Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Villains.
sepher
Member Posts: 3,561
I'm probably behind in any news regarding the ability to play villains at launch, but last I heard it sounded sorta cemented that there'd be Hero only gameplay with the only PvP being some arena deal or somesuch.
There's a mentioning of Villain gameplay in a new 1up preview/interview from a few days ago though: http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3167585&p=4
The discourse dovetails naturally into City of Villains and whether Champions will let you play the bad guy right out of the box. Emmert responds with a "maybe," though the duo seems to think they're onto something special. "[In COH/COV], heroes were always more popular than villains," says Lewis, "but the hero and villain gameplay was pretty much the same. We think the villains' content was a lot better, and we found a lot of people playing villains simply because it was a new and better experience. But it's something we're thinking about in Champions: Is the gameplay experience the same for a hero and a villain? But that's part of our top-secret plan we're not talking about."
I sure hope they DO allow villains at launch, especially if they want to be seen as a company that's learned from some of City of Heroes shortcomings.
It wouldn't hurt if they evolved their ideas about PvP inclusion as well. Maybe they will after the three heavyweights of PvP hit this year; AoC's border kingdoms, WAR's RvR, and if nothing else, WoW's world PvP.
I'd be satisfied with just the ability to play a villain though.
Comments
For me the more important aspect of playing a villain at launch would be for the experience to actually be different. CoV really doesn't address that very well. It's more or less doing exactly the same things as a hero, but with different dialogue.
I'd be happy if they waited till later to allow villain characters and focused on making them actually different from heros.
The problem with adding them later though is the population imbalance issues that CoX never managed to overcome; even though Villains, despite how similar the content, is actually kind of better in terms of quality.
Sepher is right. Although most ppl prefer playing as Villians in CoX because of the newer content
Honestly I'm pretty skeptical about including villains. I think making COV was a big mistake, and if they would have focused on COH they could have a much better product. CoV was basically a copy of COH with an evil theme. Such a waste of resources.
If an MMO has just one faction (i.e. heroes) then the developers have a lot more freedom to develop great pve content for that faction.
But I suppose there could be creative ways to do villains that wouldn't detract from the pve content. Maybe it would be something where after your hero hits the level cap you can unlock a villain for PVP and some specific villain content, but the main game would be hero PVE content.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
"Shhhhh Shhhh, that's right calm down, stop crying, you'll stop breathing and go to sleep very soon. That's right. ..Goodnight"
would be nice to make a villian and make a ach nemneis hero..
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
Well that's a management issue. It doesn't mean City of Villains was a bad move just because they neglected another lackluster part of the game.All the more reason to launch with Villains at launch, so a mirror copy of whatever they come up with now won't be needed a year into launch.
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
Well that's a management issue. It doesn't mean City of Villains was a bad move just because they neglected another lackluster part of the game.All the more reason to launch with Villains at launch, so a mirror copy of whatever they come up with now won't be needed a year into launch.
The point is that they had a limited amount of resources and they used a lot of their manpower to make an expansion that didn't really include anything for those playing COH. They should have done an expansion that added levels, archetypes, and lots of content for COH players. They neglected COH because of COV, so yes, I think it was a very bad move.
Including villains from the start will also be a bad move IMO if they intend to make both sides equal. You'll just be splitting the content in half. I don't see the point in severely limiting the PVE experience for heroes just because some miscreants feel compelled to be "evil". I hope they do like LOTRO and make the evil faction limited to PVP. You could have deep and compelling pvp in competitive missions (like battlegrounds) and PVP zones without having to make any sacrifices for the PVE game.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
Or they could allow for Hero Civil Wars... like Marvell did.
- CaesarsGhost
Lead Gameplay and Gameworld Designer for a yet unnamed MMO Title.
"When people tell me designing a game is easy, I try to get them to design a board game. Most people don't last 5 minutes, the rest rarely last more then a day. The final few realize it's neither fun nor easy."
Villians will eventually be playable. Whether at launch or an expansion. It is too easy to generate revenue. City of Villians kept their existing player base subscriptions and problably caused players to reactivate accounts ( I know I did).
The real challange for this game is to separate itself from the City of Heroes/Villians. Graphics are one, but what else?
If villains and pvp is in at launch I will be in the first seat playing this game.
