Talk:City of Heroes

Korean transliteration

I don't want to change it right away since I don't edit Wikipedia enough to know what is acceptable, but it seems to me the English transliteration of the Korean transliteration of 'City of Hero' is a bit frivolous. '시티 오브 히어로' is just a transliteration of "City of Hero' and means nothing in Korean. Why, then is that transliterated back to English as 'Siti Obeu Hieoro?' I think we can just remove that superfluous transliteration. Ilithios (talk) 07:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected?

Not that I'm complaining, just wondering why, talk page is pretty quiet about it. UOSSReiska (talk) 15:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

PEGI 16+

The PEGI rating for City of Heroes has gone from 12+ to 16+ according to the loading screen of the game.(As of Issue 11, i think) Shouldn't the wikipedia article about it be updated? - Kayaia 16:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

NEW Suggestion

How about a section describing the archetypes. Most fantasy games have the well known class system of warrior, mage, wizard, ranger, hunter etc. I think breaking down the archetype system with a little more in detail would give readers a better understanding on characters and their roles and super powers are in game. Example: Blasters (Fire, ice, guns), Tanker (defender, other, other), etc...

There was a section dedicated to that, but it was split off to City of Heroes characters for such information. Ryūlóng 21:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

This brings up an interesting thought. Do we want to see about submitting the article for possible Featured status. Submitting would bring a lot more new eyes to the page, which could be good or bad, but overall should be a good thing. - TexasAndroid 15:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget the Kheldians!--Eoghanzer 03:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Expansion

Removed "A retail expansion which will work with both games is planned for 2007"; a developer just confirmed on a podcast that all features that were planned for the expansion have instead been shuffled into the next 'issue'. 69.141.234.83 03:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I had not thought of removing that from here, solely from City of Heroes history. Ryūlóng 03:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Marvel v NCSoft lawsuit

I was one of the persons obsessively following this case, so I made a few corrective edits.

To explain some of my edits: I took out the "failed to police" clause only because it was redundant with "actively promoted" in the same sentence. I reworded instances of the phrase "copyrighted characters" because characters cannot be copyrighted; only the whole works (i.e. the whole comic books, art, films, etc.) in which the characters appear can be copyrighted. I used the phrase "potentially infringing" because it is disputed whether playing a copy of a Marvel character is fair use or not, but NC Interactive disallows such characters either way. My edits concerning the EULA come from a close reading of the EULA. I'm uncertain of the outcome of Fonovisa v. Cherry; the only document I found online was an appellate reversal of the dismissal, which is not the same thing as Fonovisa winning. Finally, I added a mention of the partial dismissal of Marvel's claims because it seemed highly relevant.

Anyway, if someone can find out the final disposition of Fonovisa v. Cherry, and cite the documents for it, that would be great! Matt Fitzpatrick 02:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

"Memo of Points and authorities of Amici Curiae" (PDF). is a reference we probably ought to use, giving some good back ground into what is protected in terms of a 'character' and what isn't. How to work this in to the structure as it stands - I'm not quite sure of. Catwhoorg 11:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Edited the external link to docs on eff. The original contained characters not permitted to be naked, had to put in HEX for them. 146.171.254.66 (talk) 23:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Structure: Rewards and Hazards?

In my mind, as a player, enhancements, inspirations, influence, prestige, and salvage are all related, but distinct. I know there is some butting of heads going on as to structure here, so perhaps we should discuss and get this settled.

I'd propose grouping all six of these together under a more general "Rewards" topic; information about experience points and leveling up, badges and gladiators, and unlockable costume pieces and super group base placeables could also be placed under "Rewards."

The subsection on experience debt could be the seed for a new section, "Hazards" perhaps. Mission failure conditions, prisons instead of hospitals, anti-teleportation zones, environmental emanators (such as Circle of Thorns crystals), and (in PvP) hostile police drones could be other topics to place in such a "Hazards" section. Enemy-related hazards, such as ambush spawns, would still go under "Enemies," of course. I don't think separate subsections under "Hazards" is warranted, though, because other than experience debt, these "hazards" are all minor or infrequent elements of the game. Matt Fitzpatrick 18:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget temporary powers. --Robotech_Master 19:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Temp powers (and all other powers) can be found at List of powers in City of Heroes and City of Villains; however, I have tried in the past to combine all of these new sections (enhancements, etc.) but I could not think of a good header for everything, or think of a suitable way to reword some of the sections. I fully support this, but I do not have time to do it myself. Ryūlóng 22:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Contaminated

As a moderate to hardcore player, i feel that mention of the Isolator badge only being obtainable by killing 100 of the contaminated foes should be in the same section as the information about the tutorial. Ever since badges were introduced, the inability of the majorit of players to obtain Isolator either through ignorance of its existance, or having begun playing the game at launch, has remained a point of contention for the long time and hardcore players. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Carterhawk (talk • contribs) .

Wikipedia is not a game guide. There are City of Heroes Wiki's out there if you want something like that. Ryūlóng 23:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I concur with Ryūlóng, that type of information does not belong in a wikipedia article. Those are articles for the general public NOT "hardcore" gamers. That is why WP:NOT is quite clear about gameguide type material. --Charlesknight 23:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I fail to see how information about this particular part of CoH is any less encyclopedic than the archetype descriptions here Carterhawk

That's always a weak hand to play - "well if it happens in article A then why not in article B", if it does breach policy all it means that someone has not got around to it, but never fear, now you have mentioned it, I'll take a hard look at it tomorrow and be assured I'll turn my anti-cruff cannons on anything that needs removing. --Charlesknight 23:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

There is an article about the archetypes and whatnot because it is important to the game. There needn't be any sort of mention of the badge you get if you beat 100 Contaminated because that is pretty crufty. There is an entire article about the creation of characters in City of Heroes and City of Villains because it is unique from other games, somewhat. There's a whole list of races of Warcraft characters, and for City of Heroes/Villains, it is merely a list of the classes, with as much detail as the Warcraft races get, if less. Citing a specific item one can only get in the tutorial is more game-guidelike than describing the classes within the game. Ryūlóng 23:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe his point was that the badge is notable to players in the game for a good reason. There are those in the game that call themselves "badgers" that like to go around collecting all badges, even the meaningless ones, like Isolator. After badges were created, there was no way old players could get the badge and it was a slight source of contention. Not just for the isolator badge, but for other badges that were more difficult to get as people leveled higher. The developers even went as far as to create an entire system that one could re-live lower level content. A big reason for this was so that players could get missed badges. In fact, the "devs" even went as far as to make the tutorial available again due in part to this reason. Now, I'm not saying I agree with him totally on the idea that the Isolator badge should be mentioned in this article, but I do understand what he is saying. 98.215.128.112 (talk) 15:26, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Too long

This article is too long - I'd suggest the first cut be made to that community section - one or two lines would be fine and then ONE link to the most notable community in the external links. --Charlesknight 23:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I concur. I think I'm going to do some EL culling, and just leave a link to CoH's official list. Ryūlóng 23:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

also in regards to cutting it down:

A more recent criticism is against a change in the game's mechanics, called Enhancement Diversification (ED). The changes were originally posted on the City of Villains beta forums, however some testers who were angered by the changes attempted to leak the information on to the City of Heroes forums despite their Non-Disclosure Agreements. Eventually the developers posted the information on the CoH forums. They stated that ED had been in the works since March 2005, and that all changes to the game had been made with it in mind. The lead developer stated that it wasn't mentioned before because he did not want to release the info because they hadn’t worked out the exact system and did not want to release false information. This is understandable considering that Emmert (using the forum alias Statesman) had mentioned a special "Super Secret Out of Combat Skill System" in the past that has never materialized due to problems developing the system. Emmert, in a response to a private message sent to him by a forum-goer regarding "SSOCSS" stated that this system is currently shelved for the time being.[citation needed]

The second bit in particular is incoherent to the general reader, What the hell is a "Secret out of combat skill system" and why sould a general reader care? --Charlesknight 23:46, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've just forked Items in City of Heroes and City of Villains of into its own article. And I'll look into cutting that down. Ryūlóng 23:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, article is much too long. Should be half the size. I think as a rule of thumb any content that is only relevant to players (e.g. Enhancement Diversification) should be removed or moved to paragonwiki. --Surturz (talk) 03:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Not in Rhode Island?

