And the mask comes off.

[MM3squints]

I have *the* answer, and generally almost nobody likes it.  But the real problem with the AE from day one is the devs had the entirely wrong idea about what the AE was even supposed to be.  They saw it as a way to allow players to write their own content.  That's wrong for one simple reason: most players can't write content.  By focusing on making things easy for *authors* they made the experience terrible for *consumers*.  Really, most of the architectural complaints about the AE boil down to that one simple fact.

The focus of the AE should have been on *consumers* of the content, not the writers.  Which is to say, for every decision about the AE, the question should have been whether it improves the experience for players playing the content.  I once told the devs that a big mistake they made was believing 10,000 authors was a success.  50,000 authors is a failure, because there's no possible way 50,000 of our players were even literate, much less competent authors.  Success, for the AE, should not have been 50,000 authors and few players liking the content.  It should have been few authors and 50,000 players loving the content.

We should have been a lot harsher on authors.  We should not have been crying about how unfair it was to authors.  We were looking for a fair rating system for authors.  As an AE author, I say screw the authors.  What matters is that good AE missions survive and reach their audience, and everything else dies.  If you want to publish a nonsensical grammatically random gibberish storm for yourself and your close friends to play, I was all for that - but with the catch that it was likely *no one* would ever find it unless they were explicitly searching for it.  But if you actually wanted total strangers to play your work, it should have had to pass significant stress tests and reviews.

If you're primarily focused on the top 100, or 500, or even 1000 AE missions and arcs, questions like "what rewards should AE arcs have" and "how do we make a search system that works for players" start to become a lot simpler to answer.  When you're talking about the 300,000 streams of consciousness that were actually in the AE, farming arcs were not actually the biggest problem.  They were a symptom of the fact that people needed a reason to play AE content, and "for the rewards" isn't the only such reason people would, but it was the only reason they could easily satisfy.  "For the stories" was an extremely difficult proposition for people not expert in finding things that qualified as stories.

The idea of dev-approved arcs having standard rewards was a good idea in theory, but because of the fact the AE generated more arcs in a day than the entire dev team could play in a week, it was impossible to execute on.  And their hearts really were not in it, AND they were worried about being "fair" to authors, which once again is the cement shoes around the ankles of the AE.  Be fair to the poor players that are going to be exposed to the content.  For a business to be successful, it needs as many customers as possible, not as many employees as possible.

I actually had a lot of respect for Venture, bastard that he was about it, reviewing AE arcs with no concern for authors' feelings at all, and only looking at them from the perspective of the player that had to run them.  Because that's what really matters: does it generate content that players actually want to run and enjoy running.  Its ultimately the only thing that matters, and any AE author who disagrees in my opinion shouldn't be an author.  Even I had trouble being that blunt, and to be honest I think that was a mistake on my part.

So this is what I would do if I was rebooting the AE and had enough resources to yada-yada-yada.  First, anyone can make any arc they want, but that arc would have *no* rewards.  They could play through it, or guide friends through it, and there would be no limitations on what you could do in these.  You could even do things the devs originally banned for being exploitable, because exploits don't matter if there are no rewards.  Fight Hamidon if you want, or spawn all the Praetorians at once.  Test your build against pylons, or herd all of Creys Folly into a dumpster.  No rewards, so nothing is off-limits.  I'm sure there are players that would take advantage of that, rewards be damned.  I would even create arena-like switches for those missions that would allow players to turn on and off certain effects, like travel suppression or the aggro cap (yes this requires a lot of code).

If you actually want your arc to have rewards, you'd have to submit it for approval.  There would be two tiers.  Tier 1 arcs would only award AE tickets and would have to meet certain well documented parameters.  For example, some of those switches would be illegal in tier 1 arcs.  We'd also run an automatic spell checker, and if you can't even be bothered to spell check, you get rejected.  You'd have to show evidence you've put the requisite work into the arc to be deserving of any consideration at all.  If the arc met the limits of most AE arcs, you'd get tier 1 certified quickly and your arc would award tickets.  It would also be searchable as a tier 1 arc.

