This game is so fantastic, it is selling for $2.50 at amazon, not even a year after release. I bet everyone who paid $240-300 for a lifetime sub is just tickled pink over it. And if it is so fantastic, why is next to no one playing it, and selling for less than the price of a burger? The free market does not lie.
Not at all. I am a lifer and have no problems with anyone selling it cheap. My only issues that I have as being a lifer is that if they do end up going free to play, I want to know how they will handle lifetime subs. I figure it will probably be something like lotro is doing. And lets get real, there is absolutely no way you can say that next to no one is playing it. Does it have 10 million subscribers, of course not. But as long as they are making money, then they have plenty of folks playing.
That's not necessarily true. There is a difference between profitable and profitable enough.
Who cares? we dont own the company so we are not making money from it. From a gamer perspective it is true.
Those who care are the folks who play a profitable game that gets shut down (or flushed down the toilet in SWG's case) because the game isn't profitable enough. I'm not saying it will happen to STO (nor am I saying it won't), I'm simply saying it happens. From a gamer perspective, you should want games you like to continue operating, therefore, you should care.
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
actually if a studio is not making money, they do not put money into content (ie STO, the exception being the c-store which is a cash grab). so from a gamers perspective, if you want a game to improve, people playing it is critical.
ps- this is one of the main reasons why cryptic has not fixed many major issues's (ie ground combat, content, sector space, crafting, klingons content, etc, etc)... their is just no point in dumping resources you would have to borrow into a game that is never going to attract a decent sized customer base due to its horrible launch and continued problems.
if you think this is wrong i suggest you look at eve or wow and see all the massive expansions they have made.... because they have customers.
You are obviously just talking crap. Cryptic has been adding content since they started. They have fixed TONS of bugs and many major issues. The game was not horrible and has never been horrible. Ok, I say that as a federation guy, I feel sorry for the klingons but they are getting content to, just not in a timely manner. Frankly I think they should just cut the losses with the klingon side and revamp them and reintroduce them at a later date, but thats just me.
They just had a major overhaul of sector space and crafting in season 3. They introduced weekly missions that they put in and have been for a few months now. The story lines in those missions are actually very good. So sorry if I don't believe the lies in which you are trying to push. Sure this game has problems but it has gotten a lot better since launch and I feel its just going to keep getting better.
As for eve and wow, yeah they have expansions but they have also been out for a long time. How many years was it before wow put out its first expansion? 2? 3?. Please, if your going to debate, at least get your facts straight.
actually if a studio is not making money, they do not put money into content (ie STO, the exception being the c-store which is a cash grab). so from a gamers perspective, if you want a game to improve, people playing it is critical.
ps- this is one of the main reasons why cryptic has not fixed many major issues's (ie ground combat, content, sector space, crafting, klingons content, etc, etc)... their is just no point in dumping resources you would have to borrow into a game that is never going to attract a decent sized customer base due to its horrible launch and continued problems.
if you think this is wrong i suggest you look at eve or wow and see all the massive expansions they have made.... because they have customers.
You are obviously just talking crap. Cryptic has been adding content since they started. They have fixed TONS of bugs and many major issues. The game was not horrible and has never been horrible. Ok, I say that as a federation guy, I feel sorry for the klingons but they are getting content to, just not in a timely manner. Frankly I think they should just cut the losses with the klingon side and revamp them and reintroduce them at a later date, but thats just me.
They just had a major overhaul of sector space and crafting in season 3. They introduced weekly missions that they put in and have been for a few months now. The story lines in those missions are actually very good. So sorry if I don't believe the lies in which you are trying to push. Sure this game has problems but it has gotten a lot better since launch and I feel its just going to keep getting better.
As for eve and wow, yeah they have expansions but they have also been out for a long time. How many years was it before wow put out its first expansion? 2? 3?. Please, if your going to debate, at least get your facts straight.
Hmmm, angry reply that one.
All that he was pointing out, was that a game - any game - with a larger subscriber base, and hence larger revenues, will, all else being equal, have a faster development cycle - and that is plainly, bluntly inarguable.
I don't know if you were there when STO launched, but I was, and it was pretty bloody bad at launch. Crafting was a nightmarish joke, latency and constant rubberbanding were an ever present factor, the content was screamingly lacking particularly once max-capped and the Klingon faction had basically nothing but PvP to do the whole time.
I have recently returned to STO and I do accept that the game has been improved. The point though is whether or not it is improving fast enough to hold onto a minimum subscriber base. Make no mistake Cryptic, or Atari, have a figure in mind, a number of subscribers below which continuance of STO becomes unprofitable. What that figure is and where it is in relation to the current subscriber base is anyones guess of course, but it's a good point to keep in mind when people cheer about subscribers leaving the game, or about not accepting the flaws the game had at launch and has today.
As to WoW, Burning Crusade was 2 years after the initial launch. However, during those 2 years we also had added to the game, two 20-man raids, 3 40-man raids, 2 new tiers of equipment sets, new battlegrounds, seasonal events, pre-expansion events and a plethora of more minor additions, fixes and tweaks.
While I am happy STO is improving, let's not kid ourselves and pretend - even for a second - that it's rate of content development / game improvement is anything remotely like Blizzard has been able to manage with a subscriber base that was then and is even more so now larger than STO's by at least one order of magnitude and who knows possibly two.
All that he was pointing out, was that a game - any game - with a larger subscriber base, and hence larger revenues, will, all else being equal, have a faster development cycle - and that is plainly, bluntly inarguable.
I don't know if you were there when STO launched, but I was, and it was pretty bloody bad at launch. Crafting was a nightmarish joke, latency and constant rubberbanding were an ever present factor, the content was screamingly lacking particularly once max-capped and the Klingon faction had basically nothing but PvP to do the whole time.
