Redside... Best side? Right??

[Sunsette]

8 hours ago, Vic Raiden said:

The lack of agency, in my understanding, doesn't refer to being railroaded into evil or roguish acts the player may not be comfortable with so much as to the very fact player villains simply don't get to do much on their own without being explicitly told to, with the exception of newspaper missions, morality tips and a small number of arcs.

 

I think these two things are technically different but nearly synonymous in a large majority of cases.

 

A LOT of people on this forum and in-game have referenced Joker's refusal to work with Red Skull given recent content controversy, and while I do not find the actual cited comic to be a piece of good writing, the fact is that people have wavy and individualized comfort lines about what types of evil they'd never do IRL but can fantasize about vs. those they can't find exciting in any form.

 

I don't have strong opinions about how this divide breaks out overall, I think you, Chris, and some other people have brought up fantastic points that are getting to the heart of an issue that is easy to sum up in a line but also bears close and nuanced examination well.

[Chris24601]

I think one of the elements muddying the waters a bit as well is that it’s one thing to discuss issues, it’s another entirely to come to a consensus on a direction to take to solve them, and a third thing to account for the resources available to accomplish a significant change in direction.

 

My focus on labels (whether they be Rogue/Villain or Power/Money/Sadism) is largely because it’s low-hanging fruit. It requires no new tech and minimal rewriting of existing content (mostly just adding the correct label).

 

Re-sorting the contacts so competing types aren’t locked behind other types is more effort, but still fairly low-hanging compared to other things; changing which contact they introduce if in conflict (most of them don’t already; this would be more of a fidelity pass).

 

Beyond that though you start getting into actually rewriting mission content, and beyond that into writing new missions.

* * * *

 

In terms of the latter I think the best use of time for both the agency and morality concerns would be to expand the number of Rogue/Villain Tip missions. Presently there’s 10 Rogue and 10 Villain tip missions per 10 level band (along with one each alignment confirmation mission for 20-29 and 30-39 and two each for 40-50). They’re also locked by level so once you’re 40+ you’re just seeing the same dozen tips repeatedly.

 

Even just 1-2 new tip missions and one extra confirmation mission per level band would do wonders to freshen up that content. That’s basically 18 missions; about the same as the number added for the new Striga content.*

 

It’s also content where you’re choosing to investigate and whether to go rogue or villain (so choosing how to take advantage of the tip)… which fits the agency concerns and keeps those who just want to be rogues from accidentally choosing a villain option.

 

A related assist in that regard would be to do something similar to the Mayhem Missions at 50… unlock the 20-29 and 30-39 tip missions (to the extent enemy level scaling would allow it) and add them to the rotation of tips you can find.

 

A final tip mission improvement I would suggest is to make a contact (call them Tip Brokers) out of the base item that allows you to grant yourself any tip mission you qualify for at a cost of 1 merit each and place one in every zone. I’m not sure how many people are aware of the base item, but adding the equivalent out in the open world would be a way to provide even more agency to the characters.

 

If you wanted to make Redside appealing you could even limit them to the Redside zones/alignments to distinguish between reactive heroes and proactive villains/rogues.

 

* * * *
 

Unrelated to that, but in the broader wheelhouse of cleaning up content. I feel like the Mayhem Missions should be their own reward separate from contact access.
 

Make all the general contacts into ones you can just use the contact finder for so characters are free to associate with other lowlifes. Then add a merit reward to the Mayhem Missions (you are doing 3-5 missions to unlock it); perhaps instead of one lump sum, you give a modest amount for the robbery (say 5 merits) and then each completion of a side quest on the map grants a few more (such that completing all four side quests and the robbery might net you 10-12 merits).

 

Then put a little more weight on the mini-heists (i.e. the bank missions before there were MMs) so they come up in the rotation more than once in a blue moon and maybe see about adding a few other mission types to the rotation (ex. kill alls, destroy object, and rescue/collect multiple (the kind where you don’t have to escort them out).

 

* * * *
 

The feeling I’ve teased out from this thread is that Redside would be best served by adding to the randomized/semi-randomized content options like Tips and Newspapers more than they would from trying to make dedicated story arcs.

 

The need for story arcs largely hinges on the merit economy, but between alignment confirmation rewards and adding merits to Mayhem Missions you could provide access to the merits needed while allowing Redside characters to largely chart their own course in terms of mission selection; freeing them to only run the specific story arcs that make sense for them instead of needing to run some they’d dislike just to keep up with the Blueside merit rewards.