Tier 2 would be tricky.  Unlike tier 1, it would reward standard rewards.  And trickily, also unlike tier 1 it would have almost no limits.  You could do things in Tier 2 you couldn't in tier 1.  The catch is you'd have to submit the arc for special review.  I would create a set of community reviewers pulled from volunteers with experience making tier 1 and tier 2 arcs, and they would be tasked with reviewing potential tier 2 arcs for problems, exploits, and quality of content.  You'd need to have multiple approvals to be granted tier 2 certification, and you'd also be searchable as a tier 2 arc.

In all cases, people who tried to abuse the submission system in defiance of the guidelines would get warnings, then banned.  Arc creation and publication (for tier 1 and 2) would be a revocable privilege.

On top of all that, I would create a curation system.  Any player could create a curated AE list of their favorite or recommended missions, which players could see in-game.  Good reviewers would tend to get more followers, which would increase the reach of their recommendations.  "Softer" or less discriminating reviewers would tend to get less followers and less credibility.  This would encourage honest reviewing, but open the door to many different perspectives to operate that honesty in.  Someone that honestly likes a lot of combat but hates story could still be counted on to honestly review arcs with that perspective.  Someone that honestly likes story more than combat could be counted on to honestly view arcs with that perspective.  Different players with different perspectives but limited time to search around could gravitate to curators with similar sensibilities.

Not gonna happen, but that's what I think a consumer-focused AE system would look like.

Sounds like how getting your App approved by Apple (which provides quality control) then going through how Yelp dose their ratings. I always wondered also if an player generated story was so good, they (the devs) would ever consider putting it in the game outside of AE with their own contact NPC.

[Arcana]

I always wondered also if an player generated story was so good, they (the devs) would ever consider putting it in the game outside of AE with their own contact NPC.

In a manner of speaking, sort of.  First, a side note: one of the big objections about the AE when it was being discussed was that if it had no rewards no one would play it.  To me, that was always obviously false, for this reason: a significant percentage of players engaged in behavior with no rewards prior to the AE.  PvP didn't really have much in the way of rewards: certainly not enough to be considered a legitimate reason to PvP.  RP has no rewards.  Bashing pylons to climb the DPS ladder has trivial rewards.  Soloing AVs has pathetic rewards.  Base building: no rewards.  Costume contests: only if you win.  Players did all sorts of things in City of Heroes that had little to no reward.  AE rewards attracted a certain kind of player, but an AE will less or no rewards wouldn't attract no one.  Just a different kind of player.

I mention this because another objection to the AE was directed at the rating system.  It was thought that the ratings system would be a disaster because it would be a popularity contest.  Popular players would get all the plays and unpopular or unknown ones would have no chance to catch them.  There was some truth to this theory: I specifically tested it by publishing arcs under my primary account and a secondary account no one knew was connected to me.  Arcanaville arcs did get more plays than the other.  But the other did *get* plays, and did get attention.

But in another way, that theory was completely wrong**.  During AE beta there were a lot of "names" making and testing arcs.  I know that I got a lot of plays and attention simply because I was recognizable.  However, the player that got the most attention, the most plays, and the most praise for their arcs wasn't me, not by a long shot, and it wasn't any of those other well-known players.  It was feargas (technically feargas2).  Before AE beta, few players had ever heard of him, but his writing spoke for itself.  Even the devs were impressed: he had a knack of getting the most out of the limited tools we had to make arcs many, including some devs, felt were better than some of the actual content in the game.

My guess is that it would be complicated for the devs to simply lift an AE arc and put it into the standard content in the game.  But in a sense, we know they felt there existed AE content at least as good as what they were writing, because the player known as feargas became the developer known as Dr. Aeon, based in large part on the strength of his AE writing.