I have recently returned to STO and I do accept that the game has been improved. The point though is whether or not it is improving fast enough to hold onto a minimum subscriber base. Make no mistake Cryptic, or Atari, have a figure in mind, a number of subscribers below which continuance of STO becomes unprofitable. What that figure is and where it is in relation to the current subscriber base is anyones guess of course, but it's a good point to keep in mind when people cheer about subscribers leaving the game, or about not accepting the flaws the game had at launch and has today.
As to WoW, Burning Crusade was 2 years after the initial launch. However, during those 2 years we also had added to the game, two 20-man raids, 3 40-man raids, 2 new tiers of equipment sets, new battlegrounds, seasonal events, pre-expansion events and a plethora of more minor additions, fixes and tweaks.
While I am happy STO is improving, let's not kid ourselves and pretend - even for a second - that it's rate of content development / game improvement is anything remotely like Blizzard has been able to manage with a subscriber base that was then and is even more so now larger than STO's by at least one order of magnitude and who knows possibly two.
According to what Jack Emmert stated in pre-launch interviews, they were looking at 100,000+ subscribers to consider STO a success. He also said that they needed 50,000 subscribers for STO to be viable. Considering STO sold an estimated 250,000 - 300,000 copies, and had between 100,000 - 130,000 subscribers (tracking websites put that number at 110,000) when Jack made his statement concerning STO's numbers after the first month of STO's launch, it is reasonable to expect that STO's number of subscribers is below that 50,000 mark now. As those multi-month plans expire, the numbers will generally drop even more.
However, given Atari's continued financial problems, it is a safe bet that 50,000 viability number has probably been lowered. More than likely, Atari will keep STO going until such time as either:
It begins to cost them more to keep it going than they bring in via subscriptions, or
They move it to the free to play model, as they are doing with CO, in hopes of increasing revenue.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Frankly, I think STO's non-successful launch/existence is a good thing, for the genre overall.
It was the first "major" IP MMO that fell flat out of the gate because of bad/inadequate development at launch. Up to then, developers were perfectly willing to release the same buggy, half finished crap MMO and finish development and polishing with the cash from box sales and early subs. Granted, it was a new low in terms of a "full featured" MMO as far as content and game mechanics (the klingon faction at release was just pathetic), but other developers before them released early and figured people would play anyway, because that is how it has always been.
STO's more or less failed state is a a direct refutation of that line of developer thinking. That FFXIV also fell on it's azz for many of the same reasons only reinforces the point.
That people are no longer willing to pay for half finished garbage can only be considered a good thing. Just not for the jokers that made this pile.
actually if a studio is not making money, they do not put money into content (ie STO, the exception being the c-store which is a cash grab). so from a gamers perspective, if you want a game to improve, people playing it is critical.
ps- this is one of the main reasons why cryptic has not fixed many major issues's (ie ground combat, content, sector space, crafting, klingons content, etc, etc)... their is just no point in dumping resources you would have to borrow into a game that is never going to attract a decent sized customer base due to its horrible launch and continued problems.
if you think this is wrong i suggest you look at eve or wow and see all the massive expansions they have made.... because they have customers.
You are obviously just talking crap. Cryptic has been adding content since they started. They have fixed TONS of bugs and many major issues. The game was not horrible and has never been horrible. Ok, I say that as a federation guy, I feel sorry for the klingons but they are getting content to, just not in a timely manner. Frankly I think they should just cut the losses with the klingon side and revamp them and reintroduce them at a later date, but thats just me.
They just had a major overhaul of sector space and crafting in season 3. They introduced weekly missions that they put in and have been for a few months now. The story lines in those missions are actually very good. So sorry if I don't believe the lies in which you are trying to push. Sure this game has problems but it has gotten a lot better since launch and I feel its just going to keep getting better.
As for eve and wow, yeah they have expansions but they have also been out for a long time. How many years was it before wow put out its first expansion? 2? 3?. Please, if your going to debate, at least get your facts straight.
Hmmm, angry reply that one.
All that he was pointing out, was that a game - any game - with a larger subscriber base, and hence larger revenues, will, all else being equal, have a faster development cycle - and that is plainly, bluntly inarguable.
I don't know if you were there when STO launched, but I was, and it was pretty bloody bad at launch. Crafting was a nightmarish joke, latency and constant rubberbanding were an ever present factor, the content was screamingly lacking particularly once max-capped and the Klingon faction had basically nothing but PvP to do the whole time.
I have recently returned to STO and I do accept that the game has been improved. The point though is whether or not it is improving fast enough to hold onto a minimum subscriber base. Make no mistake Cryptic, or Atari, have a figure in mind, a number of subscribers below which continuance of STO becomes unprofitable. What that figure is and where it is in relation to the current subscriber base is anyones guess of course, but it's a good point to keep in mind when people cheer about subscribers leaving the game, or about not accepting the flaws the game had at launch and has today.
As to WoW, Burning Crusade was 2 years after the initial launch. However, during those 2 years we also had added to the game, two 20-man raids, 3 40-man raids, 2 new tiers of equipment sets, new battlegrounds, seasonal events, pre-expansion events and a plethora of more minor additions, fixes and tweaks.
While I am happy STO is improving, let's not kid ourselves and pretend - even for a second - that it's rate of content development / game improvement is anything remotely like Blizzard has been able to manage with a subscriber base that was then and is even more so now larger than STO's by at least one order of magnitude and who knows possibly two.
I am pretty sure that I stated I been in the game since beta. And no, I am not angry at all. When people spart spewing lies just because they don't like the game, I will call them out. And no, he was not pointing that out at all.
I had very little lag all the way through STO. It was way less lagy than many other mmo releases. The lag was never bad enough that I couldn't play. Heck, eve is how old now? I would lag like crazy to doing missions with 50 other people in the zone and this was earlier this year and it was actually not playable and could cause my ship to be destroyed and absolutely not compensated at all for it.