If not I will never pick it up.
Just my preferences... that is all. Coh was fun for a while, but CoV came waaay too late to give any meaning ...
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
I sure hope they DO allow villains at launch, especially if they want to be seen as a company that's learned from some of City of Heroes shortcomings.
It wouldn't hurt if they evolved their ideas about PvP inclusion as well. Maybe they will after the three heavyweights of PvP hit this year; AoC's border kingdoms, WAR's RvR, and if nothing else, WoW's world PvP.
I'd be satisfied with just the ability to play a villain though.
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
Well that's a management issue. It doesn't mean City of Villains was a bad move just because they neglected another lackluster part of the game.All the more reason to launch with Villains at launch, so a mirror copy of whatever they come up with now won't be needed a year into launch.
The point is that they had a limited amount of resources and they used a lot of their manpower to make an expansion that didn't really include anything for those playing COH. They should have done an expansion that added levels, archetypes, and lots of content for COH players. They neglected COH because of COV, so yes, I think it was a very bad move.
Including villains from the start will also be a bad move IMO if they intend to make both sides equal. You'll just be splitting the content in half. I don't see the point in severely limiting the PVE experience for heroes just because some miscreants feel compelled to be "evil". I hope they do like LOTRO and make the evil faction limited to PVP. You could have deep and compelling pvp in competitive missions (like battlegrounds) and PVP zones without having to make any sacrifices for the PVE game.
Hey idiot, an entire seperate development team was used to create CoV. They did not relocate their current development team that was originally on CoH. Just because you like to be a goody good school girl, doesn't mean everyone else wants to. Hell, most popular games nowadays revolve around being a bad guy or a bad guy with somewhat good side. It's not old, rubbish, and corny like a simplistic hero that you hear and read everyday in your little comics.So, quit whining like a little prick who drop his popsicle and mommy want pay for a new one. You're starting to sound like the hippy of MMORPGS. Congratulations!
PEACE MAN!
P.S. You are a douche, and last I checked; no one wants to be around a douche.
ooh, you're such a badass. You're probably some emo queer that has to play the evil side because "nobody gets me! argh! I'm so complicated!"
P.S. you're a retard if you bought that crap about there being another development team doing COV. Technically true, but the result was the same. That team should have made a true expansion to COH with good content to keep the players interested.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
I doubt Villains will be playable at launch, thats just my opinion.
During a Game Informer exclusive, the developers clearly stated that, though they are making Champions Online, they have already "planned" a Villain part as well. Now by my judgement they're taking their time with CO, incorporating things they want while taking heed to what Coh/CoV lacks as well.
I'd rather wait for a Villains expansion. Don't get me wrong I WANT a Villains expansion lol, but I'd rather them take their time with it than rushing to deliver Champions AND Villains.
Backup Your Videogame CD's
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
Well that's a management issue. It doesn't mean City of Villains was a bad move just because they neglected another lackluster part of the game.All the more reason to launch with Villains at launch, so a mirror copy of whatever they come up with now won't be needed a year into launch.
The point is that they had a limited amount of resources and they used a lot of their manpower to make an expansion that didn't really include anything for those playing COH. They should have done an expansion that added levels, archetypes, and lots of content for COH players. They neglected COH because of COV, so yes, I think it was a very bad move.
Including villains from the start will also be a bad move IMO if they intend to make both sides equal. You'll just be splitting the content in half. I don't see the point in severely limiting the PVE experience for heroes just because some miscreants feel compelled to be "evil". I hope they do like LOTRO and make the evil faction limited to PVP. You could have deep and compelling pvp in competitive missions (like battlegrounds) and PVP zones without having to make any sacrifices for the PVE game.
well, just as you don't care to be a villain enough to want it right away, others of us out there(I am sure that there are more than you think) don't care to be a hero. I am going to play this game regardless, because it interests my fiancee and playing together with her is paramount.
I personally wouldn't bother though making a hero character if not for the fact that my lady only likes to be goody-goodies in every game she plays and like I said, playing with her is most important. you had better believe I will have a villain character on the side to play alone.
hell, if you ask me, it would be great to include an "antihero" faction also, that way people like me could have the satisfaction of playing with all the evil intent and dark persona afforded such an individual, without actually having to make a true to form villain. people with the desire can be a total jerk, but still cooperate with the good guys. my problems would sure be solved then. and hey, I'd not have the stress of managing time enough to play two seperate characters.