I realize how sad this is but some friends and I decided to try and match the map of Paragon City to real world maps. The results were surprising. Apparently the makers of the game have never bothered to look at a map of Rhode Island. As a matter of fact the only nearby area that even vaguely resembles the shape of the coastline as they show it is Boston Harbor.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by GuyFromBoston (talk • contribs) .

Paragon City is an alternate dimension to us, thus their geography is not necessarily the same as ours. Also it's sort of a homage to other fake cities in comics like Metropolis and Gotham. Likewise I sincerely doubt that there are actually any island chains around where The Rogue Isles are either.--Zikar 18:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough...GuyFromBoston 00:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The article states that indeed Paragon is in Rhode Island, but I'm still looking for a reliable source on that. Sorry to have typed my issues with that statement in the changelog. (I'm new at this) Modeps 13:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Umm. The article that is/was linked is official backstory for the game. I'm not sure how much more reliable you can get than something official from the game's company itself. - TexasAndroid 13:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

True enough. My apologies for the removal. I was just looking for something like an interview, not an in-game newspaper. Modeps 14:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

"This was revealed to the players by Lead Developer Jack "Statesman" Emmert very early on in the City of Heroes beta test period." (that is from the wiki article, so you'd think that a link to that statement could be provided, that's all I'm saying) Modeps 14:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure how reliable this is: "Marcus sold many of the island's treasures and built up a small fortune in Europe before Stefan, now calling himself Lord Recluse, lured him back to the United States and Paragon City, a fictional city which is located somewhere on the eastern seaborn side of Rhode Island." Answers.com 162.66.50.5 14:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Well the link is not to an in-game newspaper, as you'd have to be in-game to see it, but the first paragraph of the newspaper says "Paragon City, Rhode Island". PureSoldier 17:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we are discussing two different things here. The wiki entry states that Statesman told everyone during the beta that it was in Rhode Island... but there are no citations to that fact. We could just change the text of it so that it would read something along the lines of "Paragon City while fictitious, is based in Rhode Island." removing any hearsay. Modeps 20:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, this means that we simply remove the sentence; unless Jack Emmert has logs during the beta testing in which it says that Paragon City is in Rhode Island, later sources (such as the fictional newspaper article I found on the CoH main site) do use "Paragon City, Rhode Island," despite being fictional articles that use an in-universe perspective on updates for the various Issue releases.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Do any of the Comic books or other canonical texts have information about the real world (if any) location of Paragon City? Nothing fills plot holes like holes to other dimensions!--Eoghanzer 03:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

The image here[1] states it as being in Rhode Island.

I've seen from looking around in Google Earth that there is only one Paragon in the United States in the real world. It happens to be in Indiana. And yes, we are in different universes entirely. There is a zone called Pocket D. One of the NPCs, War Witch stands at the ledge of the upstairs hero area. She'll talk randomly and even mentions that "she loves alternate dimensions".

88.105.171.63 (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Blasters

Do blasters use weapons for their powers? We could at it if they do or don't. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by--Kingdom hearts llll 21:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

There is a single Blaster power set that utilizes an assault rifle and another that is archery. This is not to really be described here, as it is a bit unnecessary. It is already mentioned at List of powers in City of Heroes and City of Villains.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Do they only use weapons, like to produce fire? Are they like controllers? What would a hero like spiderman for example be. Sorry for all the questions.--Kingdom hearts llll 21:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you'd be better browsing the articles in Category:City of Heroes for a bit to learn more about everything :)—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

While there are exceptions, like the assault rifle power set mentioned above, the game does not define how the powers are generated. The players decide that in part by the Origin that they select. Several Fire Blasters could have very different origins and very different One could be an angelic being, (magic origin) weilding holy flame. Another could be like te Human Torch (science origin), who generates the flame within himself. And still another could have a power suit (tech origin) that generates the fire. All wuld be fire blasters, but the details are up tothe player to decide.

And even the sets that use visible foci are subject to player interpretation. I have a Claws scrapper. Visibly the claws appear to emerge from housings on the back on the character's hands. But for my character's background, the claws are intended to be external weapons that are clamped to the wrists, not Wolverine-style internally stored weapons. I just ignore the fact that the visuals are not *quite* matching my vision of the character. - TexasAndroid 23:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Be aware also of temporary powers and rewards. My character completed a task force and got a Crey pistol as a reward. Any character who completes this task force would also receive a Crey pistol. Story arcs are another way of obtaining temporary weapons.--Eoghanzer 03:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

the Crey pistol is an accolade power, which requires the 'Consiracpy theorist Badge'. That requires 4 explorations, a mission Badge (Doctors ally) and the defeat Paragon protectors Badge. Manticores Tf is not required but a great way of getting the PP badge. There a a host of temp powers from Safeguards, the craftable 3 weapons (Sledgehammer, baseball bat and pistol - all of which do decent damage). There are a host of ways of getting different weeapons now. Catwhoorg 11:43, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

How many pool powers can you have?

How many pool powers can you have? --Kingdom hearts llll 14:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

You can choose four different pools(leadership, fitness, etc), not including epic pools. You can choose all the powers in each pool if you wish, so up to 16 pool powers(assault, swift, etc) and 4 more epic pool powers. PureSoldier 14:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

What are the epic pool powers.--Kingdom hearts llll 21:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

There are none. They are called the "Ancillary Power Pools" that are chosen when a player gets to level 41. They are usually powers that are used to round out the characters other powers; Scrappers and Tankers get some ranged powers, Blasters and Defenders get self-defensive and melee powers, Controllers get offensive powers, and the like.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

there is a bit of vandalism about Marvel "taking the stick out of its ass and dealing with it" but I cannot seem to edit it out. could someone else remove this bit of juvenile humor?

Criticism

I just want to start a little discussion on the level of criticism in the section. The recent addition from 68.53.194.28 whilst adding substationally to the section is probably a little 'crufty' in its details. The verbage in the section still needs some cleaning up. I5 (GDN) was August 31st 2005, I6 (ED) October 27 2005, neither of these is really recent now. At this time the game is about 34 months old.

Strange though it may seem, we have had the GDN in effect for longer than the game existed before I5. I cannot recall exactly when supression came in (but can dig that date out if needed I guess) but IIRC its even older than the other two. 'Recent' changes hardly cuts it as an accurate description. The whole section could do with a clean-up and a discussion towards a consensus of what criticisms should be included, and we certainly need links to verify the claims. 'Critics claim' 'often' etc fall under Weasel Words and phrase to be avoided. If you have a cite include it. Catwhoorg 13:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

This is likely a good discussion to have. The anon has been trying to greatly expand the criticism section for a number of days now. Their changes, however, are woefully inappropriate in their current form. Unsourced and likely Original Reasearch. They have been reverted several times by different editors. But that does not mean that the section is perfect. - TexasAndroid 14:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Big gameplay changes? The GDN, ED, and travel suppression all fit that, IMO, but there was also the Purple Patch and AOE caps. Also status effect suppression in PvP, though I don't know if that was criticized. Plus, since the section is actually "criticisms" and not "nerfs", it ought to include things like lack of content, unbalanced PvP, and sluggish performance as well. The hard part will be verification. Jeff Alexander 17:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

A small item of note, I recollect most of the City of Heroes loading screen illustrations (such as Steel Canyon, Atlas City, etc.) from a game module or roleplaying game I owned as a child. I'd like to know if anyone else remembers these from a published source besides the recent City of Heroes computer game. After all, most fans of superhero RPG will recognise the Origin types used in City of Heroes as from the earlier published RPG Villains and Vigilantes, especially back during Alpha phase CoH development when "Magic Artifact" was advertised by the City of Heroes webpage as a possible Origin type -- thus completing the entire list of origins from Villains and Vigilantes. I do not recognise the Enhancement system per se (although the "buttons" look like SSI illustrations), but I do not think it's original either.

Of course, this could be unintended misprision and I doubt a crock of tripe is cooking at Cryptic, but maybe it's that the lead designer *does* have legal rights to a vast source of roleplaying game material. No one besides Marvel has sued... User: Anonymous User

Looking over the ED section again, i think we can both tighten it up and improve the balanced view of it. Change a 'more recent' to 'long standing' - I could link probably a dozen active threads bemoaning ED on the forums right now, so in the ~18 months of the game there have been complaints over ED for half of that time (well maybe even more - not sure the exact date of the first breaking the NDA post.