The content being lacking once maxed, yep, not going to argue that one at all. And guess what, it still is.Pretty much like many other mmos, when you get to the top, you usually only have a few raids available to you or you pretty much dont have anything to do.
Again, having flaws a year later is no different than any other mmo out there. How many years did it take wow to finally fix the hunters? How long did the warriors cry about being broken. What about the paladins. Their favorite maneuver was to pop a shield in pvp and hearth home. bugs exist. I see cryptic doing as good a job as any other mmo in trying to track down and fix issues.
Also during wow, when they introduced the battle grounds, it comepletey and forever changed pvp in the pvp world. Everyone wants to farm battlegrounds instead of actually pvping. With a lot of things that wow added, there are a lot of things they changed for the worse to.
Lets look at sto: they introduced raiding, 3 or 4 STF's were created. They added more missions, they added diplomacy, They added new ships, higher levels, weekly content, fixed crafting and overhauled it and almost has the UGC ready to fully implement. they added the several layers to your ship instead of just the bridge. And there was even more things they added.They have done this in less than 1 year. So sounds to me like they are working just as hard to make this a successful game as the "big" developers.
Now, thats not to say they couldn't be even better. I really hope that the game draws more people and that it continues to grow. But as I have stated many times, it is FAR from fail.
Frankly, I think STO's non-successful launch/existence is a good thing, for the genre overall. It was the first "major" IP MMO that fell flat out of the gate because of bad/inadequate development at launch. Up to then, developers were perfectly willing to release the same buggy, half finished crap MMO and finish development and polishing with the cash from box sales and early subs. Granted, it was a new low in terms of a "full featured" MMO as far as content and game mechanics (the klingon faction at release was just pathetic), but other developers before them released early and figured people would play anyway, because that is how it has always been. STO's more or less failed state is a a direct refutation of that line of developer thinking. That FFXIV also fell on it's azz for many of the same reasons only reinforces the point. That people are no longer willing to pay for half finished garbage can only be considered a good thing. Just not for the jokers that made this pile.
Unfortunately the game developers (or the investors pushing them to release too early) haven't picked up on this, and since this has been going on for years, it doesn't appear that they'll see the writing on the wall anytime soon. Heck we've had SWG, AO, WWIIOnline, AoC, WAR, and all the new releases launch in the same sad shape; so far no one except Blizzard and Bioware seem to want to take the time to make sure their game is ready for launch.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Frankly, I think STO's non-successful launch/existence is a good thing, for the genre overall. It was the first "major" IP MMO that fell flat out of the gate because of bad/inadequate development at launch. Up to then, developers were perfectly willing to release the same buggy, half finished crap MMO and finish development and polishing with the cash from box sales and early subs. Granted, it was a new low in terms of a "full featured" MMO as far as content and game mechanics (the klingon faction at release was just pathetic), but other developers before them released early and figured people would play anyway, because that is how it has always been. STO's more or less failed state is a a direct refutation of that line of developer thinking. That FFXIV also fell on it's azz for many of the same reasons only reinforces the point. That people are no longer willing to pay for half finished garbage can only be considered a good thing. Just not for the jokers that made this pile.
Unfortunately the game developers (or the investors pushing them to release too early) haven't picked up on this, and since this has been going on for years, it doesn't appear that they'll see the writing on the wall anytime soon. Heck we've had SWG, AO, WWIIOnline, AoC, WAR, and all the new releases launch in the same sad shape; so far no one except Blizzard and Bioware seem to want to take the time to make sure their game is ready for launch.
LOL, your kidding right? WoW was extremely buggy at release. It is funny how people forget that. The closest to bug free and smoothest launch that I have ever seen was Lotro. I agree though, I would love to see games be more polished before they are released but I would also say, I would rather put up with a few bugs than to force a company to wait another year for the game I am wanting to be released.
Frankly, I think STO's non-successful launch/existence is a good thing, for the genre overall. It was the first "major" IP MMO that fell flat out of the gate because of bad/inadequate development at launch. Up to then, developers were perfectly willing to release the same buggy, half finished crap MMO and finish development and polishing with the cash from box sales and early subs. Granted, it was a new low in terms of a "full featured" MMO as far as content and game mechanics (the klingon faction at release was just pathetic), but other developers before them released early and figured people would play anyway, because that is how it has always been. STO's more or less failed state is a a direct refutation of that line of developer thinking. That FFXIV also fell on it's azz for many of the same reasons only reinforces the point. That people are no longer willing to pay for half finished garbage can only be considered a good thing. Just not for the jokers that made this pile.
Unfortunately the game developers (or the investors pushing them to release too early) haven't picked up on this, and since this has been going on for years, it doesn't appear that they'll see the writing on the wall anytime soon. Heck we've had SWG, AO, WWIIOnline, AoC, WAR, and all the new releases launch in the same sad shape; so far no one except Blizzard and Bioware seem to want to take the time to make sure their game is ready for launch.
LOL, your kidding right? WoW was extremely buggy at release. It is funny how people forget that. The closest to bug free and smoothest launch that I have ever seen was Lotro. I agree though, I would love to see games be more polished before they are released but I would also say, I would rather put up with a few bugs than to force a company to wait another year for the game I am wanting to be released.
Well, all the people that dumped STO and FFXIV like they were burning bags of poo do not agree.
It is about time that gamers/customers were not willing to buy buggy early release MMO X just because the game is "something new" or that the developers release it unfinished and want polish on the customer's dime.
I don't view the fact that both STO and FFXIV fell flat as a bad thing for the genre, just that people are starting to wake up and not accept subpar half finshed crap (for full price) out of the gate.
Yes, WoW had a somewhat buggy release, but that was what? 7+ years ago. People were more forgiving then, but guess what? It is not 7 years ago, and the developers have not realized that fact as of yet.
