I have a serious mental disorder as well and still think you're being bitchy here.

On topic: MMOs end, it's inevitable, and if you dislike it (as I do) you shouldn't support the business model.

I don't want to sound insincere because I understand that games -- especially shut-downable online games -- have a special place in many people's heart. But I'd have to say to not fret. NCSoft probably just wants to free some assets or capital for a new project. So that's something to look forward to.

And now you'll have the opportunity to go sniff around some new MMOs and see what else is out there. It takes some time, but you'll rebuild an online community and learn all of the quirks of a new game in no time.

What I wish is that the game could be "frozen" and given to the players to host (more or less like the old Ultima -- people host that out of their home now). It would be hard and expensive, but I doubt the community would have a hard time putting it together.

3) Only play MMORPGs in which you can have own servers.

This way you never, ever loose access and solve the described problem completely. Only I don't know if there are such MMORPGs?

I am a fellow schizophrenic and understand why this made you feel the way it did, but I also want to suggest that you reconsider reading the rest of Quinch's letter. I think you'll find that he is being incredibly understanding overall, even regarding the company he is upset with. I don't see that coming from someone who would willfully judge or hurt someone with a mental disorder. I don't think one should be faulted for misunderstanding what schizophrenia is, considering how misunderstood this and other conditions have been in the psychiatric field... and I don't say any of this to be confrontational (in fact, I'd like to reiterate what Rohan15 was suggesting, that your reaction was not something you should be criticized for, as being regularly misunderstood can be really difficult and frustrating), but I think you'll find that you'll find much more success being understood if you look at misunderstandings like this from different angles... I have to do that to keep things in check all the time, so it's something I do by habit now...

If it's helpful in any way, n this situation, these are things that would help me keep this in perspective:
a) when I was first diagnosed with schizophrenia, I had friends and family members alike say things like, "so when will I meet your other personalities?" or something similar, and at the time it really hurt, but they were all people who cared for me and would never judge me for my condition. Misunderstandings happen, and though it can be hard to adjust to that becoming a common theme, I myself can't find fault in others for this. It's just unfortunate, but not mean spirited.

b) To this day, I have to admit that I catch myself saying things that I really shouldn't, and that I already know are rooted in misconception, sometimes even clearly derogatory. But I would never willingly say something hurtful to someone and would never judge someone based on what they struggle with in life.

c) It's an incredibly common misconception that schizophrenic = multiple personalities. I grew up hearing people laugh over silly jingles like, "Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm schizophrenic, and so am I." The science isn't exactly brand new anymore, but it's hard to shake things you hear all the time growing up, and I suspect my experience with this wasn't an isolated one.

This is probably just wordy and unnecessary babble, but that accounts for 90% of what I say. ;)

That's simply untrue. Looking at the money the game made according to the NCsoft reports there was a surge in the quarter when Freedom was released but the next quarter things returned almost to what was before that.

If my personal experience can be extended to others (which of course might not be the case), the announcement of Freedom excited me and I paid to be part of the VIP Head Start. Once I fully understood the details of the convoluted F2P scheme it turned me off. From other comments at the time I understand that was the case for others. If that was the common reaction it could explain the figures.

I know enough MMORPGs where the community somehow got access to the server tools while the game was still officially supported (like WoW and Lineage 2). Don't know in which cases the devs actually intended to provide the community with this ability but it is possible for some games either way.

It's not quite as simple as that. You see, CoH is... well, I hesitate to say unique, but it broke a lot of MMO conventions. For example, how many MMOs can you name that;

1} Allows for near total character customization right off the bat. And by "near total" I mean millions, billions or error-not-a-number appearance combinations; it really depends if you draw the line at costume pieces, colors, sliders or power customization. All of those are independent of the character build itself - what you look like is never obscured by pieces of armor, weaponry or accessories bolted to your character. What you look like is what you choose to look like. Period. On a less visual tone, that freedom extends to the character concept itself. In DCUO, for example, your powers come from nanites, officially and unchangeably. In CoH, you can fill out a short biography that others can see - so if you want to be an ex soldier, martial arts champion, former mob enforcer, a bored fairy, a pair of sentient pistols piloting a zombie cowboy or bitten by a radioactive mailman, the lore doesn't try to shoehorn you into anything

2} An unabashed breakaway from the Holy Trinity of MMOs - Tanker, Healer, Damage Dealer. While teams with variety complement each other better, and some do better solo while others excel in a team, there are very few challenges in the game that can't be overcome with any - and I do mean any team makeup. It's not uncommon for players to run same-archetype task forces {a string of missions}, either for personal accomplishment, bragging rights, or usually for the hell of it.

3} An altoholic approach to character-making, rather than shifting the goalposts of grinding. In the game history, there was a single time where the level cap was raised - at the very beginning, on account of the fact that Lv40-50 content still wasn't implemented. To illustrate my point, there are fourteen different archetypes - classes, basically - and each of those has about an average of eight powersets - primary and secondary. There are also eleven servers, with a default of twelve character slots, per server, upgradeable to thirty-six, and the rate of experience gain has been increased several times by now. Rather than using the standard tactic of delaying the player from "winning" by reaching their goal, the pervading philosophy is instead focused on replayability, as each different combination will play differently - some slightly, some drastically.