To balance this perspective, including a sentance along the lines of 'The succesful implementtation of the invention system in I9 required a fundamental change to the way chracters were slotted, which ED provided.'

Thoughts ? Catwhoorg 19:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The problem with this is that WP:RS comes into play. While ED is an issue that players do complain about (I was never one to 6 slot a power with one enhancement before ED), we need critical commentary by non-forum posts. Such as an IGN article about ED or something of the sort.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I found a couple of reviews that speak on ED. It really is head and shoulders above the other complaints as far as my Googling discovered. I found far less (if anything), and nothing referencable, regarding travel suppression, PvP balance, or the hard AoE control nerf, and no references to the GDN by name (only indirect references to a big nerf in the issue before ED). I found some player reviews citing simplistic gameplay and lack of content, but not in quantities I feel would justify claiming it's a common criticism. Jeff Alexander 00:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Nicely sourced Jeff, thanks. Catwhoorg 12:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

The "Detailed Info" feature has been in place for quite some time now. I recommend removal of the Hiding Statistics criticism. Jogar2 (talk) 19:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

According to WP:BOLD, I have removed the out-of-date 'Hiding statistics' criticism. It is only of historical interest to players, not general encyclopedia readers - it might be worthy of incluson at paragonwiki, but not here. --Surturz (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Payment options correct?

In the Payment options section, it contains the following prices:

• 1 month for $14.99
• 3 months for $41.85 ($13.95 per month)
• 6 months for $77.70 ($12.95 per month)
• 12 months for $143.40 ($11.95 per month)
• 60-day prepaid time card for $29.99 suggested retail price

I know the one month option is correct, and I just added the 60-day prepaid time card option. But the others, I don't think they're correct. If I'm not mistaken, I think that no matter what billing cycle you choose, the game is $14.99 per month, period. In other words, if you're billed every six months, each billing cycle will be billed at $89.94 (or $14.99 x 6).

Can someone confirm or refute this? If not, my card is billed yearly, and the billing cycle is going to hit next week. --TonyV 06:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

sigh  Of course, five minutes after posting this, I find this article on their support site, whereas I couldn't find it in the 30 minutes prior. I was still thinking I got billed $14.99 no matter what billing cycle I chose, though. Please don't reply to this comment yet. When my billing cycle hits, I'll know for sure, and if the information as posted is correct, I'll just remove this comment entirely. --TonyV 06:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

For the 60 day time cards, I was told that it's not made anymore. They now made it a 30 day time card. There are still some stores for example "EB" game store where they have the 60 day time cards. The salesman told me they must be left over. It's the second time I was told this. the first time was at "Game stop." I'll contact "Plaync support" and get back with the correct info and make the correction. --legacy 1 6:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

For the time card issue, we'll need more than "I was told by someone." An article or announcement regarding the change in time cards would be a much better source. QuasiAbstract (talk) 18:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I contacted "PlayNc Support" and asked if there are still those "60 day Game Time Cards" available. "PlayNC Support, Dennis" replied at 01/17/2008 09:27 PM: "Thank you for contacting PlayNC Support.We would like to inform you that, Game Time Cards are available for 15/ 30/ 45/ 60 days. A game time card is not game specific. A game time card for any of our games will work on a City of Heroes account or a Lineage II account." --legacy 1 19:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who told you, direct communication from someone to an editor can not be used as a source unless it is in the firm of a permanent viewable copy (like a web post). A phone call or email is unacceptable.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 14:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Dude, that sounds rude and unnecessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.182.138 (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Questions about Game Mechanics and In-Depth Info

I'm seeing a few questions about game mechanics and such here. I think it should be stressed that this page is not a Q&A forum to get questions about City of Heroes answered. For that, there are the official site forums, particularly the Player Guides forum and the Player Questions forum. Also, the article and this page aren't mean to be an in-depth guide to City of Heroes. For that, I highly suggest you visit the Paragon Wiki, which is a wiki set up specifically for the game and that contains all the nitty-gritty details that aren't appropriate for a general-purpose wiki such as the Wikipedia. --TonyV 06:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. We can't stress this enough here.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Issue 9 Updates

The article should be updated to include the new loot-base Invention system, which changes a lot of the Enhancement-based game dynamics since ED.

Also, shouldn't there be a general section that briefly mentions the issue updates, approximately when they were released, and the major content provided by each issue? Or perhaps this would be too in-depth for the article's breadth. Archabaddon 22:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The issue information is already over at History of City of Heroes and City of Villains. - TexasAndroid 23:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Sub-pages not notable wiki content

This wiki page and its sub-category pages read like a player guide. Detailed information on enhancements, enemies, etc. are not notable wiki content. I propose deleting the character creation, items, enemy groups, zones, and possibly the gameplay update history pages entirely. Jeff Alexander 01:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The sections are not player guides. They exist to describe aspects that would otherwise make this article too large.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:06, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. Most sub pages describe things, but do not tell you how to use what is described. That's the difference between information and a player guide.--Zikar 06:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I retract my last statement. There are lots of stuff there that could go... I think items, enemies and zones should likely be deleted. Character creation (although, the name should be changed) and history should remain in my opinion since they do more than just explain in-game mechanics.--Zikar 06:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The article was too large because the information it contained was more detailed than necessary. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. Several of those sections (now sub-pages) are closer to a game manual or a straight dump of game data than to an encyclopedia article. For example, List_of_powers_in_City_of_Heroes_and_City_of_Villains (which I add to my list of pages I don't think serve wiki's goals). I don't see how a thorough history of game changes and holiday events is notable wiki content. I agree that the character creation page is more an Archetype summary; I think it can stay if it's presented more as such. Jeff Alexander 09:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Praise (Correction Needed)

For a relatively short period, inactive accounts ran the risk of having the names of their characters taken by new players in the character creator. The lack of names being taken from inactive characters eventually led to this policy being revoked. While this policy was active, the character itself was left untouched and a player who lost his character's name was given the option to choose a new one.

This is no longer accurate. I logged in last night after 3 years of inactivity and found this policy to be in effect, possibly re-activated silently with an Issue release.

• Yes it was reinstated in September of 2007. You can only loose character names that are below level 6. So names of characters that have been leveled up past 5 are always safe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.109.227.80 (talk) 03:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to log in. Apologies.

No, I do not beleive names are currently being lost, but if your name was recycled during the previous purge, and you just now logged in, then you would indeed just now see the loss of the character name, even though it was actually lost a while back. - TexasAndroid 15:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It is not currently the case, but the 30 day notice was just posted that the inactive name policy is being re-instated. 90 days of inactivty and below level 6 for this next batch. It does sound like your names were 'flagged' as available during the last time and were taken during that period. Catwhoorg 16:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

How does this look ? Catwhoorg 16:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, the game is praised because a subscriber's characters are not deleted, even if the subscription has been canceled or inactive for an extended period of time. Some MMORPGs delete a character after a period of inactivity. For a relatively short period, inactive accounts ran the risk of having the names of their characters taken by new players in the character creator, and this policy is retunring effective August 29th 2007. When this policy is active, the character itself is left untouched and a player who lost his character's name was given the option to choose a new one. The policy will apply to characters below level 6, and after 90 days of account inactivity."Character name policy 30 day notice".

I went ahead and added some text without noticing your version on the talk page first, Cat - it's probably a little wordy, feel free to clean it up. The links to the official site news posts are in there, too, and I'll add them here for convenience:

http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/archives/2005/10/city_of_heroes_41.html - original announcement of the policy on characters under 35 http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/archives/2006/05/city_of_heroes_14.html - revoking of the policy on characters under 35 http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/archives/2007/07/city_of_heroes_30.html - announcement of the new policy on characters under 6

As a side comment, the page could possibly use a comment on the recent practice Cryptic has had of giving former subscribers a free weekend shortly after new Issue releases, if it's not already there. UOSSReiska 13:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

No worries the paragraph looks great now. Catwhoorg 15:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Kill Skuls

Should we add a part about that old joke somewhere? The Warcraft article talks about Leeroy Jenkins, and it became more than just an internet meme when they actually added it to the game. Rebochan 20:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Issue 11

In the protection by Ryochan, I think an edit regarding Issue 11 was removed. While I agree listing powers and in-game items is not encyclopedic in nature and shouldn't be done, listing very basic information would be still useful, i.e.:

Issue 11, named "A Stitch In Time" was made available in October 2007 as a closed beta to select players. The update adds a new storyline involving "Ouroboros" and time travel to the game's features. The Issue is expected to go out live late 2007/Q1 2008.