Frankly, I think STO's non-successful launch/existence is a good thing, for the genre overall. It was the first "major" IP MMO that fell flat out of the gate because of bad/inadequate development at launch. Up to then, developers were perfectly willing to release the same buggy, half finished crap MMO and finish development and polishing with the cash from box sales and early subs. Granted, it was a new low in terms of a "full featured" MMO as far as content and game mechanics (the klingon faction at release was just pathetic), but other developers before them released early and figured people would play anyway, because that is how it has always been. STO's more or less failed state is a a direct refutation of that line of developer thinking. That FFXIV also fell on it's azz for many of the same reasons only reinforces the point. That people are no longer willing to pay for half finished garbage can only be considered a good thing. Just not for the jokers that made this pile.
SWG, which came out in Summer of '03 was the first big name IP hitting the MMORPG genre. I loved SWG before the CU/NGE changes, but the launch was horrid. Look up various reviews from back then and they all say the same thing: Very buggy game; No space combat in a Star Wars title.
It retained a pretty decent following despite that disaster. Namely due to the core of the mechanics, the "Star Wars" name, and a fabulous player community.
But the very buggy nature at release was a major issue. The issues were numerous and it was something SOE never was able to fix all of, even after 2005 when they did the CU/NGE revamps.
If developers hadn't learned the lesson even back in 2003 with one of the largest IPs you can ever get, then they'll never learn.
Those big name MMORPGs coming next year? I'm quite willing to wager a good number of them will have horrid releases. Players know by now to expect a degree of bugginess. But their patience these days compared to when the genre was newer is by far alot smaller. If players see the game is really F'ed up past even what's expected of a new MMORPG, then they're not sticking around long. Not past that first month.
But if there's one rule the genre has stuck with is this: You don't get Second Chances, no matter what.
EVE is the only title I know of that recovered and actually prospered and held onto a core playerbase. But EVE is the exception, since the "Road To Recovery" is littered with dead / dying MMORPGs, none of which other than EVE have come back from failure.
Anyways, expect to keep seeing buggy and disastrous releases. If you've followed history any, you'd know man will keep making the same mistakes.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
I would really like to know what your definition of fail is. STO was released to universally poor reviews, the lead dev gets fired shortly after launch, subs drop like the titanic with estimates in the 50k range, the Klingon faction has no content and you can now purchase the game for $2.50 on Amazon less than 10 months after release. All the other games you mentioned that share the same flaws as STO are all selling for more than $2.50 and they were released years ago. I understand the game has an appeal for you and you find it fun but that does not mean it is not a failure, it just means you like it. There were people who liked TR and APB but it didnt stop those games from being failures.
Has Cryptic done a great job in adding new things to the game, yes. Is that a good thing or a testiment to how poorly the game was launched? A bit of both I'm afraid.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I would really like to know what your definition of fail is. STO was released to universally poor reviews, the lead dev gets fired shortly after launch, subs drop like the titanic with estimates in the 50k range, the Klingon faction has no content and you can now purchase the game for $2.50 on Amazon less than 10 months after release. All the other games you mentioned that share the same flaws as STO are all selling for more than $2.50 and they were released years ago. I understand the game has an appeal for you and you find it fun but that does not mean it is not a failure, it just means you like it. There were people who liked TR and APB but it didnt stop those games from being failures.
Has Cryptic done a great job in adding new things to the game, yes. Is that a good thing or a testiment to how poorly the game was launched? A bit of both I'm afraid.
Well, lets ee. APB shut down, what? 7 months after it started. if that. Tabula didn't make a year either if I remember correctly. I actually tried out tabula and while it was interesting, it lacked focus, It lacked a lot in user friendliness. That goes a long way in getting people to play your game. Did cryptic release to early? Yeah I think so. There is a difference in releasing with bugs and a difference of releasing with to little content. And what is the big deal about amazon selling the game for 2.50? Amazon does a lot of wierd things with their pricing. Heck, they lowered the price of the kindle by more than a hundred bucks and they own the thing. Seriously, I don't care if some company said we are giving away copies of the game, it doesn't mean that game is a failure.
Look at AOC, they had a horrible launch, horrible game, and its still going. Is it fail? No. But its also not what it could have been. Same with STO, it could have been more but right now its not. It is working on improving that and may or may not recover, but at this point, I do not think they are in any danger of going under. Every single time I log into STO there are tons of people around. And it is also full of new people. I can't tell you how many times I been asked what my quantum slipstream was.
The game lost a lot of people shortly after launch, but they have been steadily getting more people in over the past many months and I think it shows. Gozer is back and working on STF's again, Dan is taking the game in the right direction now to. They are pretty open with the information they are working on, they have timelines for developments that they are posting, show me another mmo that is doing that. They are talking with the community and putting in stuff that they want. I think that goes a long way to show that they do care about STO and they are working hard at making it a very good game. As I said, its not perfect, It still needs tons more content on both sides but it is a lot better than it was and it certainly isn't fail.
It's a 60% off sale on Amazon. STO is not the only game marked down cheap. I think it is the only MMO on the sale though. It is a limited time deal. Guess that is why it is called Year End Video Game Deals.
Well, all the people that dumped STO and FFXIV like they were burning bags of poo do not agree.
It is about time that gamers/customers were not willing to buy buggy early release MMO X just because the game is "something new" or that the developers release it unfinished and want polish on the customer's dime.
I don't view the fact that both STO and FFXIV fell flat as a bad thing for the genre, just that people are starting to wake up and not accept subpar half finshed crap (for full price) out of the gate.
Yes, WoW had a somewhat buggy release, but that was what? 7+ years ago. People were more forgiving then, but guess what? It is not 7 years ago, and the developers have not realized that fact as of yet.
Release crap and be punished. And rightly so.