.....hehehe, die.......
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
Well that's a management issue. It doesn't mean City of Villains was a bad move just because they neglected another lackluster part of the game.All the more reason to launch with Villains at launch, so a mirror copy of whatever they come up with now won't be needed a year into launch.
The point is that they had a limited amount of resources and they used a lot of their manpower to make an expansion that didn't really include anything for those playing COH. They should have done an expansion that added levels, archetypes, and lots of content for COH players. They neglected COH because of COV, so yes, I think it was a very bad move.
Including villains from the start will also be a bad move IMO if they intend to make both sides equal. You'll just be splitting the content in half. I don't see the point in severely limiting the PVE experience for heroes just because some miscreants feel compelled to be "evil". I hope they do like LOTRO and make the evil faction limited to PVP. You could have deep and compelling pvp in competitive missions (like battlegrounds) and PVP zones without having to make any sacrifices for the PVE game.
well, just as you don't care to be a villain enough to want it right away, others of us out there(I am sure that there are more than you think) don't care to be a hero. I am going to play this game regardless, because it interests my fiancee and playing together with her is paramount.
I personally wouldn't bother though making a hero character if not for the fact that my lady only likes to be goody-goodies in every game she plays and like I said, playing with her is most important. you had better believe I will have a villain character on the side to play alone.
hell, if you ask me, it would be great to include an "antihero" faction also, that way people like me could have the satisfaction of playing with all the evil intent and dark persona afforded such an individual, without actually having to make a true to form villain. people with the desire can be a total jerk, but still cooperate with the good guys. my problems would sure be solved then. and hey, I'd not have the stress of managing time enough to play two seperate characters.
I don't have any real with playing a villain, I just don't like symmetric faction games because it places huge limitations on content and story development. I do think that playing as a hero lends itself better to MMO gameplay than a comic book villain simply because heroes are more reactive, so PVE content seems to fit them slightly better thematically. But aside from that fact, I'm cool with playing villains. The classic example is Tie Fighter. That was one of the greatest games ever, in part because it was so awesome to see the viewpoint of the Empire.
But yea, I think it's kind of stupid to make a big issue out of which side you are on. If the game is good then who cares whether you're playing as the good or evil side? And this BS fake machismo attitude that says "playing the good side is for queers! Yeehaw!" is especially pathetic. I just don't see the point in making equal factions to appease these fools when you're going to loose god knows how many subs because your game is lacking in content and everyone is bored as hell.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Well I'm sure there were some players like yourself, but I think overall it was still a bad move. Why attract a new audience at the expense of your current one? They built a solid foundation of a game, but there was a big lack of content at high levels. They failed to address that because they were too busy making COV.
Well that's a management issue. It doesn't mean City of Villains was a bad move just because they neglected another lackluster part of the game.All the more reason to launch with Villains at launch, so a mirror copy of whatever they come up with now won't be needed a year into launch.
The point is that they had a limited amount of resources and they used a lot of their manpower to make an expansion that didn't really include anything for those playing COH. They should have done an expansion that added levels, archetypes, and lots of content for COH players. They neglected COH because of COV, so yes, I think it was a very bad move.
Including villains from the start will also be a bad move IMO if they intend to make both sides equal. You'll just be splitting the content in half. I don't see the point in severely limiting the PVE experience for heroes just because some miscreants feel compelled to be "evil". I hope they do like LOTRO and make the evil faction limited to PVP. You could have deep and compelling pvp in competitive missions (like battlegrounds) and PVP zones without having to make any sacrifices for the PVE game.
well, just as you don't care to be a villain enough to want it right away, others of us out there(I am sure that there are more than you think) don't care to be a hero. I am going to play this game regardless, because it interests my fiancee and playing together with her is paramount.
I personally wouldn't bother though making a hero character if not for the fact that my lady only likes to be goody-goodies in every game she plays and like I said, playing with her is most important. you had better believe I will have a villain character on the side to play alone.
hell, if you ask me, it would be great to include an "antihero" faction also, that way people like me could have the satisfaction of playing with all the evil intent and dark persona afforded such an individual, without actually having to make a true to form villain. people with the desire can be a total jerk, but still cooperate with the good guys. my problems would sure be solved then. and hey, I'd not have the stress of managing time enough to play two seperate characters.