Would this sound better versus "Dual Blades and Willpower sets go live!"? 208.24.252.14 23:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

dead and outdated links

general subject because more will be found I'm sure. In "External links" the link Text of Marvel's complaint points to an outdated article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.93.172.114 (talk) 12:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

re: Combined Games

I've reworded this paragraph, since the donation of CoV access to CoH customers (and vice versa) was a one-time script, rather than a continuing policy. I'm not entirely sure, on those grounds, whether it deserves a separate section, I would say not.

Reference for this is http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9574904&an=0&page=0#Post9574904, but since they periodically wipe old posts, it is a post by the community manager - Lighthouse - and says:

Lastly: This is a one time grant. New accounts made after yesterday using only CoH or only CoV will not have access to both games.

North American Holidays?

I don't think that this statement is accurate: "The City of Heroes Development Team also initiates events based on North American holidays and observances, starting with Halloween in 2004, followed by a Winter Event (eventually becoming a primarily Christmas-themed event), and the newest holiday observance as Valentine's Day event."

Since when are Halloween, Christmas, and Valentine's Day North American holidays? I believe that all are celebrated in at least some of Europe, and Christmas is celebrated in many places besides North America. I would think that the statement about events being based on North American holidays should be altered somehow to reflect this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesuperpower (talk • contribs) 08:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

There's now a blurb about the celebration around the world. I do believe that the "North American" part was to show that the holidays were shown in-game in a North American style. (I know Valentine's Day celebrations and customs vary from country to country) ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 10:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure that added "European" fixes the statement, as other continents celebrate the holidays, as well. I do know that the holidays are based upon how the North American (mainly American) way of celebrating the various holidays. Does Europe celebrate in a close way to NA? I just don't want to slowly add all continents until Antarctica is the only one not listed. ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 22:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I can't find something about "Western" referring to the general holidays of North America and Western Europe> Halloween is generally a US/UK/Irish holiday, the Winter Event is based on the Christmas traditions in the countries where the game is played (except for Korea), and Valentine's Day is treated about the same. I can't find a word to describe them.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

City of Heroes Korea dead?

Looking at www.cityofhero.com (the City of Heroes Korean site) it looks very much like a holding page telling people to use the US version instead, which would indicate NCSoft deciding not to extend the open beta into a full product. Is anyone able to translate from Korean? Aquarion (talk) 08:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, we can certainly still state that there was a plan for a Korean game. However, this topic matter is not meant for the talk page of this article. Perhaps you should ask this question at CoH's forums.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I still cannot find any official announcements to the effect, but it would appear from asking there (http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=general&Number=10258200) and a translated version of the CityOfHero.com site (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fpm.ncsoft.net%2Fcoh%2F&langpair=ko%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8) that it didn't take off and was shut down. Despite the lack of official press releases, which I suspect is just an attempt to keep it quiet, it's probably worth relegating the info about the Korean service (which had its own servers) to its own section. Aquarion (talk) 08:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, the single sentence in the lead is probably decent. We could simply just say "the beta has ended, and cancelled."—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, City of Hero is dead, Korean players were given one free account transfer to the US servers if they wanted to keep playing or something. But I can't find any official links on the subject. --Zikar (talk) 09:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Cohesion (Edit Edit Edit)

I would like to take this article and give it a good hair cut. I do not like the overview section it seems to be more of a "gameplay" section. The overview also repeats a lot of information given later in the article instead of lightly landing on each topic as an overview should.

So I would suggest changing this overview into a gameplay section much like you would see in a board game manual. Bringing in all the items that have to do with gameplay such as: items, character creation, enemies, and geography, would help make this article more cohesive. I would like to start the process soon. If there are any other ideas out there please put them here.Giddeanx (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia is not meant to be a game manual or guide. I think it would be best to see how other similar articles are formatted (World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, etc.) when reformatting this article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no intention of making it a game guide. What is here is poorly written and meandering. The article for WoW includes a gameplay section. It would be more like describing how the game is played so someone outside would get a better understanding. Save game guides for game websites. Also by grouping all of the gameplay elements into one section a casual visitor, who is not interested in gameplay, can use the contents table to more easily skip it. Giddeanx (talk) 11:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, then try to make the article more cohesive then :D—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Resurrection

I know its been a while since this discussion went on (reference to discussion #16) but I created the geography and enemies pages. I created them for exactly the reason Ryulong mentioned: to describe things that would otherwise make this article way too long. I can't comment on the character creation page but I can on the two I already mentioned. I propose that we bring them back...there never was a major problem with them before; besides, I found them quite useful over the years. Plus, I remember having that issue come up when I was still active for this those pages and the was never a big problem then. Why not bring them back and possibly modify them again? CaptainJade9

The issue was that the content was not notable for inclusion on Wikipedia and they looked more like game guides than anything else. If you can rewrite them such that they do not appear like game guides, then the articles can exist.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I plan on it then...however I must disagree that the particular pages that I mentioned did not look like game guides. They looked like any lengthy article you'd find in other encyclopedia or on some particular wiki pages. CaptainJade9

Merge to create Universe article

Many of the articles in Category:City of Heroes characters are stubs with no secondary sources and no signs of being able to expand with significant out-of-universe information. I believe most of them would end up deleted if taken to AFD. I suggest merging them into an article such as Universe of City of Heroes. Pagrashtak 21:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Revisiting this general idea, would it be acceptable to merge the Geography section to the universe article? Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 07:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

This thread is over a year old. A new discussion should be started instead of picking up the old one.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Not updated?

Two issues have gone by, 12 and 13, and nobody has seemed to have payed any attention to it. Not updated at all. Not even the powersets for 12 and 13 have been updated (being Pain Domination for 12 and Shields for 13.) If I had an account on Wikipedia, which I will soon enough, I would update this myself. But I just wanted to mention it before I just wrote it down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.185.192 (talk) 13:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Article isn't protected, you could add the info whenever. Though getting a username would be a good idea. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 13:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Controversy

According to Gamespy City of Heroes was no#8 for 2004 irrespective of the claims on City of Heroes website. I suspect this is a deliberate attempt to decieve people but that asides, I think Gamespy is a better source for who got game of the year 2004 then the developers or City of Heroes and therefore the reference on the article to their award should be deleted.--Senor Freebie (talk) 06:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

In any case like this, where two references conflict, find a third source. There is no reason to assume that one reference is more trustworthy or better than another. Perhaps GameSpy got it wrong, and CoH's site was correct all along. Get a third reference, such as whoever hands out the awards. Assumption that one source is more correct than another is still assumption. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 09:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I just checked out the awards page on the City of Heroes website, and the award claimed was not "Game of the Year", but "Editor's Choice" and "Game of the Month" for May 04. I imagine that whoever added the award to the article was added all or most of the awards at the same time, and mistyped this award. CoH isn't claiming a "Game of the Year" award from GameSpy. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 09:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. One of my colleagues at work stated that they were a few days ago. He must've just seen the badges on their page and made that assumption. Still, the award was incorrectly listed here.--Senor Freebie (talk) 13:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

External linking Paragon Wiki

I'm linking Paragon Wiki per WP:ELYES factor 3, "neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to ... amount of detail". Although WP:ELNO factor 12 cautions against linking open wikis, Paragon Wiki does indeed have a stable history and numerous editors. There's a puzzling HTML comment in the article "DO NOT ADD ANY FANSITES TO THIS LIST! This includes any various MediaWiki sites that have been linked here. There is not one that is more notable than the others." which does not refer to any Wikipedia guideline or policy, so I'm assuming it's outdated. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Clarification: There used to be a few different active City of Heroes wikis, but only one wiki has been active lately. Thus why the HTML comment looks outdated to me. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 21:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