** It didn't like to hear it, but "forum wisdom" was an oxymoron

[ivanhedgehog]

That could be said about anything in the game. Is PvP worth it to turn back on because it will have a small community. Is base making worth turning back on too? I don't know the technical detail on how it works (if it is just "pulling some switches" or something more complicated), but the the system is already in place, if it doesn't need any or much maintenance to startup again, and not take away from activating the core game, I don't see why not having it in the game. Probably just me, but I know it would suck to be marginalized in the game because your play style is in the minority and for those who enjoyed AE, it feel wrong to discount them when the game comes back. Course this is just my opinion.

what i am trying to say is that the game will return with AE as it was, full xp etc. to make the change will take resources and leave a hole where there once was a popular content point. changing that would be equivalent to shutting off pvp IMO. not something good for a maintenance game attempting to regain players.

[MM3squints]

what i am trying to say is that the game will return with AE as it was, full xp etc. to make the change will take resources and leave a hole where there once was a popular content point. changing that would be equivalent to shutting off pvp IMO. not something good for a maintenance game attempting to regain players.

Oh I got what you were saying.

[Aggelakis]

what i am trying to say is that the game will return with AE as it was, full xp etc. to make the change will take resources and leave a hole where there once was a popular content point. changing that would be equivalent to shutting off pvp IMO. not something good for a maintenance game attempting to regain players.

No, removing rewards from AE would be equivalent to removing rewards from PVP.

[MM3squints]

No, removing rewards from AE would be equivalent to removing rewards from PVP.

I'm confused. From my take on the conversation, ivanhedgehog is saying to just keep the status quo of how AE was so you don't need to burn resources into making changes. Is that not the what was being discussed or was there something else?

[Arcana]

I'm confused. From my take on the conversation, ivanhedgehog is saying to just keep the status quo of how AE was so you don't need to burn resources into making changes. Is that not the what was being discussed or was there something else?

Agge appears to be pointing out that the correct analogy to removing rewards from the AE is removing rewards from PvP, not removing PvP.  That's true in the semantic sense.  However, if you believe the conventional rewards for PvP were not significant to participation, *and* you believe AE rewards were critical to participation, you could argue that a comparable analogy for removing AE rewards (and thus nullifying their participatory hook) is eliminating PvP, which is a distinction which pulls on an alternative thread of discussion from recent thread history.

[MWRuger]

In a manner of speaking, sort of.  First, a side note: one of the big objections about the AE when it was being discussed was that if it had no rewards no one would play it.  To me, that was always obviously false, for this reason: a significant percentage of players engaged in behavior with no rewards prior to the AE.  PvP didn't really have much in the way of rewards: certainly not enough to be considered a legitimate reason to PvP.  RP has no rewards.  Bashing pylons to climb the DPS ladder has trivial rewards.  Soloing AVs has pathetic rewards.  Base building: no rewards.  Costume contests: only if you win.  Players did all sorts of things in City of Heroes that had little to no reward.  AE rewards attracted a certain kind of player, but an AE will less or no rewards wouldn't attract no one.  Just a different kind of player.

I mention this because another objection to the AE was directed at the rating system.  It was thought that the ratings system would be a disaster because it would be a popularity contest.  Popular players would get all the plays and unpopular or unknown ones would have no chance to catch them.  There was some truth to this theory: I specifically tested it by publishing arcs under my primary account and a secondary account no one knew was connected to me.  Arcanaville arcs did get more plays than the other.  But the other did *get* plays, and did get attention.

But in another way, that theory was completely wrong**.  During AE beta there were a lot of "names" making and testing arcs.  I know that I got a lot of plays and attention simply because I was recognizable.  However, the player that got the most attention, the most plays, and the most praise for their arcs wasn't me, not by a long shot, and it wasn't any of those other well-known players.  It was feargas (technically feargas2).  Before AE beta, few players had ever heard of him, but his writing spoke for itself.  Even the devs were impressed: he had a knack of getting the most out of the limited tools we had to make arcs many, including some devs, felt were better than some of the actual content in the game.