Yep. Also people are a bit more forgiving (to an extent, at least) towards a company who puts out their first MMO, versus those companies who have already released MMOs. AoC's Funcom got hammered (and rightly so) because they had a previous horrible release in AO, and they repeated many of the same mistakes. SWG wasn't SOE's first launch either, nor was WAR Mythic's first foray into the MMO market. STO is Cryptic's third MMO, and the second using their new engine. All of those companies should have known better.
On the other hand, a company owning up to a mistake and trying to make good on it can earn a bit of goodwill from players; both Funcom (with AO's launch) and CRS (with WWIIOnline's launch) appologized for the horrible condition their games launched in, and stopped the clock for a bit on the free thirty days (CRS actually stopped the clock for half a year). These days you generally only see a company own up to a mistake in an interview from some outgoing executive (Mythic and Funcom immediately come to mind); the proverbial sacrificial lambs, if you will.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
All that he was pointing out, was that a game - any game - with a larger subscriber base, and hence larger revenues, will, all else being equal, have a faster development cycle - and that is plainly, bluntly inarguable.
I don't know if you were there when STO launched, but I was, and it was pretty bloody bad at launch. Crafting was a nightmarish joke, latency and constant rubberbanding were an ever present factor, the content was screamingly lacking particularly once max-capped and the Klingon faction had basically nothing but PvP to do the whole time.
I have recently returned to STO and I do accept that the game has been improved. The point though is whether or not it is improving fast enough to hold onto a minimum subscriber base. Make no mistake Cryptic, or Atari, have a figure in mind, a number of subscribers below which continuance of STO becomes unprofitable. What that figure is and where it is in relation to the current subscriber base is anyones guess of course, but it's a good point to keep in mind when people cheer about subscribers leaving the game, or about not accepting the flaws the game had at launch and has today.
As to WoW, Burning Crusade was 2 years after the initial launch. However, during those 2 years we also had added to the game, two 20-man raids, 3 40-man raids, 2 new tiers of equipment sets, new battlegrounds, seasonal events, pre-expansion events and a plethora of more minor additions, fixes and tweaks.
While I am happy STO is improving, let's not kid ourselves and pretend - even for a second - that it's rate of content development / game improvement is anything remotely like Blizzard has been able to manage with a subscriber base that was then and is even more so now larger than STO's by at least one order of magnitude and who knows possibly two.
I am pretty sure that I stated I been in the game since beta. And no, I am not angry at all. When people spart spewing lies just because they don't like the game, I will call them out. And no, he was not pointing that out at all.
I had very little lag all the way through STO. It was way less lagy than many other mmo releases. The lag was never bad enough that I couldn't play. Heck, eve is how old now? I would lag like crazy to doing missions with 50 other people in the zone and this was earlier this year and it was actually not playable and could cause my ship to be destroyed and absolutely not compensated at all for it.
The content being lacking once maxed, yep, not going to argue that one at all. And guess what, it still is.Pretty much like many other mmos, when you get to the top, you usually only have a few raids available to you or you pretty much dont have anything to do.
Again, having flaws a year later is no different than any other mmo out there. How many years did it take wow to finally fix the hunters? How long did the warriors cry about being broken. What about the paladins. Their favorite maneuver was to pop a shield in pvp and hearth home. bugs exist. I see cryptic doing as good a job as any other mmo in trying to track down and fix issues.
Also during wow, when they introduced the battle grounds, it comepletey and forever changed pvp in the pvp world. Everyone wants to farm battlegrounds instead of actually pvping. With a lot of things that wow added, there are a lot of things they changed for the worse to.
Lets look at sto: they introduced raiding, 3 or 4 STF's were created. They added more missions, they added diplomacy, They added new ships, higher levels, weekly content, fixed crafting and overhauled it and almost has the UGC ready to fully implement. they added the several layers to your ship instead of just the bridge. And there was even more things they added.They have done this in less than 1 year. So sounds to me like they are working just as hard to make this a successful game as the "big" developers.
Now, thats not to say they couldn't be even better. I really hope that the game draws more people and that it continues to grow. But as I have stated many times, it is FAR from fail.
I too hope that STO improves beyond it's current position quickly enough to survive. That's the key right now, not only does it need to improve but it needs to do so fast enough to firstly stop the slow bleed away of subscribers and secondly grow it's base. It has, at best, 12 months to do that, because at some point in those two months the new Star Wars MMO will come out, and most STO subscribers I expect will at least try it out.
And yes, I will conceede that Cryptic is trying hard to turn around STO's terrible launch - but the point I continue to make, both on these forums and the STO ones, is that Cryptic has only itself to blame for it's terrible launch, and that because of that launch, the game will be permanently less than what it would otherwise have been.
It's also really important I think that we continue to remind Cryptic of the issues in the game so that they will continue to strive to improve it, and maybe then someday, it'll be worthy of the original title of this thread.
allthough i agree with your sntiment that it would be great to see cryptic make the improvements that would make the game great, there is 2 major issues that make this almost impossible
1- many ex-customers such as myself are no longer willing to give cryptic another chance under any circumstances after the pathetic launch of sto, and even more so due to the attitude of their employee's (people who think sto is not great "just dont get it" comes to mind)
2- cryptic has moved on to their next game... nwn...
i find it very very very unlikely that cryptic is going to throw good money after bad to try to save a game that has tanked. its sad that they released a less than half finished product... its far worse that they spent months making excuses and insulting the people who called them on it before they finally admitted that the game just was not even close to what people expected from a product associated witht the star trek name.
good luck cryptic, i will not be buying another of your products.
IF THE ONLY DEFENCE FOR CRITICISM OF A GAME IS CALLING SOMEONE A TROLL OR HATER, THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE GAME
With that attitude why play any game? You're just going to be dissapointed. I quit AoC the first month of release. Tried it again that November and been with them ever since.
I never vowed to never play a Funcom game again. I think that's just crazy, in my opinion. Crytpics next game may be awesome, you never know.
