El D

Number of issues with that premise for future content. First and most important is that the Homecoming devs have stated they are not bound by nor intend to continue the Lore AMA storyline ideas from Live. Second is that even if there was dev interest in those ideas, they'd also have to want to work on Incarnate stuff and - entirely understandably - they're focused on expanding the game in other ways instead. Thirdly, Praetorian Hamidon is effectively locked in Praetoria. He has no way to reach the Shadow Shard and even if it did, with the dearth of the Well's attention on Praetoria after Tyrant's defeat, it has no reason to back Prae. Hamidon if he tried to go up against Rularuu.

This is... actually a really interesting combination. Makes fitting use of the fake Mandarin twist from Iron Man 3 while also having the 'original actor' possibly become more comic accurate by learning magic. It's been long enough from the release of Iron Man 3 that the negative reception has faded, it ties into prior films of multiple phases in organic ways, and has solid plot reasons for an existing character to show up - and then they actually do! Also it's more Ben Kingsley, which is its own plus. Combined with the fact that the trailer didn't spoil really anything about how the show goes and feels like a pretty solid shift from the 'standard MCU style'... shoot, maybe they're onto something here.

That's already the case on many of the large social media sites. Any instance where there's possibility for high levels of traffic or profitable engagement, they become inundated with bots pushing AI content to users who cannot spot it (see Facebook and old people) and/or to users who can spot it but are either apathetic or actively share it because 'haha computer thing do stuff I like.' Given that Homecoming is a forum for a 20+ year old game, is at the fringe of an already niche interest, and that the MMO market is nowhere near what it was even ten years ago, it's thankfully not remotely popular enough to be worth that kind investment. That means aside from the occasional spammer, posters here are most likely actual people, so AI content cropping up here is due to real users who are actually interested in it. Given the prior replies in this thread, these seem to be the acceptable aspects regarding AI: - AI does things that its users lack the technical or artistic skill to do, otherwise they would do it themselves - AI is cheaper than commissioning someone who does possess the technical or artistic skills its users lack, so there's no longer a necessity to pay someone else - AI does things much faster, so even if its users had the technical or artistic skill or knew of another person who did, it's still quicker to just enter a prompt - AI is inevitable, so the internet might as well get used to its imperfect state now because eventually it's going to go from 'convincing but has tells' to 'indistinguishable' That last part I have to take a bit of an issue with, not on any technical or even moral ground but just on the nature of branding. Even if the media fidelity of generative AI improves to a direct one-to-one with real video, AI companies are going to go out of their way to say AI made it. Specifically their AI, which is better than the competition. Case in point, this thread. Rather than post in any of the existing AI content threads, there's now a brand new one with Grok directly in the title. What's the Grok thread about? Why, showing off the neat stuff Grok does and encouraging others here to use Grok. 'Look what Grok can make when fed with NCSoft's IP! You too can do this, just give your CoH screenshots to Grok! This thread hosted by Homecoming.' The forum already had areas for posting AI content, so why did Grok deserve its own name drop? I have doubts that OP works for xAI and even more that Homecoming or NCSoft have any partnerships with them, so it's probably not intentional on that front. It's far more likely that OP, as they said, likes the things that specific AI generator does and just wanted to share. That doesn't change the fact that the thread still has the name slapped all over it and is pretty much free advertising on Homecoming's dime (courtesy of content xAI is being given free access to, but doesn't own). Of course, that distinction only works when AI is being advertised, be it intentional or not. Plenty of folks have used AI secretly. Fake screenshots to troll a friend, fake texts to get back at someone, fake videos to generate likes, fake contest submissions to get prize money. That's the real tipping point. Not companies using it as a labeled, marketed product or active users encouraging others to their specific favorite, but people generating things at their own discretion without any requirement to declare AI was used at all. It makes me incredibly glad we can still tell the stuff posted here and on Discord are CoH screenshots that have been AI-ified, generator name drop or no. If it were advanced enough to make something that actually looks like legit in-game content? That's the ballgame for any amount of civility and trust here. What happens to the forums when we stop being able to tell the difference between content that doesn't exist and things that actually happened in-game or are really in development? What happens to community relations when anyone can show up with something that looks like a real interaction, but isn't? Does ToS apply to AI generated content at all, since it isn't actually happening in-game - no matter how much it increasingly looks like it did? Sure, Homecoming could still ban someone if they're dumb enough to post ToS breaking stuff on an official site, but what authority do the devs have if it's hosted elsewhere? 'Hey, that's an unauthorized use of our IP, please take it down' doesn't hold much water when hefty portion of Homecoming's own community already doesn't care about that and - more importantly - are the ones generating the fake AI content in the first place.