My guess is that it would be complicated for the devs to simply lift an AE arc and put it into the standard content in the game.  But in a sense, we know they felt there existed AE content at least as good as what they were writing, because the player known as feargas became the developer known as Dr. Aeon, based in large part on the strength of his AE writing.


** It didn't like to hear it, but "forum wisdom" was an oxymoron

Great story. never heard that before!

[Drauger9]

I like your idea about AE Arcana.

I think a consumer based model for AE would be nice. I did farm AE.....a lot but I also did play some of the content because there was some amazing arcs out there.

[Remaugen]

One of the big problems with AE was getting people to see or try your content. I published only three or four missions, not farm mission, but missions that would have formed a story arc when completed. But in the end it was really wasted effort, the best mission (in my opinion) of the arc, only had two reviews and nobody outside my peer group ran it.

No I am not crying in my beer and claiming to be the great unsung author. (The truth is that I am probably the ONLY one who thought they were good.) But the saturation of farms, which is exactly what it seems that many players were looking for, prevented players who are trying to tell stories from getting proper exposure for their missions.

No, I don't know how to fix the problem, because in truth I used some of those leveling farms myself on occasion, but it would have been nice if there had been someone actually in charge or reviewing and rating AE content so that those worthy of exposure actually got out of the gate, rather than the few popular ones that got published early on.

When we get our game back, AE is certainly on the list of things that need fixed. Maybe, if we are lucky, Arcana will volunteer for that task, and she will take charge, kick ass, and give us what we need! (Hint hint hint)

[LaughingAlex]

One of the big problems with AE was getting people to see or try your content. I published only three or four missions, not farm mission, but missions that would have formed a story arc when completed. But in the end it was really wasted effort, the best mission (in my opinion) of the arc, only had two reviews and nobody outside my peer group ran it.

No I am not crying in my beer and claiming to be the great unsung author. (The truth is that I am probably the ONLY one who thought they were good.) But the saturation of farms, which is exactly what it seems that many players were looking for, prevented players who are trying to tell stories from getting proper exposure for their missions.

No, I don't know how to fix the problem, because in truth I used some of those leveling farms myself on occasion, but it would have been nice if there had been someone actually in charge or reviewing and rating AE content so that those worthy of exposure actually got out of the gate, rather than the few popular ones that got published early on.

When we get our game back, AE is certainly on the list of things that need fixed. Maybe, if we are lucky, Arcana will volunteer for that task, and she will take charge, kick ass, and give us what we need! (Hint hint hint)

I think I've said this before, but I'll say it again.  In many ways, Farm missions in the AE were alot like anime mods on the nexus network.  They were so excessively common that they overshadowed EVERYTHING else.

On the nexus network you had mods like trait/perk overhauls for new vegas(I use one currently), or gameplay overhauls for skyrim ect that just get completely overlooked due to the latest generic naked giant-boob anime girl mod.  Or the latest boob physics mod ect.  All the same it was hard to find good mission archs in architect entertainment because you had "Generic farm 1,7805".  Or "Generic farm 1,7806".  In many ways, I have more respect for the nexus mod community because at least they did have some variety even among the bad anime mods.  But in this case it was horrendous, I mean what difference was there between AE farm missions other than the damage type you faced and how you ended it?

Not to mention it still took skill to make an anime mod.  An AE farm took no skill to really make.

AE should be a tool for creativity I agree with everyone on that and fixing it so it was used as such should certainly be on a priority list when the game is finally back.

[duane]

I like your idea about AE Arcana.

I think a consumer based model for AE would be nice. I did farm AE.....a lot but I also did play some of the content because there was some amazing arcs out there.

I liked AE for the stories.  I did level one hero solo from 20 to 40 over a year and then my attention wandered away.  I am not sure if I ever cashed in the tickets.  I played a lot of junk, some good and few excellent missions.... Like rescue Becky the Tarantula from Arachnos.  Come to find out she wasn't a slinky Night Widow as indicated.  She was an 8 legged toxic tarantula that spoke like a valley girl from the 80s.