It's been the general thought on this page that, as soon as we allow linking to any one fansite, we make it much much harder to disallow others. I'm personally a big fan of PW, and maybe it has enough of a unique place in the CoH community that an exception can be carved for it. But I do not want to allow it at the expense of having to allow others. What about Herostats? Badge-hunters/Vidiots? COH faces? And the other prominent fansites. By allowing PW, are we not setting ourselves up for someone to come along and try to add others, with the understandable argument that once if we allow one fansite, we can no longer say "no fansites". - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

External wikis seem to have a different guideline than fansites in general. I suspect the reason is that often insider-oriented detail accumulates on certain pages (which game zones include the word "City"), crowding out information of general interest (how many subscribers the game has). See templates {{Gameguide}} {{Gamecleanup}} and {{Copy to gaming wiki}} which hint at game pages being prone to this phenomenon. With a linked external wiki, insider-oriented detail can be moved out to keep the Wikipedia page a manageable size. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 21:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

There is no reason to link to Paragon Wiki as it is a fansite. There is plenty on the official website to direct people to their fansites. We should not give any undue weight to any particular fansite just because it uses the Wiki format.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Paragon Wiki is not a fan site, it is an open wiki. Fan sites and open wikis have different justifications for external linking. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 06:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but a fan-run site that uses Mediawiki software, despite what WP:ELNO says, should not be added to this list. There is no need to give a link to Paragon Wiki. I'm aware that point 12 of WP:ELNO states that there should e "Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors.", but WP:EL is a guideline and things are decided on a case by case basis. Both TexasAndroid and I do not think that this link should be here, so that is a consensus against your suggested changes. This is where the essay WP:BRD comes into play. Just because your reading of WP:EL dictates that Paragon Wiki could be linked on this article, it does not mean it should or will.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:05, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Paragonwiki should not be the only fansite linked. Rather than have multiple links cluttering the article, a link only to the official fansite portal is the best compromise solution. <disclosure> I say that as an active editor over at paragonwiki. Catwhoorg (talk) 12:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

It could be a solution to link to this. I'm not sure how effective at the moment it would be, but it's a new thing to discuss.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 14:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I think I understand your position, that you're saying: (1) Wikis edited by fans are still fan sites, so should meet the requirements of both the fan site and the open wiki external linking guidelines. It should be written by a recognized authority, and it should be active and stable. (2) Guidelines aside, linking to Paragon Wiki doesn't do anything for the article anyway.

My response to (1) is that the fan site guideline makes no sense when applied to a wiki. Wikis don't have a single editor to judge how authoritative he or she is. Wikis can only be judged by activity and stability. My response to (2) is that links to wikis serve a practical purpose than links to fan sites do not. Links to wikis help direct constructive but too-detailed edits, and readers looking for such detailed information, to the better organization of a wiki specializing in the topic. The DAoC, Dofus, Eve Online, EQ2, Guild Wars, Lineage, MapleStory, RuneScape, SWG, Ultima Online, and WoW articles all use external links to wikis to good effect; the level of specific gameplay detail in these articles isn't as excessive as you might expect. This article, on the other hand, listed and described the game zones with the word "City" in their names until just last month. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 03:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I don't know how you managed to delete every thing else on this page but this thread. Second, just because it is a wiki does not give it any more privilege to be linked on this article. Those other sites are all hosted on Wikia, and just because other stuff happens on other pages it doesn't mean it's going to happen on this one. Knowledge of the different zones of Paragon City and the Rogue Isles is not essential to the knowledge of the lay reader of this article. You are right in the fact is that is where Paragon Wiki comes in. However, this article does not have to link to it. Just because the information is not on this page and is on the other website is not a good enough reason to link to that other website. The editors of those articles decided that the Wikia link is helpful. The editors here have decided that linking to any fansite, in the Mediawiki software or not, should not be linked to. The fact that the official CoH website has a portal to submitted fansites is enough, and is easy enough to find on the official website. What we are deciding here is whether or not there should be a link to the fansite portal on this article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

(Apologies for breaking the talk page, and thanks for fixing it.)

Consensus can change. I know your intent isn't to say that you own the external links section of this article, but by saying that unlinking Paragon Wiki is not open to further discussion, citing a "consensus" formed between you and a semi-agreeing post from two weeks ago from TexasAndroid, that's what it's starting to feel like. Since this dispute already teetered dangerously close to an edit war due to the liberal use of reverts of non-vandalism edits, including one revert without explanation, I'm going to keep my hands off the article for now, and ask for a third opinion instead. Hope we can work this out with the help of someone impartial. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 06:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

You can stop throwing policies and guidelines at me. Consensus can change, but it's not going to happen in this instance right now. There are multiple people here who disagree with directly linking to the Paragon Wiki page, even if one is several weeks old at this point. Right now we're discussing whether or not a link to the fansite portal would be effective on this article. There have been no reverts of non-vandalism edits, simply uses of undo with a clear reason as to why. There is already a third opinion (Catwhoorg's) who gave a possible solution. And I will say again: Just because there's a fan wiki does not mean there is a necessity to link to it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Catwhoorg seems to agree with me on whether Paragon Wiki should be linked, actually, and I wouldn't call "no" as a one word revert summary a clear reason. I'm standing by Paragon Wiki being a yes ("what should be linked" criterion #3).

As for the (oxymoron of the day) official fan site directory, it's a maybe ("links to be considered" criterion #3). I have two concerns with that directory page, though. First: yeah, it's official, but it's not being maintained. The directory is "not accepting any new submissions" and contains dead links. Second, there's a neutrality problem, as only sites that followed certain rules got listed. Paragon Wiki's community portal is more up to date and inclusive. WP:EL suggests another possibility, {{dmoz}} to link to the City of Heroes Open Directory page. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 07:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

No... Catwhoorg seems to agree that there should not be a link. If anything, we should only be linking to what the City of Heroes team decided to list as fansites, the fansite portal. And with Dmz5's comment below, it should be clear that there do not to be any more additional links to any other websites on this article, unless it is a news article in a reference. Your interpretations of WP:EL are proving to be faulty or you are merely interpreting them to feign a possible guideline that is in your favor. The fansites have information that are not important to the article. The fanwiki has information that is not important to the article. No matter how many websites are out there or how reliable you are making Paragon Wiki out to be out of the other fan wikis (or Wikias) will not factor in to the fact that there is currently a consensus against the addition of any non-official website links on this article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Let me be very clear. Im in favor of linking the official fansite portal. I am not in favour of linking paragonwiki, despite being an active editor over there. Catwhoorg (talk) 16:51, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Opinion

I have no stake in this discussion, I just came here via the 3rd opinion page. Here is my opinion: whether this external site is construed as a wiki or a fansite or both seems to be beside the point. Rather, the question is, why does this link belong in the article. Wikipedia articles are meant to be concise and informative descriptions, backed up by sources. An article is not a jumping off point to a lot of external content. That is what the game's website is for. Unless the external link is a substantial source for the article or a major locus of content - i.e. the game's official website - it shouldn't be here, regardless of the ins and outs of when we should and shouldn't link to other wikis. My opinion is that this link is unencyclopedic and shouldn't be here. -Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 23:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 07:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

"superhero" word

Wouldn't it be interesting to point out that the word "superhero" o "super-hero" is never used in any marketing material, because it is trademarked my Marvel and DC? (in all the materials, there are words like "super powered hero" - http://www.cityofheroes.com/trial/index.html )

I don't know about the game itself, though, because I have never played it... --85.160.71.24 (talk) 13:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No, not really.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

That is such a broad idea that you'd have to bring it up in every other super-heroic endeavor by other companies in their Wikipedia articles and there's really no reason to do so when it comes to the game itself. There has been no issue with trademark of the word itself in the game's history. About character trademarks, yes. About the word "superhero", no. It also doesn't merit a mention here because you can specifically go to the article about [Superheroes] itself and get the information there which is a much more efficient and direct way to get that information anyway. Besides, you can follow links in the footer of the article from "Superhero video games" to Category:Superheroes and finally to Superhero anyway--ThePenciler (talk) 01:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

NCSoft and/or Cryptic made a point of not using the term "super-hero" in the marketing or the game. It's pretty clear that they knew that DC Comics and Marvel Comics jointly-owned the term "super-hero" (along with a toy company actually) and took great lengths to attempt to avoid judicial altercations with DC Comics and Marvel Comics. Marvel Comics, being the more aggressively sue-happy of the two companies, was more than willing to take shot of getting their hooks into NCSoft over City of Heroes in general - they would have had a hay-day if the term "super-hero" was used in the game or related to the game in official marketing or advertising material.