 

* * * *
 

As a final suggestion for both tips and newspapers; expand their access down to even the starter levels.

 

Put a broker on Mercy Island who unlocks at level 5 to get players used to the system before they even leave the first zone. Just use the same missions from Port Oakes and 5-10 is already the level range for the Atlas Park MM (I can’t tell you how easy that one is to miss if you’re running the current starter missions and contacts in Mercy).

 

Similarly, a set of 5-19 Tips would let Redside characters start to have agency over the type of crimes they’re committing (as fast as you level the usual 10+1 number would be sufficient for the whole band).

 

* * * *
 

That would be my “least amount of work for most value of result” proposal for what to do to improve and draw interest in Redside; expand on the two areas where the players already have the most agency (and with that agency comes the ability to avoid missions you’d find distasteful).

 

One advantage to that approach as well is that, because they’re all individual missions, you don’t need to worry about connective tissue or how the missions connect to a bigger narrative.

 

I have to think that, at least from the storyboard side, designing 18 “random” missions would be less effort than needing to figure out how to tell a story across 18 interconnected missions.

 

* * * *
 

Realistically, this is something I would expect to be added in stages across several pages. But it’s also divided into some bite-sized pieces already (labels, tip revamp A, newspaper revamp, MM revamp, low-level access) instead of demanding an entire elephant be choked down all at once.

 

So that’s my pitch.

 

* * * *
 

* though if it were me; I’d not divide that as evenly as that would suggest. Instead, I would leave the 20-29 tip set alone since you outlevel that so quickly, add one alignment confirmation mission to the 30-39 range (just the one confirmation mission can get very monotonous once you hit the mid-30 slump, but there’s still a lot of content in that level band to occupy you).

 

I’d put all six of the new tips (12 missions) and two new alignment confirmation missions (4 total) into the 40+ range band. It’s still 18 missions worth of design (2 at 30-39, 16 at 40+, but weighted for where you’re hoping to have PCs spend the bulk of their time and increasing the tips by 60% and doubling the alignment confirmation mission options.

[ThatGuyCDude]

I agree not to underestimate the power of low-hanging fruit.  A few labels and the injection of some inner monologue paragraphs in the middle of a contact diatribe can go a LONG way towards changing the feel of a game.

For instance, the first Dr. Graves briefing (taken from the wiki, extra text added to the orange section)...

Dr. Graves [Power]

"You would believe me to be a ghoul? And I assume your self-image is that of a misunderstood protagonist, is it? Or maybe the snarling monster with a secret heart of gold? Or perhaps someone cursed to a life they didn't want?

Bah. I am not here to trade barbs with someone of your like. However, what I am going to do is offer you, $Character, a formal invitation to a very exclusive, albeit unsanctioned... competition.

Before you dismiss this opportunity, know this - the victor of the trial shall be granted the privilege of being apprenticed, if you will, to a person with very important connections."

You take a moment to ponder the proposal.  This is a chance to meet the other aspirants in the Isles, but is it worth attracting the ire of Arachnos?  What about this Graves... do you trust he's on the level with this proposal?  Power is power, and this could be a good opportunity to make your mark, but do you really want to dance for this walking corpse for the honor of winning an apprenticeship?  You've got big plans, and being somebody's lackey isn't at the top of the list.  Still, you have to climb the ladder somehow, right?  It's not like you're getting locked in the Zig: you could always back out or sell Graves out to Arachnos if things don't play the way you want.
Noting that your attention has drifted and irritated that you seem to be ignoring him, Dr. Graves looks around at nearby Arachnos guards in a rather dramatic fashion before fixing his soulless eyes upon you and reemphasizing his point.

"Very, very important... connections."

I'm listening, Graves. What do I need to do to make this happen?

I'm glad to see that your ambition overshadows your attitude, $Character. You'll need both if you expect to surpass the others in the eyes of the one who is truly watching. With that said, let us tarry no longer with this conversation. Actions speak louder than words, and if you try hard enough, sometimes louder than screams. I will give you the location you are to 'register' at. Use the registration console within the gathering place to prove your intent and I shall then speak to you further.