The Dr. Aeon cutscene from the Statesman/Ms. Liberty Task Force is pretty hilarious. Even better when you imagine Aeon has giant googly eyes instead of goggles. The Romulus 'I! Am! NICTUS!' bit from the final ITF mission is a classic, both for 'player character dancing in the background' reasons and because of the giant chatbox text (RIP). Much as I malign the writing choices of 'Who Will Die?' and despise Darrin Wade, Statesman's death cutscene at least treats the moment earnestly.

Ya know, besides the fact that every concept in those clips could have been done via demo-editing, what strikes me the most is that the AI animations are just... similar to CoH's existing ones. It couldn't manage to 'imagine' anything better than what the game already offers? Aside from the generic dancing, the rest all have FX or emote equivalents in the game as is, and at minimum the in-game versions would have been more consistent because there'd be no weird upscaling effects or textures. It's like suddenly switching to a pre-rendered cutscene but the cutscene is obviously unfinished. I'd have figured it'd generate stuff well beyond the game engine's limitations, the character doing something really cool they literally can't do even with demo-editing or dev tools, but apparently not. The guy flying and throwing energy blasts at the same time could at least be plausibly faked as in-game footage, but the energy blasts don't even line up with his hands.

Pretty much why, yeah. Design gospel from the impact of Smashing and Lethal being separate damage types over a uniform 'Physical Damage' and early copy-pasted power animations being locked to unchanging weapon FX due to the limits of the 2004 costume creator/engine. Heck, even Katana didn't even have unique animations at first - it used the same ones as Broadsword/Battle Axe/War Mace back in the day. Adding in secondary effects (-Def, Knockdown/Knockback, DoT, etc.) to differentiate the weapon sets mechanically and conceptually beyond 'the model looks different' was much more necessary at the time, but also locked concept design even deeper into the 'weapon model equates to mechanical function' thing. Power animations got much more unique and weapon customization allowed for easy model changes, but the mechanic stipulation remained. The rules of the game said a bladed weapon was not the same thing as a blunt weapon, so regardless of how relatively easy it might have became to let players swap out the models, since they did not do the same damage or cause the same effects they weren't the same thing and could not be interchanged. IMO keeping that bit of strict separation feels pretty arbitrary at this point, especially given how customizable the game got in every other respect, but I kind of get wanting to respect it. Working within the established guidelines but going in new directions is kind of HC's whole thing after all. So while I doubt the devs would let Dual Blades use non-blade weapon models, a Dual Mace echo set could absolutely be a thing. Use the same animations, swap Lethal for Smashing damage, exchange the DoT effects for Disorient, allow the War Mace models instead of Blades and it's pretty much there. Sure it's a bit copy-and-paste/find-and-replace and would need tweaking, but that's how CoX did powersets from the start. If we're going to keep to precedent, lean into it and give folks more options.