As it was, player-based copyright infringement of DC Comics and Marvel Comics was rampant in City of Heroes. The game gave you the ability to highly customize your characters and this meant that it had the capacity to come pretty close to making any DC Comics or Marvel Comics character in the game - in both image and super-power (especially once power color-customization came along). WereTech (talk) 13:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Updates

Would it be feasible to tableize these updates showing effective dates (approximations fine on older issues), Update Titles, Gameplay Changes, UI Changes, and Rules Changes as possible columns? This I think would shore up each issue to the most essential changes per issue, make descriptions simpler, and resemble something like the charts used in TV Seasons on Wikipedia for example.

I'd try the "go bold" attempt, but I believe there's enough of a following in editors for this page to try for consensus first before ruffling feathers. 209.180.155.12 (talk) 02:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

A table could work. We'd just have to make sure that everything is officially stated by the updates.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Alrighty, then... I'll take a crack at it later next week if no one beats me to it. (And allow time for others who think it's fine the way it looks now to speak up.) 209.180.155.12 (talk) 01:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I edited the issue list into a table as suggested, since nobody's objected in the last 6 months LLamaBoy (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks brilliant, that's why. 209.180.155.12 (talk) 13:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Criticism fix

Merge the Praise/Criticism areas into one, call it "Reception"? 209.180.155.12 (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Very good.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Why even have the criticism section's info any more anyway? It's about a very tiny part of the game's community (who are always complaining about something) and has either been gotten used to or forgotten by most of the community now. I think we should just have "Reception" and keep it to official sources, community problems shouldn't really be aired on Wikipedia. Just my opinion. --Zikar (talk) 07:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I think we could nuke both sections. It's just boosterism and forum whining.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Players liked pre i5 and pre ED CoH, and many left after those changes. The statement "It's about a very tiny part of the game's community (who are always complaining about something)..." is rather naive considering the big changes effect on the game's population. Actually, considering the fact that the game has lost significant numbers of subscribers with each major "nerf", I think that the criticism section should be expanded. The massive PvP change and recent AE changes being examples. The base of people upset by the changes may be tiny in your opinion, but even if only 25% of the people that subscribe and play regularly are unhappy with the changes thus far, isn't that valid? I still hear people complain on global channels, SG chat, and other places talking about how they wish ED was never implemented, let alone the disdain for the nerfs that came previously. Many of my friends left after i16, and even Freedom has been a bit slow after the recent AE changes. Being that the decisions the devs have made have had drastic effects on not only the game itself directly, but upon the amount of players in the player base thus limiting SG/VG, teaming and PvP options for the remaining players, I would think that this section is completely valid and even pertinent to the article. The only reason that we don't hear more complaints in game or on the forums is because the elite, the dev fan boys, do their best to stifle the malcontents quickly by making them feel like idiots for not being satisfied with their toons getting crappier by the issue. Don't get me wrong, the devs work hard and make cool big changes too. AE, Auction house and Invention being a few. The Quality of life changes are cool too, but all this stuff does nothing to bring in new subscribers. It merely keeps the current ones happy for a while.98.215.128.112 (talk) 05:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

This typifies why you should get rid of it; the people who think it's accurate also think players have been leaving in droves and the game is surely about to die... every issue for the last three years (so, one might ask, why haven't they all gone by now?) It's ancient history now; the game's been the post-ED game for most of its life. WP is surely not a soapbox for the minituae of fanboy grudges. 81.187.27.126 (talk) 05:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Is that really your response to all of my points? Basically stating "The game isn't dead yet, so obviously nothing's wrong. No more posting bad stuff about the game." What a horribly weak argument, please try again.98.215.128.112 (talk) 15:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Got bold: slapped ED into Reception without a criticism header. In fact, I think the changes mentioned through Issue 14 regarding Architect Edition may be another paragraph to add to the Reception for balance of the area as a whole. I feel that showing equal parts of polish and tarnish in reception would be accurate to demonstrate reception, as long as it's kept to significant events in game history.

ED is a classic example of developer nerfing. I agree conveying it does make a more clear picture of the community as a whole (if we keep it to official sources it may be painting the game too much with rose-colored glasses... While I love playing it, it's certainly not without conflict), but I could agree with Ryulong that as a low-importance classified article that the dealings of prior issues with a game that now has a smaller population than it did in it's past may not be productive in dwelling about too much. One possible way to meet Ryulong's point perhaps: Just truncate the ED paragraph a bit to it's essential points only and not minutia about "how", just the "what and why", but give the same treatment to the "positive" paragraphs in Reception as well... take some weight out of the whole area. Architect Edition is one other area I feel has good points to cover, particularly Positron's Doctrine of "(Within reason...) give the player what they want" and the work done to correct the oversights made in the release. (I'd get even more bold and write it, but my workplace blocks COH websites as a whole.)

The work on AE would need to be done fairly soon while the articles and RSS are all still fairly recent in Massively and other places, or the content would have the same problem that GDN and ED now have: outside sources are waning on confirming these problems as older sources fade for whatever reason. 209.180.155.12 (talk) 11:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

City of Heroes Senior Designer Joe Morrissey on the Conception and Philosophy Behind the Architect System

Saw a good interview about the game [2] it mention the architect system for user generated content which does not seem to get mention in the article. I've not played the game so I don't really feel confident to add info about it. --Salix (talk): 22:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

It was a very good system actually. However, instead of being used for its intended purpose - allowing players to create their own missions with their own dialog, heroes, villains, and NPCs - , it was turned into a tool for copyright infringement of DC Comics and Marvel Comics properties (I myself witnessed some X-Men player-created missions), Power-leveling via exploits (players found weakness in the system that allowed very little effort to yield great rewards so much so that some players simply played [more at sat and did nothing while high level characters on the team decimated the helpless enemies] the same mission over-and-over again for a couple of hours and they were at the games level-cap), and erotic content (some players took lengths to conceal through the use of running missions in a test mode that allowed missions to be run by only players that a player invited rather than "publishing" the content wherein all other players would have access to the content - the players that didn't faced suspension and banning and this did occur.) The Power-leveling was the most devastating to the Community spirit that had been built-up among the subscriber base. A whole new type of player began to play City of Heroes simply to avoid playing the actual game and only to get a character that was at the highest level before really trying to play any of the content. These players were lost in the Open World (non-instanced content) and knew nothing about the in depth lore that was build-up and presented to characters through the leveling content. The fact is that so many players were creating content that it was virtually impossible for the DEVs to even make much of a real attempt to police these player-created missions.

This, in fact, one of the three big errors that occurred with City of Heroes. Not fore-seeing what players would do with the mission-builder (I mean - isn't it pretty obvious if you think about it at all?), not dropping the 40-ton ban-hammer that they said they would (they said that they were going to suspend and ban people for misusing it when it went into beta testing, started to stand by their word when it went live, then actively hiding every trace of forum documentation that ever said that they would or mentioned the repercussion during the initial days of the mission-architects release), and going F2P (this wasn't the kind of game that Koreans were going to play regardless of the pricing) WereTech (talk) 13:28, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Sections regarding Issue 17 and Going Rogue contain incorrect or unsourced information

The aforementioned parts of the article state that Issue 17 will include new power sets (Dual Pistols and Demon Summoning) and that Going Rogue will include a graphics update, however the Official Issue 17 Overview Page makes absolutely no mention of the new power sets coming specifically with Issue 17 and does make mention of an upcoming graphics upgrade with that issue. A preliminary internet search gives no information about a graphics upgrade ALSO coming with Going Rogue.

I will remove these information bits from the article.

If anyone can find factual verifiable confirmation declaring that the Power Sets will be included with Issue 17 and that Going Rogue will have it's own graphics upgrade different from the Ultramode coming with Issue 17, then please put the information back into the article at that time and make the appropriate links.