 

Changing the label indicates the contact's missions are about accumulating power, not wealth or status with Arachnos (so players running this mission know which narrative goal it actually targets).  The added 2nd-person-perspective monologue demonstrates that your Villain is actually considering the value of the offer and whether it's worth their time.  Injecting paragraphs like this is on the same level of involvement as fixing a typo, doesn't require changing any mission variables or outcomes, and gives the player more foundation to fill in the gaps when the only response option is 'sure' or 'I'll break your legs when this is over'.  This kind of fortune-teller deniability of motive could make Villains more appealing to Vigilante and Rogue-style players who want to believe they're working towards benevolent (or at least less malevolent) goals, with no mechanical adjustments necessary.

Edited February 28 by ThatGuyCDude
Removed redundant phrasing

[Chris24601]

My biggest issue with Graves, and why I feel it needs more than just a power/wealth/status label is the Lackey mission (and anything involving Crosscut really).

 

I just saved this guy, he promised loyalty to you, and the mission makes you turn him over to a serial killer to be tortured and killed and presents it as you betraying someone who was loyal of your own free will.

That is SICK and makes you a soulless psychopath. But you’re well locked into a storyarc by then so frack whatever sort of concept you had about your character; you’re the sort of asshole who will turn an ally over to be tortured and killed just for your own gain.

 

In a game where the core experience is teaming up with fellow villains for mutual gain.

 

Frak that!

 

That’s exactly why you need a Rogue/Villain tag in addition to any sort of “what is being gained” tag.

 

That mission alone led to me completely rerolling a character from scratch and never touching that arc again.

[ThatGuyCDude]

Crosscut is an example of where the dialogue needs to have more response options.  They can all lead to the same mechanical outcome/mission conclusion, but being able to click a response that resonates with the character makes a measurable difference.

"I just want my toy back, $Character. He's my favoritest toy ever, and I don't want to start a new game until I'm finished playing with him."

Crosscut giggles at you, his entire body shivering with delight.

"I promise, it won't take long..."
You've seen him make this look before.  If you don't give him what he wants, he's going to turn his 'interest' back on you.  Certainly this lackey of yours is disposable, yes?  You're going to have to make decisions like this all the time as your power and infamy grows... maybe it's just part of the job.  Who knows, the thug is resourceful... he might be able to get away, yeah?  Or... perhaps you and Crosscut are kindred spirits, and your imagination runs wild thinking just what he might do with this 'toy'?

<1> Oh, that's all? Sure, go ahead. Knock yourself out.
<2> No, Crosscut, the toy goes back into the box.

<1> Crosscut immediately snaps his gaze to the Skull accompanying you.  "Oh, thank you, $Character. I won't be long..."
<2> "What a pity.  I guess I'll have to find something else to play with." Crosscut giggles again, matching his gaze to your 'pretty little eyes'.

Right. I'll see you around.

 

Other contacts handle dialogue trees in this same manner, such as Vincent Ross in Sharkhead Isle: you're given the option to offer to help with his tampered mind or simply shake hands and walk away.  While there is no mechanical difference between his two dialogue trees, the impression left on the player is vastly different..  It would be a lot of leg work to find and address these motive dilemmas, but the community could help finding sharp corners like this and sanding them down a bit.  A lot of them are in the lower-level content of City of Villains, too, so adjusting low-level mission dialogues (Mercy to Cap au Diable) could be enough.

[Clave Dark 5]

@ThatGuyCDude, if you don't already write MA arcs, it's time you started.  😃 

[Vic Raiden]

Reviving this thread like the evil necromancer sorcerer I wish I was...

 

I've taken a moment to look at the wiki pages for Sgt. Schorr's arc and the two Homecoming-brand Rogue arcs, and I'm positively amazed by the sheer volume of interactivity, from multiple-choice dialogue trees to even a multiple-choice souvenir in that Nerva guy's arc. Reworking every other arc in the game to be more like that would definitely be a task far too arduous for our volunteer team, but nonetheless I'd love to see more of this kind of content in the future. Villains could especially benefit from it due to how varied they can be in their motives and methods.

[Lockely]

On 2/28/2024 at 8:52 PM, ThatGuyCDude said:

Crosscut is an example of where the dialogue needs to have more response options.  They can all lead to the same mechanical outcome/mission conclusion, but being able to click a response that resonates with the character makes a measurable difference.

"I just want my toy back, $Character. He's my favoritest toy ever, and I don't want to start a new game until I'm finished playing with him."

Crosscut giggles at you, his entire body shivering with delight.