I know I'm looking forward to the NWN game and the D&D game Atari is doing for XBOX Live.
With that attitude why play any game? You're just going to be dissapointed. I quit AoC the first month of release. Tried it again that November and been with them ever since.
Because MMO companies are no different than any other company, and if a person gets ripped off, treated badly, or sold a massively inferior product, they are justified in not giving that company any more business?
There are several companies or businesses I won't do business with, because of bad experiences and the companies' handling of them. This is not an usual thing, happens every day with airlines, restaurants, and all kinds of other businesses. And if a company puts out a crappy product or treats a person badly (and has a history of treating that particular person badly) what would that person be to go right back to that comapny the next time they release a new product? Naive? Gullible? Stupid?
The mistake that apologists make about MMOs and MMO companies is they think these things are in some special catagory, and deserving of every excuse in the book for bad quality / ineptitude/ bad service, when in reality, MMOs and MMO companies are companies like any other.
I thought that was my point? No mmo is going to be released in such a flawless manner so you're setting yourself up for dissapointment. If you think DCUO, Rift, Star Wars will be released in a errorless way I think you'll be surprised, in my opinion.
You can call me Naive, stupid or gullibe for going back to AoC after I quit the first month. But for me they fixed what needed to be fixed in order for me to enjoy their game. And I do and I have zero regrets. The moment it stops being fun and enjoyable I will unsubscribe.
If you keep holding on to that chip on your shoulder, all that anger is going to eat you up. It's just a video game.
I thought that was my point? No mmo is going to be released in such a flawless manner so you're setting yourself up for dissapointment. If you think DCUO, Rift, Star Wars will be released in a errorless way I think you'll be surprised, in my opinion.
You can call me Naive, stupid or gullibe for going back to AoC after I quit the first month. But for me they fixed what needed to be fixed in order for me to enjoy their game. And I do and I have zero regrets. The moment it stops being fun and enjoyable I will unsubscribe.
If you keep holding on to that chip on your shoulder, all that anger is going to eat you up. It's just a video game.
I am not the one trying to defend the indefensible, nor attacking every poster who citizicises a particular game.
In regards to MMOs, there is "not flawless" i.e. some bugs and polish issues or server issues that get fixed, and then there is "crap" because of lazy design choices, rushed production, and disservice to an IP. What we have with STO is clearly the latter.
Heh, if you think I am least bit concerned or angry about STO, you need to get out of the basement more. STO is the joke that keeps on giving. If anything, I look forward to reading the next Cryptic fiasco with STO and the laughs I get from the CDF types are better than from most things on TV.
I'm not trying anything. I don't care one ounce if you or any others hate STO. I enjoy it and will do so till it stops. That's just the way it works for me. No opinion from someone else is going to change that. If the game packs up and closes tomorrow I won't lose any sleep over it. It's a game and nothing more.
I'm glad you get your jollies reading posts for STO. Atleast they are enjoying a game.
I thought that was my point? No mmo is going to be released in such a flawless manner so you're setting yourself up for dissapointment. If you think DCUO, Rift, Star Wars will be released in a errorless way I think you'll be surprised, in my opinion.
You can call me Naive, stupid or gullibe for going back to AoC after I quit the first month. But for me they fixed what needed to be fixed in order for me to enjoy their game. And I do and I have zero regrets. The moment it stops being fun and enjoyable I will unsubscribe.
If you keep holding on to that chip on your shoulder, all that anger is going to eat you up. It's just a video game.
I am not the one trying to defend the indefensible, nor attacking every poster who citizicises a particular game.
In regards to MMOs, there is "not flawless" i.e. some bugs and polish issues or server issues that get fixed, and then there is "crap" because of lazy design choices, rushed production, and disservice to an IP. What we have with STO is clearly the latter.
Heh, if you think I am least bit concerned or angry about STO, you need to get out of the basement more. STO is the joke that keeps on giving. If anything, I look forward to reading the next Cryptic fiasco with STO and the laughs I get from the CDF types are better than from most things on TV.
Keep trying tho...
What I don't get is if you hate sto so much, why bother reading threads? Why not move on to your next game? you don't see me in all my ex games calling them crap and telling the people that like them that they are losers or stupid for liking the games. Yet you still make comments like they did a disservice to an IP. At least they made the game for it. the last company didn't do squat with it for years. The game is star trek. It has the feel, the sounds, the look of star trek. A company could spend 10 years making star trek and there would still be pissed off people out there because they didn't include the feature that "they" wanted in it.
Now, I can fully understand your hatred if you were a klingon. They did get shafted in many aspects but the federation was done well in my opinion. With that said, there are still things I would love to see in the game, that is not currently there.
I would love to be fighting from my bridge instead of third person view. I would love for my helmsman to fly the ship so that I don't have to and can concentrate on the battle at hand. I would love true exploration where there are unlimited zones and you the lone ship exploring the unknown galaxy. Tons of other things that I would like to see but I am not sure if they are even possible to do with the current game engine. There are a lot of things I wished they had done differently in the game, but in the end, to me, it is still a fun game. I feel like I am in the star trek universe when playing as does others that are playing.
Hey, maybe I should ask you how you felt about the awards that cryptic won for 2010. But then again, you would probably just ramble on about how crappy the game was at launch and no way should they have won anything. You sit here and complain about how the game was and yet the game has improved tons in lots of ways but you seem to ignore that and want to make it sound like its gotten even worse since its launch. I mean, really, have you decided to make it your lifes goal to try and steer people away from the game? I mean, seriously, I hate sony with a passion but I am not going to try and convince people to not buy their games.
hey doomsday 01 and sevenwind... have you read the little blurb at the bottom of my posts?
keep calling people haters! it works, every time you do sto gets better!
HONEST!
I have seen plenty of your posts Raistalin69, you had to put that comment into your tag line because you are a hater and that is the only way you could retaliate. Move along now... Nothing to see here for you...