Light Bearer (talk) 09:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Issue 18 is Going Rogue. Utramode was the new graphics mode that was to be added with Going Rogue. I do not recall if this was actually able to be employed before the Going Rogue went live. They did allow us to use Dual Pistols and Demon Summon power sets early on the live servers if we pre-purchased Going Rogue (aka before the release date) and I believe that this was accessible once Issue 17 dropped, but it simply didn't unlock until you could enter a "code" for Going Rogue (it was a foundation for the implementation of Going Rogue). I don't have a time time-table for when actual large downloads occurred, but I do not believe there was another substantial download after the Issue 17 release until just before Going Rogue went live - and this would mean that the power sets were already in the content, but simply not "unlocked".

There was no actual game box for Going Rogue at least did not get one at GameStop. As I recall, I received a code only. Once I had "attached" the code to my subscription account, I was able to access the Demon Summoning and Dual Pistol sets - there was no additional download major download but there might have been small one to "unlock" the content. I don't recall if was able to run any of the "alignment changing" content until the day before the official release date(the night before this was a huge download) but I know that I couldn't change sides (or probably go Rogue or Vigilante) until the Black Market opened a day early for those that pre-ordered. You definitely could not get into the Praetorian "City" early and that was where the actual content generated for the Ultramode was located. (If you bought it before the release date they also gave you some little hinky enhancements to allow you to run through level 1-5 faster).

I can not recall if you could individual buy these powers in the market place without purchasing Going Rogue before or until after the release date - but I'm assuming it was after the release date (maybe even 30 days after the release date) as they were pushing for the sale of Going Rogue.

The Ultramode was up and running on the test server before Going Rogue was released. Really Going Rogue was designed with Ultra-Mode in mind; it simply gave greater presentation of the older content. The content created for Ultramode - the Praetorian City" - didn't even really display entirely correctly on older graphics cards. I know I had plenty issues with it especially involving issue where surfaces were far too blindingly white.

Only the DEVs might be able to tell you for sure, because NCSoft seems to have taken great care to destroy as much historical information on City of Heroes as possible - they might as well have been Burning the Library of Alexandria. WereTech (talk) 13:59, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Paragonwiki: in-game mention

Paragon Wiki is now mentioned in the game's tooltips. I know of no other third party site so mentioned. This contradicts the noticeably out-of-date "There is not one [MediaWiki site] that is more notable than the others" comment. Given Paragon Wiki's continued history of stability and activity, coupled with this unique recognition as a comprehensive informational site, I think an external link is appropriate. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 06:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

It does not need to be linked.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:23, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

My thoughts haven't changed since the last go round. A link to the official fan site portal (http://www.cityofheroes.com/community/fan_sites/fan_sites.html) is not unreasonable. Singling out Pwiki for an external link, over and above say Badge Hunter shouldn't be done, they are both great resources. The fan page, links to them both. That seems to be the best way of keeping a neutral point of view. Catwhoorg (talk) 15:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not adamant that Paragonwiki must be linked, but at least the HTML comment needs to be changed or removed, since it makes the consensus look uninformed and out-of-date. There is indisputably one MediaWiki site that is more notable than the others. The real reason it's not linked to, as I understand it, is because some editors believe wikis are fansites and should be held to fansite authorship standards. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 03:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

It is simply not a necessity that any particular non-NCSoft website be linked, other than for news referencing.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:35, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what policy, guideline, or consensus discussion you're referring to. My last post, if I may direct your attention, referred to the HTML comment, which contains a striking inaccuracy and can be improved.

Current wording: "DO not ADD ANY FANSITES TO THIS LIST! This includes any various MediaWiki sites that have been linked here. There is not one that is more notable than the others."

Proposed wording (consulting WP:EL and WP:HIDDEN): "External links to fansites should generally be avoided unless written by a recognized authority. See WP:EL for details. For this article, open wikis are considered fansites by consensus. See this article's talk page for details."

Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 03:51, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh. Why bother with formalities?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:34, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Neither City of Heroes nor Paragon Wiki are in mainstream consciousness, and Wikipedia isn't a platform to change that. I defer to Catwhoorg's wisdom on this one (since he is a major editor of ParagonWiki), best way to avoid 45 fan sites clamoring for attention (imagine the edit wars over notability) to be listed on the Wikipedia page of a game that isn't in mainstream attention (unfortunately, the only one to buck this tide is WoW) is to list none of them. As King Solomon as it gets. Honestly, it's been a year since the tip screens were added to the game, and if it wasn't a significant part of the argument a year ago, I don't see how it matters specifically now. 209.180.155.12 (talk) 05:45, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Game Engine

What is the name of the City of Heroes game engine? I don't see it in the article. Is it CoX (stands for City of X)? Or is CoX the name of a company? 98.151.11.248 (talk) 06:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

The engine was created by Cryptic, who didn't discuss such things back in 2004. I would guess it's not too dissimilar to the Cryptic Engine used to power Champions Online and Star Trek Online, just that Paragon Studios won't say what engine it is now that they're not with Cryptic anymore.

CoX is an older acronym used by players and MMO critics to describe both sides: "City of X" which could mean City of Heroes or City of Villains. It's unofficial, just how players referred to both titles before the game world merge in 2007, now most people just call it City of Heroes or CoH. 209.180.155.12 (talk) 13:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

New Item Packs

There have been multiple new item packs added namely the animal pack, the origins pack and the Going Rogue complete item pack. This should be reflected on the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.137.204.208 (talk) 19:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality Dispute?

At the top was a warning box that read, "The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (February 2011)"

But when I checked this talk page I didn't see any dispute about the neutrality of the article. It appears to have been added during a drive-by-edit by an unregistered IP address.

If I'm wrong then someone can always put the box back up on the page, and then add a big "Don't Vandalize!!!" warning to my talk page as usual. Seanr451 (talk) 22:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Semi-Protection?

Since COH is end of life, the fanbase is going to repeatedly vandalize this page. You might want to lock it if you hope at all to keep it the way it is. (Versus folks slapping in petition and kickstarter links over and over again. 75.141.15.56 (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I requested this before the damage really started, but it was denied because "protection is not preventative".—Ryulong (琉竜) 20:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I added a sentence stating that the former developers and various fan projects were underway seeking to save the game, referenced to the Massively MMO news site. Since the game is not yet closed, efforts are in fact underway to save it, and they've been covered in reliable sources, I think at least a brief notice should be taken of the fact. I would agree that petition and kickstarter links probably don't belong in the article directly. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

With the RS, yup, good to include it. Agree that the petition and kickstarter aren't needed here. Ravensfire (talk) 16:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

That CNN source looks like it was just someone who was in no way affiliated with CNN posting a story to their site. It has "NOT VETTED FOR CNN" plastered all over it. I've removed it, as it was just a pisspoor attempt to get the Change.org petition posted somewhere.—Ryulong (琉竜) 20:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

This is the format of the CNN iReport: regular citizens submit stories. The article has been vetted by CNN iReport Producer Henry Hanks as newsworthy. Is your stance that Wikipedia should not link to iReports in general, there are plenty other links to it, for example: Dolphin_Action_and_Protection_Group? Are you against including it because Henry Hanks admits to having played City of Heroes? I understand excluding articles "NOT VETTED FOR CNN" but this article no longer is at that status. I think http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-840174 would make a valid reference to a report documenting the efforts to save the game, it describes all the important efforts and links to them. Your reaction sounds emotional to me, especially the word "pisspoor", can you explain your reasoning? AdriaanRenting (talk) 21:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

My stance is that the iReports are not reliable sources as anyone can submit them. But these are just opinion pieces and have no actual bearing on the events other than this one person's response to them. It's also a vague attempt to include the petitions.—Ryulong (琉竜) 23:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Announced the closure of City of Heroes

On August 31 NCsoff made ​​the decision to close Paragon Studios [3] --Gusama Romero (talk) 02:20, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

It's covered already.—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

It may be covered, but the article as a whole still contains quite a few references to the game still being active, verb tenses and such. could use a good going-over.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.42.99.87 (talk) 19:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Too Long (Ver. 2)

For a defunct video game, the length of this article compared to its importance scale (Low, C) seems out of whack. Is there anything that can be trimmed out since people can't play it anymore and notability isn't likely to increase? (Disclaimer: I am a ex-player, I am not trying to troll folks, but I also see less than 10% of a chance NCSoft is going to change their stance on the COH IP.) I figured mentioning this in Talk before "being bold" would be a wise move instead of revert wars. 75.141.15.56 (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Why would it matter to the length of the article that the game's now defunct? And why should an article of "low importance" be short? --Xario (talk) 14:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Subscription

This section is a bit disingenuous.