"I promise, it won't take long..."
You've seen him make this look before.  If you don't give him what he wants, he's going to turn his 'interest' back on you.  Certainly this lackey of yours is disposable, yes?  You're going to have to make decisions like this all the time as your power and infamy grows... maybe it's just part of the job.  Who knows, the thug is resourceful... he might be able to get away, yeah?  Or... perhaps you and Crosscut are kindred spirits, and your imagination runs wild thinking just what he might do with this 'toy'?

<1> Oh, that's all? Sure, go ahead. Knock yourself out.
<2> No, Crosscut, the toy goes back into the box.

<1> Crosscut immediately snaps his gaze to the Skull accompanying you.  "Oh, thank you, $Character. I won't be long..."
<2> "What a pity.  I guess I'll have to find something else to play with." Crosscut giggles again, matching his gaze to your 'pretty little eyes'.

Right. I'll see you around.

 

Other contacts handle dialogue trees in this same manner, such as Vincent Ross in Sharkhead Isle: you're given the option to offer to help with his tampered mind or simply shake hands and walk away.  While there is no mechanical difference between his two dialogue trees, the impression left on the player is vastly different..  It would be a lot of leg work to find and address these motive dilemmas, but the community could help finding sharp corners like this and sanding them down a bit.  A lot of them are in the lower-level content of City of Villains, too, so adjusting low-level mission dialogues (Mercy to Cap au Diable) could be enough.

 

Especially contacts like Dr. Weber that have to just going along with pretty heinous testing on *mostly* innocent people.

[Vic Raiden]

I did Kalinda's "clear out the Infected from the water treatment plant" mission immediately after completing Weber's arc, kinda out of spite for him forcing me to spread disease, but also to get double payment for solving a problem I myself caused.

But more on point, yeah, it's silly how you get no say in the matter. My Elec/Energy Dominator, for example, would never do such a thing voluntarily, and yet the script railroaded him into it - and then again with Radio Free Opportunity asking him to go to Paragon City and spread even more plague, which is one of the last things a Technology-origin cyborg dictator-to-be would want to do.

[Lusiphur Malache]

Apologies if I'm biting somebody's idea because I'm late to the thread.  Redside lost its' purpose when they lost AT exclusivity.  I don't want to force players to redside, but to get the most out of your redside AT, need to influence players to stay red. Storytelling fix is that contacts won't trust rogues and vigilantes so you lose all your contacts and new contacts only give you missions that move you back to red or blue.  Slight influence and xp penalty to teams that include rogues and vigilantes.  Moderate influence and xp penalties to all rogue and/or vigilante teams. 

 

Put more elevators in Mercy and Port Oakes.  Jetpacks help, but when it is running low and you have to get over that tall ass wall, an elevator nearby would be great.

 

Give Villains a chance to do real evil.  Make some bank robberies instances, give heroes in the zone an alert that a robbery is happening.  If they stop the robbery, all is good, but if they don't influence is halved for a day.  Let meaningful npcs be kidnapped, if I was part of the crew that grabbed Blue Steel, I'm going to let everybody know.

Edited March 28 by Lusiphur Malache

[Chris24601]

XP/inf penalties to teams that include rogues?

 

Give villains a chance to be more evil?

 

You really want Redside to be a deserted wasteland don’t you?

 

All this suggestion would do is encourage most players roll heroes with a “I used to be a villain” and “I’m doing this for the money” in their background info because for most people engaging in pretend evil isn’t all that engaging and exiting Redside numbers already show that.

 

The main reason opening up the ATs happened was because even exclusive access to those ATs wasn’t enough to keep people playing Redside.

 

They merged the markets because there weren’t enough players Redside to sustain it… whole categories of recipes and salvage; much less crafted IOs; were just empty. No amount of influence can buy what’s not there.

 

Redside isn’t popular because being an outright villain isn’t popular.

 

Honestly, I’m curious what the metrics of the new Striga arcs looks like. What percentage are taking the “Work for the 5th Column” and “Beat/Kill an old lady for her magic wedding ring” arcs? How many of those who have are going on to play it more than once (on the same or different PCs)?

 

Particulary in relation to the Rogue-aligned Curtin and Houston arcs (which anacdotally I go out of my way to play with every rogue I roll).

 

 I stand by my prior conclusion; you can either make Redside into a more populated Rogue Isles (i.e. focus on more Roguish content… or at least content where Rogue options are possible) or maintain it as a largely empty City of Villains (i.e. focus on content that is exclusively villainous), but a more populated City of Villains just isn’t possible given human nature.