Edit note: I felt that may have been a little to harsh for poor Raistalin. If you actually want to DISCUSS like your tag line suggests, then please feel free to discuss. So far you guys haven't been doing much of that at all. You say CRITICISM, yet there has been no critiquing, there has just been blame and hate. So, bring it, lets critique the game that YOU think STO should have been.
2nd Edit note: Let me also point out to you and your band of friends, that it was YOU that chose to come into a thread where people actually like the game and have been trying to slam it. its not like you have been actively discussing anything, you guys throw out some hate which in most cases has been out right false statements and then you try to come back with, check out my tag line. So seriously, if you want to discuss, please feel free to chime in. But if you want to spout out crap, then please go elsewhere.
Comments
Those who care are the folks who play a profitable game that gets shut down (or flushed down the toilet in SWG's case) because the game isn't profitable enough. I'm not saying it will happen to STO (nor am I saying it won't), I'm simply saying it happens. From a gamer perspective, you should want games you like to continue operating, therefore, you should care.
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
You are obviously just talking crap. Cryptic has been adding content since they started. They have fixed TONS of bugs and many major issues. The game was not horrible and has never been horrible. Ok, I say that as a federation guy, I feel sorry for the klingons but they are getting content to, just not in a timely manner. Frankly I think they should just cut the losses with the klingon side and revamp them and reintroduce them at a later date, but thats just me.
They just had a major overhaul of sector space and crafting in season 3. They introduced weekly missions that they put in and have been for a few months now. The story lines in those missions are actually very good. So sorry if I don't believe the lies in which you are trying to push. Sure this game has problems but it has gotten a lot better since launch and I feel its just going to keep getting better.
As for eve and wow, yeah they have expansions but they have also been out for a long time. How many years was it before wow put out its first expansion? 2? 3?. Please, if your going to debate, at least get your facts straight.
Hmmm, angry reply that one.
All that he was pointing out, was that a game - any game - with a larger subscriber base, and hence larger revenues, will, all else being equal, have a faster development cycle - and that is plainly, bluntly inarguable.
I don't know if you were there when STO launched, but I was, and it was pretty bloody bad at launch. Crafting was a nightmarish joke, latency and constant rubberbanding were an ever present factor, the content was screamingly lacking particularly once max-capped and the Klingon faction had basically nothing but PvP to do the whole time.
I have recently returned to STO and I do accept that the game has been improved. The point though is whether or not it is improving fast enough to hold onto a minimum subscriber base. Make no mistake Cryptic, or Atari, have a figure in mind, a number of subscribers below which continuance of STO becomes unprofitable. What that figure is and where it is in relation to the current subscriber base is anyones guess of course, but it's a good point to keep in mind when people cheer about subscribers leaving the game, or about not accepting the flaws the game had at launch and has today.
As to WoW, Burning Crusade was 2 years after the initial launch. However, during those 2 years we also had added to the game, two 20-man raids, 3 40-man raids, 2 new tiers of equipment sets, new battlegrounds, seasonal events, pre-expansion events and a plethora of more minor additions, fixes and tweaks.
While I am happy STO is improving, let's not kid ourselves and pretend - even for a second - that it's rate of content development / game improvement is anything remotely like Blizzard has been able to manage with a subscriber base that was then and is even more so now larger than STO's by at least one order of magnitude and who knows possibly two.
According to what Jack Emmert stated in pre-launch interviews, they were looking at 100,000+ subscribers to consider STO a success. He also said that they needed 50,000 subscribers for STO to be viable. Considering STO sold an estimated 250,000 - 300,000 copies, and had between 100,000 - 130,000 subscribers (tracking websites put that number at 110,000) when Jack made his statement concerning STO's numbers after the first month of STO's launch, it is reasonable to expect that STO's number of subscribers is below that 50,000 mark now. As those multi-month plans expire, the numbers will generally drop even more.
However, given Atari's continued financial problems, it is a safe bet that 50,000 viability number has probably been lowered. More than likely, Atari will keep STO going until such time as either:
It begins to cost them more to keep it going than they bring in via subscriptions, or
They move it to the free to play model, as they are doing with CO, in hopes of increasing revenue.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
It was the first "major" IP MMO that fell flat out of the gate because of bad/inadequate development at launch. Up to then, developers were perfectly willing to release the same buggy, half finished crap MMO and finish development and polishing with the cash from box sales and early subs. Granted, it was a new low in terms of a "full featured" MMO as far as content and game mechanics (the klingon faction at release was just pathetic), but other developers before them released early and figured people would play anyway, because that is how it has always been.
STO's more or less failed state is a a direct refutation of that line of developer thinking. That FFXIV also fell on it's azz for many of the same reasons only reinforces the point.
That people are no longer willing to pay for half finished garbage can only be considered a good thing. Just not for the jokers that made this pile.
I am pretty sure that I stated I been in the game since beta. And no, I am not angry at all. When people spart spewing lies just because they don't like the game, I will call them out. And no, he was not pointing that out at all.
I had very little lag all the way through STO. It was way less lagy than many other mmo releases. The lag was never bad enough that I couldn't play. Heck, eve is how old now? I would lag like crazy to doing missions with 50 other people in the zone and this was earlier this year and it was actually not playable and could cause my ship to be destroyed and absolutely not compensated at all for it.
The content being lacking once maxed, yep, not going to argue that one at all. And guess what, it still is.Pretty much like many other mmos, when you get to the top, you usually only have a few raids available to you or you pretty much dont have anything to do.
Again, having flaws a year later is no different than any other mmo out there. How many years did it take wow to finally fix the hunters? How long did the warriors cry about being broken. What about the paladins. Their favorite maneuver was to pop a shield in pvp and hearth home. bugs exist. I see cryptic doing as good a job as any other mmo in trying to track down and fix issues.
