. That is why its a danger room after all, and that way there is no conflict with set story lines in the game.

Anyways that is my proposal,

Thanks for reading!

DrGrabbit, aka Negaman of WATCHFIRE!

That’s it for this spotlight.  As always this is Crypticgamers.org and these are your games, your opinons.

Back to Article Navigation