Edited March 28 by Chris24601

[Rudra]

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Storytelling fix is that contacts won't trust rogues and vigilantes so you lose all your contacts and new contacts only give you missions that move you back to red or blue. 

This would kill Vigilantes and Rogues. The rewards that were supposed to encourage players to stay Hero or Vigilante were the merits they earned for reinforcing their Hero or Villain alignments. Note that I said reinforce and not change to. Those merits could only be spent in locations that only Heroes and Villains could access. However, those merits were removed and anyone that can access that zone can now enter those formerly restricted locations. Losing access to your contacts because you went Vigilante or Rogue would almost make the game unplayable for Vigilantes and Rogues.

 

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Slight influence and xp penalty to teams that include rogues and vigilantes.

This will incentivize teams to not allow Rogues or Vigilantes on them. And I am set in my opposition for punishing players and their characters for having the audacity to be Vigilantes or Rogues.

 

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Moderate influence and xp penalties to all rogue and/or vigilante teams. 

This is a worse punishment than the preceding comment. Why are you out to punish Vigilantes and Rogues?

 

Punishing Vigilantes and Rogues for being Vigilantes and Rogues will do nothing to encourage players to at least try red side. It just means you are likely to see less Rogues and Vigilantes as player characters because they are penalized for doing so without providing a reason for anyone to even try red side.

 

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Give Villains a chance to do real evil. 

This part there is agreement. That is a consistent complaint I have seen in this thread, that playing red side doesn't feel particularly villainous to some. So this comment I can get behind.

 

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Make some bank robberies instances, give heroes in the zone an alert that a robbery is happening.

I have to ask how this will draw players to try red side. Instances aren't zone events and to the best of my knowledge, not accessible to anyone outside of the mission team except by glitch. Now if you are talking about PvP events, that can work, as long as it is strictly an option for PvP'ers and not something forced on the general community.

 

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

If they stop the robbery, all is good, but if they don't influence is halved for a day. 

Why are you so focused on punishing players for playing the game?!

 

4 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Let meaningful npcs be kidnapped, if I was part of the crew that grabbed Blue Steel, I'm going to let everybody know.

This would have to be done with extreme care. One of the things I hated about WoW back when I was willing to play it was that members of the opposite faction could go into your faction's territory and murder all the contacts and merchants. It made the game frustrating and impossible to progress for those players leveling up through that area because suddenly their contacts are all gone and they can't sell or buy equipment. So my question is how would this be implemented without stepping on the other players using that contact?

 

Edited March 28 by Rudra
Edited to correct Vigilante to Villain.

[Sunsette]

5 hours ago, Lusiphur Malache said:

Storytelling fix is that contacts won't trust rogues and vigilantes so you lose all your contacts and new contacts only give you missions that move you back to red or blue.  Slight influence and xp penalty to teams that include rogues and vigilantes.  Moderate influence and xp penalties to all rogue and/or vigilante teams. 

 

Everyone will become a hero and the only thing left villain-side will be dedicated solo characters and people temporarily flipping sides to get their patron arcs in. Remove null's ability to alignment flip and red will die even harder.

 

Mutual exclusivity mechanics never benefit the less populated group in anything subject to network effects. Period. Companies that are jockeying for marketshare will always push for openness and connection when they're behind in the market and for mutual exclusivity when they're on top.

 

Redside only has as much life as it does right now because the exclusivity is nearly meaningless atm. I'm willing to join Strike Forces on occasion with my heroes to help red-siders, and my villains can do group content easily if I want. They make any change like this, my entire red roster goes blue permanently and all my blues will never touch the vig/rogue mechanic ever again.

 

Not even for that really cool John Houston story arc in Independence Port.

Edited March 28 by Sunsette

[Chris24601]

53 minutes ago, Sunsette said:

Not even for that really cool John Houston story arc in Independence Port.

Other than just to give Rogues something unique, there is zero reason for an arc that includes both heroic, rogue and villain options at several points and is REALLY GOOD to be alignment locked to Rogue.

 

Not to mention if you can’t have contacts as a Rogue as the other guy wanted, both that mission and the excellent Bobby Curtin arc wouldn’t be accessible to anyone despite being built FOR the Rogue alignment exclusively (non-Rogue Redsiders can’t even reach Houston to talk to him).

 

Similarly the Rogue arc of Sgt. Schorr shows off the flexibility Red-Side missions could have in terms of approach and goals via in-mission triggers. The rewrite of the ending of the one Crosscut mission to allow you to NOT be a complete monster doesn’t even require any change of mechanics (you don’t turn the Skull over until the very end) and would make that entire arc more playable for a much wider range of players.