[Surelle]

When we get our game back, AE is certainly on the list of things that need fixed. Maybe, if we are lucky, Arcana will volunteer for that task, and she will take charge, kick ass, and give us what we need! (Hint hint hint)

Why don't you do it all yourself then (Hint hint hint).   

Er, nobody should be volunteering the shirt off anyone else's back or even passing comments to pressure anyone into doing anything, never mind anything as work-intensive as that.  And if the zombie rez of i23 ever does return (which, let's face it, is looking less and less likely) there will be NO tools or code involved in the rez.  This has already been stated by Nate Downes.  So there will be no changes to CoX i23. (This is why APR even exists, so CoX can be added to and patched as time marches on.)   This i23 CoX zombie rez deal is a server snapshot of the night the game went down, period; not even account information will be transferred.   And it's taking a whole team of financial backers to even pay for that.

[ivanhedgehog]

I think I've said this before, but I'll say it again.  In many ways, Farm missions in the AE were alot like anime mods on the nexus network.  They were so excessively common that they overshadowed EVERYTHING else.

On the nexus network you had mods like trait/perk overhauls for new vegas(I use one currently), or gameplay overhauls for skyrim ect that just get completely overlooked due to the latest generic naked giant-boob anime girl mod.  Or the latest boob physics mod ect.  All the same it was hard to find good mission archs in architect entertainment because you had "Generic farm 1,7805".  Or "Generic farm 1,7806".  In many ways, I have more respect for the nexus mod community because at least they did have some variety even among the bad anime mods.  But in this case it was horrendous, I mean what difference was there between AE farm missions other than the damage type you faced and how you ended it?

Not to mention it still took skill to make an anime mod.  An AE farm took no skill to really make.

AE should be a tool for creativity I agree with everyone on that and fixing it so it was used as such should certainly be on a priority list when the game is finally back.

the problem of promoting story arcs could have been solved by asking the devs for a forum space for people to post the names of their story arcs and a short teaser. sub topics could have discussed any number of ae story topics. those that were interested could get the names of what they wanted easily. I tried a few stories but many were just another badly written monologue on someones background story. people that thought they were much better authors than they really were. when they didnt get instant acclaim they blamed farming missions for not letting others see their greatness. removing rewards will not get people to love your epic story arc. It will ensure that the only people that see your epic story arc are those trying to promote their own.

[LaughingAlex]

the problem of promoting story arcs could have been solved by asking the devs for a forum space for people to post the names of their story arcs and a short teaser. sub topics could have discussed any number of ae story topics. those that were interested could get the names of what they wanted easily. I tried a few stories but many were just another badly written monologue on someones background story. people that thought they were much better authors than they really were. when they didnt get instant acclaim they blamed farming missions for not letting others see their greatness. removing rewards will not get people to love your epic story arc. It will ensure that the only people that see your epic story arc are those trying to promote their own.

I can certainly see bad stories being problematic to.  I saw characters in city of heroes who, i'll be honest, I thought they were straight mary sues.  Heck even one of my own characters had problems that I started ironing out over time(in fact, said character is far more murderous and complex in my latest re-writes of her).  I'd give names but, often newbie roleplayers are to wrapped up in making their character flawless, or they are to wrapped up in their character that if they make a story it's to biased towards there character.

I can very heavily agree with Arcana in regards to reviewing AE archs.

[Brighellac]

I miss CEBR and fire farms.

[srmalloy]

I don't think AE should have any link to the actual game at all. No XP, no inf, no kill credits, nothing. The only reward should be tickets, which you use to buy thinks things to use in AE, and AE-related badges (not bought with tickets - earned as they were already). That way the farmers go find something else to do, and their crap eventually disappears...and the stories remain, the things that the devs wanted to encourage in the first place.