I don't have any real with playing a villain, I just don't like symmetric faction games because it places huge limitations on content and story development. I do think that playing as a hero lends itself better to MMO gameplay than a comic book villain simply because heroes are more reactive, so PVE content seems to fit them slightly better thematically. But aside from that fact, I'm cool with playing villains. The classic example is Tie Fighter. That was one of the greatest games ever, in part because it was so awesome to see the viewpoint of the Empire.
But yea, I think it's kind of stupid to make a big issue out of which side you are on. If the game is good then who cares whether you're playing as the good or evil side? And this BS fake machismo attitude that says "playing the good side is for queers! Yeehaw!" is especially pathetic. I just don't see the point in making equal factions to appease these fools when you're going to loose god knows how many subs because your game is lacking in content and everyone is bored as hell.
I see where you are coming from, I just think that like I said previously, it's up to the dev studio to properly institute these ideas without taking away from the game's overall experience.
on the issue of making a big deal out of which side you are playing, well, sorry, for some of us, it is a big deal, especially in a game environment like this one built on a base of classic good vs. evil as if in a comic. there are those of us who enjoy the evil persona and dark storytelling associated with villains. aside from that, there are those who like to use their villainous avatar as an extension of their less publicly acceptable self. hey, sometimes I just want a good excuse to be an asshole. it's bad form to be a jerk in an atmosphere where everyone playing is a 'good guy'(which is most games) and those of us who know the meaning of personal restraint aren't going to make an ass of themselves unless the environment we are playing in lends to it. people get to be a hero and save the day in most games that hit the market. many of us appreciate the chance to occasionally do something different. it's not a matter of machismo, or degrading the way others like to play, it's that some of us could use a place to be selfish, indulgent, unyielding and powerful without actually going to jail.
.....hehehe, die.......
I would be pretty sad to not have villains. I didn't even bother buying CoX until the Villains box came out. The setting, the attitude, the feel...everything was exactly what I wanted from it. However...that doesn't mean they have to actually develop a "villain" side to the game. It would actually be a thousand times better (and fit in with their line of thought that the CoV game was playing the same as Heroes, and that there should be another way to do it) if they actually made the whole matter reactive to choices made, rather than a simple button press at startup. In essence, to make us neither superhero or supervillain...but just super beings, and leave the hero/villain tag to be the result of choices made throughout the game.
That doesn't fit well with their "arch-enemy" plan though...so I doubt it will work that way. THe LoTR Monster PvP example one guy gave was also nice...but not quite the same. I want to PLAY and BUILD a villain...not simply "use" one after I hit endgame.
I don't think it's possible to make a game for symmetric factions without seriously hampering content and story development. You can do certain things to help, but it's always a trade off.
I know playing the evil side is a big deal to some people, but having a lot of good content is a huge issue for everyone. I think making villains primarily PVP characters is a good compromise. You still get to play as villains and the PVE content isn't being split in half or turned into generic mush. I think the vast majority of villain inclined players would accept this as long as the villains were still highly customizable, allowed character development paths such as getting new powers and upgrading others, and there were lots of varried activities for villains rather than just hanging out in one zone looking for heroes to assault.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
Having played CoH/CoV, I would certainly prefer that a player could also choose to play a villian.
One thing I really wanted was Heroes and Villians operating in the same zones....all the time. However, I recognize that the developers really have a tall order in that venue.
-----------------------------
Blog -Transcendent''s Tomb - Reviews, Polls, and tortured opinions from the minions of MMORPGS
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Hhussk
I don't think it's possible to make a game for symmetric factions without seriously hampering content and story development. You can do certain things to help, but it's always a trade off.
I know playing the evil side is a big deal to some people, but having a lot of good content is a huge issue for everyone. I think making villains primarily PVP characters is a good compromise. You still get to play as villains and the PVE content isn't being split in half or turned into generic mush. I think the vast majority of villain inclined players would accept this as long as the villains were still highly customizable, allowed character development paths such as getting new powers and upgrading others, and there were lots of varried activities for villains rather than just hanging out in one zone looking for heroes to assault.