 

Another metric I’d be interested in would be what percentage of players voluntarily fail the Marshal Brass mission to take out Amanda Vine’s broadcast despite the fact its not even difficult to complete and requires you to go faff about for an hour and a half waiting for the timer to run down before you can finish the arc (not a huge deal if you catch it in the level band, but kinda annoying if you’re getting it via Oroboros).

 

More ability to choose your path; be it a broader array of Newspaper missions, more Tip missions, and/or more story arcs where you get a choice of approach; is probably the most resource-friendly approach for strengthening Redside.*
 

I also contend that an option to betray the 5th Column and Mage-Killer contacts on Striga would be a good thing. The middle three arcs are sufficiently grey they’re good for either Villains or Rogues; but even big-time villains in comics have drawn the line at working with Neo-Nazis, while beating up an old widow to steal her wedding ring is just so petty that they may as well add a mission about kicking puppies… it’s so far over the moral event horizon you can’t see a character coming back from that to be anything other than pure villain (the most lame and boring kind from my perspective).

[Rudra]

5 minutes ago, Chris24601 said:

Another metric I’d be interested in would be what percentage of players voluntarily fail the Marshal Brass mission to take out Amanda Vine’s broadcast despite the fact its not even difficult to complete and requires you to go faff about for an hour and a half waiting for the timer to run down before you can finish the arc (not a huge deal if you catch it in the level band, but kinda annoying if you’re getting it via Oroboros).

To add options to the metric for measuring, I typically go into that mission, wipe out Wyvern, and take out all but 1 or 2 generators. Those generators I leave standing have no visible health bar left, so my characters can claim that they did try to destroy the generators as Marshall Brass requested so they have no idea what went wrong, while leaving WSPDR with enough power, even if unstable, to send out their broadcast. (Some of my characters I even have swing back by the WSPDR building and emote something to signal Ms. Vines that her request is being honored before exiting the mission and then waiting the remaining time out.) So, how many players complete the mission, how many skip the mission to let it fail, and how many complete it partially to any extent before exiting to let it fail.

[Rudra]

19 minutes ago, Chris24601 said:

I also contend that an option to betray the 5th Column and Mage-Killer contacts on Striga would be a good thing. The middle three arcs are sufficiently grey they’re good for either Villains or Rogues; but even big-time villains in comics have drawn the line at working with Neo-Nazis, while beating up an old widow to steal her wedding ring is just so petty that they may as well add a mission about kicking puppies… it’s so far over the moral event horizon you can’t see a character coming back from that to be anything other than pure villain (the most lame and boring kind from my perspective).

I missed this part. Apologies. And I have to say: Most Definitely!!!!! The Mage-Killers just seem so petty in their arcs. From the kill this CoT leader because he used to be my lover but left me mission to the murder Mrs. Peebles mission, the Mage-Killers aren't even remotely near anything I would expect such high tier villains to be like. And if a player wants to complete those arcs as laid out, more power to them. For those players just walking into those arcs and then finding out how pathetic they are, betraying the contact because you disagree or decide on another course of action that better suits your needs or because you just want to throw a wrench into their plans because you think it's fun or any other reason makes sense. Especially as rogues and villains since betrayal is a fact of life for them.

[Chris24601]

9 hours ago, Rudra said:

I missed this part. Apologies. And I have to say: Most Definitely!!!!! The Mage-Killers just seem so petty in their arcs. From the kill this CoT leader because he used to be my lover but left me mission to the murder Mrs. Peebles mission, the Mage-Killers aren't even remotely near anything I would expect such high tier villains to be like. And if a player wants to complete those arcs as laid out, more power to them. For those players just walking into those arcs and then finding out how pathetic they are, betraying the contact because you disagree or decide on another course of action that better suits your needs or because you just want to throw a wrench into their plans because you think it's fun or any other reason makes sense. Especially as rogues and villains since betrayal is a fact of life for them.

I’ve literally not seen the Mage-Killer Tatiana arc just because the contact’s title “Mage-Killer” and the arc title “Last Witch of Striga.”

 

Hearing later that it’s to get her freaking WEDDING RING*, knowing the story from the heroic version just puts that one so far beyond the pale for me. Completing that mission makes your character lower than dog feces in my opinion.