Talking about it as an avenue for future content doesn't mean the ATs, powersets, and gameplay loop was primarily designed for it. Every AT was made first and foremost around its function in PvE content and powersets structured for how they interact teamed together against NPCs. That's why they all have defined roles as archetypes; not as a style of combat against other players but for what they contribute to one another in a group. Unless we want to assert that Defenders were given 'your powers support teammates, function at the fullest on a team, solo at your own risk!' primary sets - with some powers that literally can't be used at all without a friendly teammate or NPC target - to somehow evenly face off against Scrappers and Blasters in PvP modes that the game didn't have. Heck, that's also why mezzes were re-structured so hard in PvP. Back in the day it was either 'you have enough inspirations to basically negate your opponent's control powers and murder them' or 'you're gonna get mezzed, possibly stunlocked, and then killed, so you might as well take your hands off the keyboard.' That drastic imbalance was a direct result of mezzes and the math behind them being intended to be used on NPCs, because there was no 'one player in this match up won't be having any fun' considerations against enemy mobs. The solution being inspirations of all things is its own tell, too. 'Purchase a ton of temporary, outside mini-buffs and do your own inspiration mini-game if you want to actually fight in the match up, because there's literally no other way to counter this' is not the result of 'we designed these ATs, sets, and gameplay functions with balanced PvP in-mind.'

The sheer amount of divergence between PvE and PvP mechanics means they can't ever really be equated again, at least not in any game-wide fashion. Between the alternate functions in IO sets and all the powerset modifications and additions, PvE numbers get way too bonkers to be any fun for PvP and PvP numbers are not nearly super enough for PvE. Depending on the ATs and sets involved, every PvP match with PvE mechanics would either an instant curbstomp or an unending stalemate only broken by select incarnate/temp powers or ridiculous inspiration usage. Conversely, PvP numbers are way too cranked down to be any fun against NPCs (as anyone who has gone into a PvP zone with a PvE build can attest), much less the keyboard snapping frustration of trying iTrials or Hard Mode with PvP mechanics. The idea that 'PvP would be more accepted/utilized if it was just a bit different/broader in scope' is odd to me, especially when considering what PvP already provides. The content in PvP zones is accessible to every player as is, obtainable temp powers are usually buffed to a point of being 'worth the risk' of having to use PvP mechanics/dealing with the potential danger of other players, the badges are plenty easy enough to sweep through (aside from the AVs in Recluse's Victory and even those aren't too bad), and most importantly the primary mechanics and balance of the majority of the game aren't being dictated by an alternate set of rules that are almost entirely less fun for 90% of its content. PvP has worthwhile incentives, allowances for the different mechanics, constraints on how far those different mechanics reach, and is engaged in purely at player discretion. With the consideration that PvP effectively has to be a separate subsystem for the majority of the game to continue functioning the way players expect it to - and for PvP itself to maintain any kind of enjoyable balance - that's really the best arrangement it can have. The only major addition I could see being worthwhile is base raids, but with the level of creative, mind-bending nonsense folks can create with a jailbroken base editor now I doubt even that would work in any reasonable fashion. At least not without some kind of 'this base doesn't meet raid specifications' auto-check system (if something like that is even possible in-engine). The unfortunate reality is that CoX wasn't made with PvP in-mind, both game design-wise and community-wise in the type of player the game attracted, and that's why it exists as it does. That's also why PvP can't really be 'fixed' - at least not mechanically in the ways these discussions hypothesize - without also potentially changing how baseline CoX plays at the same time and possibly alienating more players than any PvP numbers revamp brings to the table. Not to say that interest couldn't be enhanced at all, I just don't think it'll come from mechanics. IMO, the way to improve PvP interest is to lean into community engagement. The most fun I ever had with it were the big Arena contests folks would do back on Live. Last Man Standing, team fights, and just for funsies bouts. Sometimes my supergroups would do sparring matches, either to test out new builds or for roleplay moments. Which character won didn't actually matter - we rolled with whatever the outcome and made it a good training moment or story beat. CoX as a game is built around collaboration and storytelling, which is why the intense 'gank the opposing faction' leaderboards stuff never took off here, but more stuff that aligns with the heart of the community could absolutely work. For fun contests would go over a lot better than any 'cutting edge superbuild player killer' stuff.