I'd prefer if my villain could enjoy doing PvE content without worrying about PvP interference. Making villains where they are mostly PvP and stuck in zones where there is always PvP to worry about would suck IMO.
They need to add villains at launch. If they don't, then they shouldn't bother adding them at all. That is CoX's problem. CoV wasn't added until the 6th issue. Because of this, CoH was miles ahead. Now with every new issue, the issues have to be balanced, adding both hero and villain content. CoV will always be behind.
For example, CoV has very few zones. Now, everytime they add a zone, its a damn co-op zone where villains AND heroes team up. I'm sorry but that idea gets old very fast. CoV needs more exclusive villain zones, but if they make that a main feature of a new issue, then the hero players get mad, and vice versa.
To end my rant, I strongly hope that villains are released at launch in Champions, that way heroes and villains will start their journey together and hopefully become unique sides throughout Champions's playtime.
I don't think it's possible to make a game for symmetric factions without seriously hampering content and story development. You can do certain things to help, but it's always a trade off.
I know playing the evil side is a big deal to some people, but having a lot of good content is a huge issue for everyone. I think making villains primarily PVP characters is a good compromise. You still get to play as villains and the PVE content isn't being split in half or turned into generic mush. I think the vast majority of villain inclined players would accept this as long as the villains were still highly customizable, allowed character development paths such as getting new powers and upgrading others, and there were lots of varried activities for villains rather than just hanging out in one zone looking for heroes to assault.
I'd prefer if my villain could enjoy doing PvE content without worrying about PvP interference. Making villains where they are mostly PvP and stuck in zones where there is always PvP to worry about would suck IMO.
Well playing an MMO with a serious lack of content because everything is being split 50/50 between two factions would suck IMO.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
I have to strongly disagree with your first sentiment that it was a mistake. COV was my first MMO, and I wouldn't have really cared to play them period if it wasn't for that game. I don't want to play a Hero, I have no interest in that. The fact you COULD play the bad guy was the atttraction to me. So, waste of resources I don't think so, I think they tapped into a well of new players because of it.
I will still play Champions online, but I will do it begrudgingly, as I would much rather play the dark side.
Agreed, although I agree and disagree with both sides of the argument to some extent. He's kind of right in the fact that if they built upon CoH rather than create the CoV expansion they could have really made some interesting progression. It would certainly build upon the PvE... but it would continue to lack PvP, a needed source for the game and a near constant complaint.
For PvP to honestly work there needs to at least be two factions. A faction of heroes and a faction of villians makes it perfect. Although in my opinion the PvP in that game was a complete failure, it would have been even worse if they didn't try to begin with.
Not only was it good for the PvP aspect, but it was good for, generally, just wanting to play a villain, and it did make sense for the game's first real expansion. Heroes need villians. Agreeing with what Bella said, in my opinion it was probably the best choice to go with CoV rather than simply expand upon CoH. It added great versatility to the game and, although I rarely played villains, it made the game a lot more fun.
What would really be neat in this game is if they actually had a world completely focused on the players if you catch my drift... what I mean is, the PvE is intertwined with the PvP. Like say, for example, your arch-nemesis described in this game is actually another player. The story would be combined within the two players battling one another... although I know not many people would prefer that, I just think that would be pretty neat in my book. Or perhaps if you played the game with friends than you could have a supergroup from the beginning and a story revolving around them... and of a super villain team trying to thwart their every action. But like I said, a good amount of people don't want to be involved in PvP of any sort so I could never see this working. That would be really cool, though
One thing that I do think everyone would agree on is more unique PvE stories. If we can make our characters look and act any way we can possibly imagine, can't we choose their stories? Say when creating your character, you get to choose a super-hero alliance to be guided over. You would recieve your missions from that certain group to the end and follow their specific story. It would make creating alts much less of a burden and more fun, and the game would feel much less tiresome... the only thing bad about this is much more work for the developers, and probably more work than fair to expect.
EDIT: to what I said earlier, for the issue of people prefering PvE or PvEvP, it would be cool in character creation that you could choose which sort of story you'd want and play one or the other. But that brings in the same problem that it would be extremely bothersome to create that much.