At the time that City of Heroes came out all (if not all - a very high percentage) of MMORPGs were subscription based. It was only during the time that City of Heroes was available to play that things like game-trails, extended-game trails, and F2P mechanics began to appear.

This kind of goes to the "free updates" as well as other games were charging when they updated their games (example: World of Warcraft). City of Heroes did have two "paid updates" - City of Villains and City of Heroes :: Going Rogue. So City of Heroes went through at least these phases of game access during it's life-span. Only Subscription (for full access)

Only Subscription (with some cash shop purchases)

Subscription to City of Heroes, City of Villains, or both at the same time (all with some cash shop purchases) and 3 or 7 day free trial to City of Heroes (can't remember which - but capped at level 13 and no cash shop access) (can't remember if you could upgrade these accounts or if had to start all over if you subscribed)(These trail "codes" came in the City of Villains box - one for you, in case you didn't already play City of Heroes, and one for a friend)

Subscription to City of Heroes/City of Villains as one regardless if you bought both the City of Heroes and the City of Villains (with some cash shop purchases)

Subscriptions (cash shop purchase options begin increasing and including non-cosmetic items) and 14-day free trail (capped at level 13 and no cash shop, but characters could be converted to a full account status by subscribing).

Subscriptions (cash shop purchase options begin increasing and including non-cosmetic items) and a free trial that never ended (but was capped at level 13 with no cash shop access, but characters could be converted to a full account by subscribing)

Subscriptions (cash shop purchase options begin increasing and including non-cosmetic items) and a F2P (free-to-play) model with no level cap and through which you could purchase options that that subscribers where receiving access to "for free" (free if you consider paying a subscription fee not paying anything for access to the game material from the cash shop (as well as cash shop access to anything that subscribers could purchase previously - I'm pretty sure this included character slots, etc.)

It is important note that City of Heroes (et al.) didn't go F2P until other games were being released as near F2P such as NCSoft titles like Guild Wars 2 - where you pay for the initial game but there are no on-going subscription fees. (As I recall, Guild Wars did have subscription fee - at least in America). Even City of Hero competitors Champions Online and DC Universe Online started as subscription-only models with the exception that both of them offered a life-time subscription option before the "live" release of the game. This should be noted at least here. The section in the article on subscriptions seems to paint a completely different picture from what actually when on in the game and in the gaming world in general at the time that City of Heroes was up and running. WereTech (talk) 12:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC) edited to fix a chronological error and indicate the form that the original "trial" was delivered to customers. - WereTech (talk) 13:00, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on City of Heroes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080828191414/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/archives/2007/07/city_of_heroes_30.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/archives/2007/07/city_of_heroes_30.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080709031916/http://www.scifi.com:80/scifiwire/index.php?category=0 to http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=41833
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928041054/http://www.ncsoft.com/eng/NCPress/View.asp?hseq=1 to http://www.ncsoft.com/eng/NCPress/View.asp?hSeq=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on City of Heroes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://edenstudiosdiscussionboards.yuku.com/reply/41669/t/Huh-.html#reply-41669
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090720070201/http://www.cityofheroes.com:80/goingrogue/en-gb/index.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/goingrogue/en-gb/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Various resurrection, homage, and "in the spirit of" games

There seem to be a large number of homage projects; ranging from 'same client' to server side projects based on the chat protocol that NCSoft released, and spiritual successors.

• Paragon Chat | original game client; allows costume customization and moving in world; no combat
• Titans Online | Volunteer project
• Ship of Heroes | Spiritual successor / Commercial
• Valiance Online | Spiritual successor / Commercial

There are also similar games, such as DC Comics Online and Champions Online. (I'd say Marvel Online isn't as you can't customize it seems like?)

What do you guys think of me adding a section, something like "Successors / Similar games"? I was building the list for my own purposes and would like to give back to the community, which is surprisingly still active (I saw over a dozen people 'in game' with Paragon Chat).

Jgwinner (talk) 21:39, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on City of Heroes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090501104845/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_15/issue_15_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_15/issue_15_overview.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=41833

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on City of Heroes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090922121535/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/its_all_access.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/its_all_access.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718111343/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/city_of_heroes_steams_ahead.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/city_of_heroes_steams_ahead.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515011658/http://www.newzyouwant.com/NCsoft/CityofHeroes_GoingRogue_V1.html to http://www.newzyouwant.com/NCsoft/CityofHeroes_GoingRogue_V1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100626002711/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/city_of_heroes_going_rogue_rel.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/city_of_heroes_going_rogue_rel.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110623015652/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/freedom/freedom_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/freedom/freedom_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090314180534/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_14/issue_14_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_14/issue_14_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090719081912/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_16/issue_16_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_16/issue_16_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100421220506/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_17/issue_17_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_17/issue_17_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100813191044/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_18/issue_18_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_18/issue_18_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110305000708/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_20/issue_20_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_20/issue_20_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110624230155/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_21/issue_21_overview.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/game_updates/issue_21/issue_21_overview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100602032031/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/new_gamestoprazer_going_rogue.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/new_gamestoprazer_going_rogue.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929022441/http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=269559 to http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=269559
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100425183041/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/city_of_heroes_6_year_annivers.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/news_archive/city_of_heroes_6_year_annivers.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110809022501/http://www.zam.com/story.html?story=17048 to http://www.zam.com/story.html?story=17048
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131210041408/http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/246959/page/3 to http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/246959/page/3
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070529233124/http://coh.ogaming.com/data/618~Pay-to-Play.php to http://coh.ogaming.com/data/618~Pay-to-Play.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081023211856/http://www.cityofheroes.com/community/veteranrewards.html to http://www.cityofheroes.com/community/veteranrewards.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120906193718/http://www.ncsoft.com/en/legal/user-agreements/city-of-heroes-user-agreement.html to http://www.ncsoft.com/en/legal/user-agreements/city-of-heroes-user-agreement.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Secret server that had run for 7 years after the game shut down

We should update the wiki page with this new information

https://www.pcgamer.com/a-fully-functioning-city-of-heroes-private-server-has-somehow-been-kept-secret-for-six-years/

Release date

release date was April 28th Link shows the 2 year anniversary annoucement reflecting that date

https://web.archive.org/web/20060522225131/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/archives/2006/04/celebrating_cit.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20040610021050/http://www.cityofheroes.com/news/item224.html

Catwhoorg (talk) 17:11, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Coevers: https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/games/franchise/631-city-of-heroes DoctorHver (talk) 05:42, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Homecoming, Rebirth, etc...

Is there any particular reason the page hasn't been updated in the last year or so to reflect all the new private servers such as Homecoming, etc. that have sprung up? It seems odd that it's been a whole year with not a single mention. I wouldn't want to try to put something in about that if there was some reason it would immediately be reverted. —Robotech_Master (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Homecoming has acquired a license

So what do you do when there's new news about the game but there aren't news articles reporting on it and the only thing reporting on it is an official news article from the game itself? City of Heroes: Homecoming has apparently acquired a license from NCSoft to host their game, and I have added a citation to the news on the game's website. Matthew Cenance (talk) 17:06, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks like we finally have confirmation from NCSoft about the license agreement, per PC Gamer: https://www.pcgamer.com/games/mmo/with-a-near-unprecedented-official-license-for-its-fan-server-one-of-pc-gamings-great-mmos-has-a-vibrant-future-let-it-be-shouted-far-and-wide-city-of-heroes-lives-again/ 71.61.91.13 (talk) 16:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Parity Update

As Old devs roll into the forums and NCsoft continues their quiet stance I feel a parity update was due to bring the article into the present. Should the article be stuck as an archival with a new page for Homecoming or does everyone agree that it should be brought back to the present. SoggiestSoup (talk) 12:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)