 

That one guy wanted Rogues punished with being mistrusted? Well, I’ll agree to that IF any character that finishes that mission gets switched immediately to villain, locked out of choosing the Rogue option for tip missions and even Null saying “Dude, I can do a lot, but I can’t wash away THAT!”

 

I can’t begin to tell you how much I hate that there’s no “drop story arc” option in this game. It’s not so much an issue Blueside where even an unfun mission is still a story of your character saving someone or stopping a criminal.

 

But on Redside, YOU are the calamity that could befall innocents and needing to essentially find a wiki and read every mission ahead of time to make sure you aren’t exposing innocents to lethal plagues, or collecting victims to be experimented on, or doing anything for Westin Phipps. That level of diligence to avoid all the moral event horizons makes it more like work than something you’re doing for fun.

 

* the ring with the flavor text of “This ring contains the power of Stephanie Peebles’ love for her late husband, Stephen.”

[Rudra]

7 minutes ago, Chris24601 said:

That one guy wanted Rogues punished with being mistrusted? Well, I’ll agree to that IF any character that finishes that mission gets switched immediately to villain, locked out of choosing the Rogue option for tip missions and even Null saying “Dude, I can do a lot, but I can’t wash away THAT!”

A bit extreme, but I at least understand the sentiment.

[Chris24601]

7 hours ago, Rudra said:

A bit extreme, but I at least understand the sentiment.

It is, admittedly, hyperbole.

 

But it does reflect one of the biggest problems Redside; the lack of agency for the players.
 

Once you hit “mission accept” most missions lock you on a rail with no choice in how it turns out. Many Redside missions don’t include their atrocities in the pre-accept dialogue; you only find out after you’re locked onto that rail.

 

So unless your villain concept is “complete irredeemable monster” your concept gets broken as soon as you touch one of those rails… and there no genuinely safe in-game way to avoid them.

 

You have to metagame by pausing before each contact choice or that first mission accept to find a Wiki or similar resource to read through the entire storh arc just to make sure you’re not going to be committing some war crime (releasing bio-weapons, stopping people from curing people infected by bio-weapons, kidnapping people for experimentation, helping a stalker murder his victim, etc.).

 

Then you slog through the content you’ve already read the story to. If the mechanics are good it can be fun, but there’s not going to be any surprises.

 

That’s a lot of work to play a Redsider if you’re turned off by playing utter scum.
 

Compare that to just rolling up a Bluesider you say is really a selfish rogur who’s only in it to enrich themselves by taking down bad guys and stealing their stuff. That’s 90% of the Rogue-friendly Redside mission content right there without worrying about getting locked to a track leading you over the moral cliff.

[Lunar Ronin]

I honestly do not understand the whole "you have no agency red side" argument.  I'm sorry, I just don't.  You have no agency on blue side either.  You either perform a heroic deed, or you don't.  Red side, you either perform a villainous deed, or you don't.  Same thing.

[PoptartsNinja]

8 minutes ago, Lunar Ronin said:

I honestly do not understand the whole "you have no agency red side" argument.  I'm sorry, I just don't.  You have no agency on blue side either.  You either perform a heroic deed, or you don't.  Red side, you either perform a villainous deed, or you don't.  Same thing.

 

The difference is:

Blueside:
Heroic deeds are all generally positive, or your character doing everything in their power to bring about a positive outcome on the rare occasion when you fail or are being duped. This sort of thing is easy enough to work into a character's backstory, even if stopping a bunch of wizards isn't something your power armor tech hero considers their usual "day at the office." Because heroes are reactive they lend themselves better to MMO-style storylines of "Hey, this happened, can you help?"

 

Redside:
The sort of evil deeds you do vary from petty theft to fun and campy mad science to kidnapping and murdering an innocent civilian schoolteacher to committing an act of bioterrorism that sickens or kills thousands. These aren't presented to the player any differently, and make the character seem like either a psychopath, a complete rube patsy, or a henchman who will commit acts of bioterrorism for even the smallest amount of money.

 

In most of the redside stories, you're basically being set up to take the fall for something your contact wants done. Redside story arcs very much need a "suck up" story thread where you can betray contacts you don't like to Arachnos at certain break-points in their story. Imagine setting up Westin Phipps to take a fall to further your own personal agenda. I feel like that would be pretty satisfying without breaking out of the "villain" mold.

[Vic Raiden]

Being able to dispose of disliked contacts is one thing, another would be having a sort of OOC content warning regarding what kinds of evil each contact is up to or what origin their missions vibe with the most.