I don't think it should be totally disconnected. I can see where running AE missions would get you XP, and perhaps inspirations -- it's a simulation, and we see a wide variety of skills for which people are using simulations to hone their skills. Recipes, enhancements, and salvage? No; if there were a way to drag an electronic simulation of, say, a magical artifact into the 'real world' the economy would have been ruined in short order. Influence? Again, no; influence -- and it's variants -- represented, at least according to the devs, your ability to get other people to do things for you, whether from respect for your actions, fear of what you might do to them, or through the intel you have that they want. No matter how many electronic Reichsmen you defeat, no matter how skilled with your powers that your practice has made you, nothing you do inside an AE mission has any bearing on the 'real world' -- if you show up in Paragon City, walk into the AE building, and don't come out until you're 50, you may be highly skilled, but neither the city, nor the movers and shakers in it, have any idea who you are. The tickets? It was convenient to be able to go to the AE and swap tickets for a known payoff, instead of grinding some unknown number of missions for a chance at getting it or paying what the inflated-cost-du-jour is from the AH. And you could argue that the tickets are a competitive payout, the way electronic gaming has been going. Badges and achievements? Part of the purpose of being recognized for defeating, say, Freakshow Tanks was being seen defeating them; crawling into your electronic navel doesn't tell the public anything about you, no matter how many electronic ghosts you send to the Zig.

[srmalloy]

The easiest way to tank recluse in this phase is to just taunt him and hover up high in front the tower. Not the buff tower but the big tower that his headquarters. He'll try to get the taunter but wont be able to as he keeps falling and teleporting. ( he automatically teleports if you try to kite him away from the buff towers) Then just hit him with another taunt when he runs back to you so he doesnt unaggro.

Im kinda surprised as I assumed most people knew this trick.

Early on, it was possible for you to get up on the ledge on the front of the building, which put you at just the right height for Recluse to jump up after you, blow the jump, fall down, and keep repeating, leaving you able to taunt him each time he jumped, but the devs got wise to it and tweaked the barrier to move the ledge just outside the mission map limits.

[Arcana]

people that thought they were much better authors than they really were. when they didnt get instant acclaim they blamed farming missions for not letting others see their greatness.

Well, they didn't only blame farming, and there were those that had realistic expectations, but in a sense trying to write for others is a tricky proposition.  You put yourself out there, and you make yourself vulnerable to the opinions of others.  Its not easy to see criticism as something other than a personal attack.  A lot of people can't do it.  As I said before, not everyone should be authors.

When Mercedes Lackey read my Immortal Game story, I asked for her opinion.  This was a project I had poured over a month of my time into, and over a week writing, and included a lot of my own ideas of CoH cosmology.  While she liked it, she thought there were significant technical flaws in certain areas, some in areas I had focused significant attention to.  And she was absolutely right.  She would have been doing me no favors pulling punches.  How many people get to have a professional writer give them even a few minutes of their time reading their work and suggesting ways to improve it.

Being able to take criticism, particularly from one's self, and use it to improve, is the hallmark of all good professional anythings, and extremely important for authors.  If you couldn't take someone taking your prized work and sticking post-it notes over all of its flaws as they saw it, you were probably not going to be a good AE author.

[Arcana]

Early on, it was possible for you to get up on the ledge on the front of the building, which put you at just the right height for Recluse to jump up after you, blow the jump, fall down, and keep repeating, leaving you able to taunt him each time he jumped, but the devs got wise to it and tweaked the barrier to move the ledge just outside the mission map limits.

Originally, there was a design flaw where if you pulled LR far enough away, the towers would stop buffing him.  That's mostly why LR teleports back to the towers if you pull him far enough away.  But there were reports of certain spots on the map that if you could pull LR to those spots and hold him there long enough, the tower buffs would eventually stop.  I didn't think that was possible until I saw it for myself.  It was very tricky to do, but I saw it done several times in slightly different places.  I don't think the devs ever fully fixed that, but very few players actually pulled this off consistently.  Part of the situation was that most of the players capable of doing it were also capable of taking down LR without it, so it was a rare thing to see.