I'll echo the sympathy for the players who lost the aspect of the game they enjoyed most and felt forced to moved on or move out - that totally sucks - but 'pre-Issue 13 PvP' only lasted for about two and a half years. Which means that for said PvPers, CoX hasn't been their game for the majority of its playable lifespan and chronologically hasn't been their game for most of 20 years. It's like those 'the game was better pre-ED' comments versus how long IOs have been around. That initial iteration of PvP has been dead for far longer than it ever lived, to the point that the current arrangement of has been the default setting for three times as long (which is basically what @srmalloy said regarding interest being nil, the community being minimal, and the zones only used for badges/buffs/battlestar galactica). Also, remembering the vocal cohort of PvPers who stuck around on the PvP and PWNZ forums after the exodus... they aren't emblematic of every PvPer, but the ones who decided to make their grievances everyone else's problem gave PvP a rep for a reason (and likely as not killed any lingering dev interest in PvP on Live). Which circles back around to OP's initial post, specifically requesting investment from both devs and other players then chiming in with the 'PVE players won't cry and complain about it' bit. That attitude was tiresome back on the Live and it's even more stale now. Enticing folks to support open world PvP probably shouldn't include an approach that makes them glad it's cordoned off.

New is relative for this topic as it's been brought up on and off for years now. Even more if you count the forums back on Live. @TheMoneyMaker already hit on a hefty chunk of the issue with making this work, but the other half is the game engine itself. CoX doesn't do stretching models or rubbery/rope physics. That's why the whip abilities in Demon Summoning are fire FX and only move via a preset animation. On the other elastic hand, webbing already has a solid amount of powers and FX made (mostly courtesy of Arachnos). A web-based set (Control, Blast, or Epic/Ancillary) seems like it'd be the much easier option, though I wouldn't hold my breath for any web swinging travel powers. The closest we might get to those are faked variants of preexisting powers, like an alternate Teleport animation that has the character launch a grapple shot.

The cost alone is ludicrous but it gets even better with the 'What is included' section. The $60 download fee and a full price monthly subscription provides 10 character slots. Not 10 per server, 10 per account. Minimum $75 for the same amount of slots as a single page on a single server on Homecoming.

What about making Ignore itself modular, akin to how SG permissions work? When ignoring another player you select how ignored you want them to be across chat, tells, e-mails, invites (or all of the above). Expands on existing ignore functionality without compromising it, directly addresses situations like this one where players want to keep chat available, and retains bind/macro usability.

Not only is it antagonistic toward the community they ought to be enticing, it's showcasing a pretty big lack of faith in the product they've spent so long working on. If they know their game is solid and will put various doubts folks are expressing to bed, they wouldn't need to moderate so hard much less go scorched Earth. Invite the doubters to play and have the game prove them wrong. Not that every remark I've seen is entirely fair (they've definitely had to wrangle some trolling) but there's been a lot of reasonable concerns from folks whom they've outright banned already. 'Hey, I was wrong about their game - it's good!' is much better rep than 'They banned me for voicing basic concerns/legit criticisms.'

It's certainly possible that those threads were all going to weave together for whatever the Battalion was going to be for the next phase of CoH incarnate endgame, especially with so many Live dev AMA comments about using prior contacts and content as 'secret Battalion agents.' Though as with anything writing-wise back then it was all nebulous until the issue actually went live, and certainly isn't any kind of requirement now. IMO I'm glad that avenue never got enshrined as canon. It'd be far too convenient if every space plot tied into the Battalion. The Shivans as undead jello attack dogs, sure, but leaving the Nictus as their own thing makes them so much more compelling. Reading the Lore AMAs about the loose plans for the Battalion and the Dimensionless and Ascension and the never-ending string of yet more powerful cosmic-religious bad guys just makes me think of Destiny 2, and not in a good way (insert 'but how would it ever be for Destiny 2?' joke here). The best of CoH's arcs and content is the stuff that isn't colossal in scope and trying to make every player character the singular super-ultra-mega hero of the omniverse.

He is, played by Jason Momoa. More of a cameo apparently rather than a major role in the film, so no telling if he'll remain in it until the movie's actually showing. Considering the tone of the Guardians films, Lobo does seem like the kind of character James Gunn would do his best to keep around, though. Apparently one of the original pitches for the Supergirl movie even had him in as a full-on secondary protagonist in a team up between Lobo and Supergirl framed as 'True Grit In Space.'