 

I'd also say just add more contacts to cherrypick from, but I figure an ongoing tip mission-esque personal master plan system like someone suggested so long ago would be a greater help in actually feeling in control of one's villainy... but then there'd probably have to be some sort of hero equivalent so that nobody complains about unfair treatment, not to mention the sheer work needed for a robust multiple-choice mission chain like in the HC-brand rogue arcs but extended to the entire character progression.

[Rudra]

3 hours ago, Lunar Ronin said:

I honestly do not understand the whole "you have no agency red side" argument.  I'm sorry, I just don't.  You have no agency on blue side either.  You either perform a heroic deed, or you don't.  Red side, you either perform a villainous deed, or you don't.  Same thing.

As @PoptartsNinja said, there is a distinct difference. When most players play heroes or vigilantes, even if they play brutal, murderous, psychopathic characters, they are out to save the day and all blue side missions/arcs move towards this goal. When players play villains or rogues, they do so with a different mind set. Some may be out to cause as much mayhem and damage as they can, and most of the red side missions/arcs lend themselves to it. Others prefer to play a more honorable villain, one that commits great evil but does so within strict boundaries set by the villain's code of honor. Others yet may prefer to simply play the selfish character, doing whatever best benefits the character which makes the character a villain because (s)he/they/it is taking from others for their own benefit, but selfishness doesn't extend to casual murder, intentionally causing medical disasters, rounding up random innocents to be experimented on or harvested for the sake of someone else's plans, and so forth. So villainy comes in a great many forms, but the red side missions/arcs too often lock you into the more extreme takes of it. Whereas heroism boils down to the same thing regardless of personal motivations or methods, because the end result is still to save lives.

 

So yes, blue side and red side both lack agency, but that agency is much, much, much more important to red side story telling.

 

Edit: That said, there are some work arounds. For instance, on the Vahzilok mission where you deliver those 3 people to them, I intentionally leave almost the entire map of Longbow standing so that they can see and trace my path, and so rescue the 3 citizens. For the plague distribution, I have my characters draw attention to the canisters and the plague already had a cure made for it. (The cure was mentioned in the Outbreak tutorial.) And for the mission where you steal the only sample of a cure for a disease, I have the character emote leaving half the sample with the defeated hero so they can still have the doctors and scientists work on replicating it. (It helps to come prepared with additional tubes just in case.) So there is a way to build some agency into some of the stories just by player action.

Edited March 29 by Rudra

[megaericzero]

The level of contempt people have about the new Striga arcs got me interested; I hadn't had a chance to play them yet but the sheer revulsion some posts have about them got me curious enough to dust off an old alt in level range and start this morning. I only had time to get through the first two contacts so far. As far as Oberst Straxt goes... what was the gripe? He's part of the 5th Column but his actual missions and dialogue didn't have anything offensive that I picked up on; you're just an errand boy picking up crates of what sounded like void rifle pieces. He could've been a Wolf Spider with the same missions. I saw something about Peebles in the thread so guess I'll circle back around when I get a chance to finish the other three contacts.

 

--

 

The recurring suggestions in this thread to mark each villain arc as Rogue or [irredeemably] Villain and shuffling the linear contacts so they don't swap between the two types sounds good along with hopefully adding enough content to go 1-50 on one path or the other on a given character.

 

To Rudra: I like how you reframe context yourself, in-character and/or as the narrator of your own story. It's a creative solution to "whoops, I took / have to take a story arc that doesn't fit with my concept!" and an extra immersive layer of roleplaying.

 

--

 

EDIT: Okay. I finished the Striga arcs. Ragana and Orpheus didn't really stand out aside from the interesting alternate complete condition on one of Orpheus' missions. I'm guessing all the vitriol is reserved for the finale of Tatiana's arc. If it's that you're able - and only able - to do it as a rogue, I can see the complaint there. If it's about what you do, I would think that's par for the course of a villain (the actual alignment) - rough up the good guys, sew chaos, etc. Personally, I quite liked it.

 

The dialogue in the Striga villain arcs as a whole were sometimes awkwardly scant and robotic but not glaringly so and the brevity is much appreciated. All-in-all a fun experience and I hope that villains (again the alignment) get more content like Orpheus' mission with the branched win condition and Tatiana's arc and dialogue. (My sympathy to the rogues who wouldn't have gone in if they could've known they wouldn't want their character doing the last mission.)

Edited March 31 by megaericzero