4} The ability to design and play my own content. I'm not sure if it's still an unique feature, but it was definitely unprecedented when Mission Architect came out. Yes, it received more than a few solid whacks with the nerf bat following each exploit du jour, but by and large, using it gave you the same rewards as playing regular content. Better, even, as the tickets the enemies dropped could be traded for specific rewards, rather than being completely random. So if you've ever looked at an arc and went, "meh, I could write a better story than this", well... you could.

5} A developed communications network. This may be a little hard to explain - while there are the usual chat channels - local, zone-wide, supergroup {aka guild} - each server had a server-wide help channel for player-to-player assistance. Furthermore, it also has global channels - player-created cross-server channels used for specific interests, like supergroup base building, forming events and task forces or even net radio stations and fandoms. I suppose the best way to describe them would be a comparison to IRC.

6} No competition over limited resources. Almost all content is instanced, and "defeat X enemies of type Y" {and it's always a specific number - collecting random drops just doesn't exist} are the last vestiges of old content. For larger events, like raids, the only requirement tends to be "do we have enough people to do this?" The primary limiter isn't a cooldown, but burnout.

7} No focus on gear. The game is balanced around store-bought enhancements {equipment, basically, though it's basically... slot-based?} The invention system exists for those with money to burn, but it is in every sense of the word, optional. Store enhancements are cheap, too - in fact, one of the reasons the invention system and auction house was implemented was to give people something to do with the ridiculous amounts of accumulated money.

8} Organic adaptability. The game does a seamless job of adapting itself to you, although you can also take an active hand in the difficulty. For example, if you're alone, an average mission will pit you against small groups of enemies. A pair of heroes will face more, tougher enemies. A full eight-man team will be mowing down armies. And if you want, you can crank up the enemy level or make them spawn in greater numbers, with the increased rewards the increased risk implies.

9} A friendly community, but calling it that might be a disservice. We're talking about a playerbase where "forum newbie helping" borders on a competitive sport, or a community that, within three hours raised a thousand dollars to buy the freshly-fired devs dinner at a restaurant one of them once mentioned they liked, or a best-selling author {Mercedes Lackey, if you're familiar} officially and openly offering to promote the game, free of charge, in order to keep NCsoft from shutting it down. The rallying cry of the whole #savecoh movement is "We are heroes, this is what we do", but it really needs to be seen to be believed.

You're missing my point, but I'll address yours first - if you look at my earlier post, you'll notice that MMOs don't routinely "end". They wane and go into maintenance mode, essentially turning into embers - no more blaze, but they're still going. They're often perceived as "gone" because they fall out of the public's eye.

My point, however, is not that anyone is expecting to convince NCsoft to change its mind about publishing CoH. They've made it clear that they're committed to that decision, and with the entire studio fired {yes, fired, not moved to other projects} continuing it as if nothing happened is... implausible at best.

Where the focus lies is convincing NCsoft to sell the game, rather than bury it. And the notion that there aren't any buyers is a transparently false one - MMORPGs live and die by the content they have, and the initial burn after release is where most MMOs fail. CoH has had eight years of continuous updates, to say nothing of the fiercely loyal playerbase that managed to keep it profitable through word of mouth alone {that bit about marketing not having a penny to its name? Literal. I kid you not, confirmed by Black Pebble himself}, the first and most enduring one of its genre... expecting us to believe that there weren't any serious offers buying for the IP just as NCsoft bought it from Cryptic, is... laughable at best, openly contemptuous at worst. We, the players ourselves have contacted NCsoft to try and negotiate the sale, but it has remained completely silent about what it would even take for them to consider selling it. It honestly feels like they're treating us like children to be ignored until we get bored.

I love how everyone says only WoW can survive long periods....ummm...do you live in a cave. It might be the most "popular", but its not even close to the longest lasting or the only one that does not get shutdown...

Let's see...

Everquest is still running...even with Everquest 2 ongoing...and probably is the stronger of the two in the long run even with crappier graphics. (Started 1999)

Guilds Wars is still going...although i have not experienced lag issues like some....and Guild Wars 2 is pretty darn popular at the moment. (Started 2005)

Eve Online (Started 2003)

Oh...definitely lets not forget one of the originals...Ultima Online...(started 1997, and still going).


That right there are three games that started before World of Warcraft and two of those pretty much paved the way for that piece of crap (sorry, I love blizzard, but i freaking hated WoW).

The only MMO's that truly die are shitty MMO's or just cannot continue to cover their expenses. City of Heroes just got in a bad spot. From what I understand NCsoft even tried to sell off CoH but too much redtape or something along those lines.

All we know is that NCsoft said that "We've exhausted all options including the selling of the studio and the rights to the City of Heroes intellectual property, but in the end, efforts to do so were not successful." Anything else, well, I hate to admit it, is little more than rumor and hearsay until either someone else says that they tried to buy it, or NCsoft itself says something more.

Sorry if it came off that way. I thought I wrote it "light" enough to not sound judgmental, just curious.

Ultima Online, over 15 years running.

The point is you're still supporting a method of payment/design that keeps the publisher in control at all times and puts the game on a timer until it ceases to exist. I cannot support that business model for that reasons, and also the fact the games are designed around pumping you for time or cash, and am surprised so many do.

Holy smokes. That game is radically different. And fantastic sounding. I hope they use those assets to make something just as awesome.

So do NCsoft read these forums? Otherwise your open letter has been sent to the wrong address. It's more usually referred to as a forum subject.