Also during wow, when they introduced the battle grounds, it comepletey and forever changed pvp in the pvp world. Everyone wants to farm battlegrounds instead of actually pvping. With a lot of things that wow added, there are a lot of things they changed for the worse to.
Lets look at sto: they introduced raiding, 3 or 4 STF's were created. They added more missions, they added diplomacy, They added new ships, higher levels, weekly content, fixed crafting and overhauled it and almost has the UGC ready to fully implement. they added the several layers to your ship instead of just the bridge. And there was even more things they added.They have done this in less than 1 year. So sounds to me like they are working just as hard to make this a successful game as the "big" developers.
Now, thats not to say they couldn't be even better. I really hope that the game draws more people and that it continues to grow. But as I have stated many times, it is FAR from fail.
Unfortunately the game developers (or the investors pushing them to release too early) haven't picked up on this, and since this has been going on for years, it doesn't appear that they'll see the writing on the wall anytime soon. Heck we've had SWG, AO, WWIIOnline, AoC, WAR, and all the new releases launch in the same sad shape; so far no one except Blizzard and Bioware seem to want to take the time to make sure their game is ready for launch.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
LOL, your kidding right? WoW was extremely buggy at release. It is funny how people forget that. The closest to bug free and smoothest launch that I have ever seen was Lotro. I agree though, I would love to see games be more polished before they are released but I would also say, I would rather put up with a few bugs than to force a company to wait another year for the game I am wanting to be released.
Well, all the people that dumped STO and FFXIV like they were burning bags of poo do not agree.
It is about time that gamers/customers were not willing to buy buggy early release MMO X just because the game is "something new" or that the developers release it unfinished and want polish on the customer's dime.
I don't view the fact that both STO and FFXIV fell flat as a bad thing for the genre, just that people are starting to wake up and not accept subpar half finshed crap (for full price) out of the gate.
Yes, WoW had a somewhat buggy release, but that was what? 7+ years ago. People were more forgiving then, but guess what? It is not 7 years ago, and the developers have not realized that fact as of yet.
Release crap and be punished. And rightly so.
SWG, which came out in Summer of '03 was the first big name IP hitting the MMORPG genre. I loved SWG before the CU/NGE changes, but the launch was horrid. Look up various reviews from back then and they all say the same thing: Very buggy game; No space combat in a Star Wars title.
It retained a pretty decent following despite that disaster. Namely due to the core of the mechanics, the "Star Wars" name, and a fabulous player community.
But the very buggy nature at release was a major issue. The issues were numerous and it was something SOE never was able to fix all of, even after 2005 when they did the CU/NGE revamps.
If developers hadn't learned the lesson even back in 2003 with one of the largest IPs you can ever get, then they'll never learn.
Those big name MMORPGs coming next year? I'm quite willing to wager a good number of them will have horrid releases. Players know by now to expect a degree of bugginess. But their patience these days compared to when the genre was newer is by far alot smaller. If players see the game is really F'ed up past even what's expected of a new MMORPG, then they're not sticking around long. Not past that first month.
But if there's one rule the genre has stuck with is this: You don't get Second Chances, no matter what.
EVE is the only title I know of that recovered and actually prospered and held onto a core playerbase. But EVE is the exception, since the "Road To Recovery" is littered with dead / dying MMORPGs, none of which other than EVE have come back from failure.
Anyways, expect to keep seeing buggy and disastrous releases. If you've followed history any, you'd know man will keep making the same mistakes.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Doom,
I would really like to know what your definition of fail is. STO was released to universally poor reviews, the lead dev gets fired shortly after launch, subs drop like the titanic with estimates in the 50k range, the Klingon faction has no content and you can now purchase the game for $2.50 on Amazon less than 10 months after release. All the other games you mentioned that share the same flaws as STO are all selling for more than $2.50 and they were released years ago. I understand the game has an appeal for you and you find it fun but that does not mean it is not a failure, it just means you like it. There were people who liked TR and APB but it didnt stop those games from being failures.
Has Cryptic done a great job in adding new things to the game, yes. Is that a good thing or a testiment to how poorly the game was launched? A bit of both I'm afraid.
Well, lets ee. APB shut down, what? 7 months after it started. if that. Tabula didn't make a year either if I remember correctly. I actually tried out tabula and while it was interesting, it lacked focus, It lacked a lot in user friendliness. That goes a long way in getting people to play your game. Did cryptic release to early? Yeah I think so. There is a difference in releasing with bugs and a difference of releasing with to little content. And what is the big deal about amazon selling the game for 2.50? Amazon does a lot of wierd things with their pricing. Heck, they lowered the price of the kindle by more than a hundred bucks and they own the thing. Seriously, I don't care if some company said we are giving away copies of the game, it doesn't mean that game is a failure.
Look at AOC, they had a horrible launch, horrible game, and its still going. Is it fail? No. But its also not what it could have been. Same with STO, it could have been more but right now its not. It is working on improving that and may or may not recover, but at this point, I do not think they are in any danger of going under. Every single time I log into STO there are tons of people around. And it is also full of new people. I can't tell you how many times I been asked what my quantum slipstream was.
The game lost a lot of people shortly after launch, but they have been steadily getting more people in over the past many months and I think it shows. Gozer is back and working on STF's again, Dan is taking the game in the right direction now to. They are pretty open with the information they are working on, they have timelines for developments that they are posting, show me another mmo that is doing that. They are talking with the community and putting in stuff that they want. I think that goes a long way to show that they do care about STO and they are working hard at making it a very good game. As I said, its not perfect, It still needs tons more content on both sides but it is a lot better than it was and it certainly isn't fail.
It's a 60% off sale on Amazon. STO is not the only game marked down cheap. I think it is the only MMO on the sale though. It is a limited time deal. Guess that is why it is called Year End Video Game Deals.
.. .... .- - . - .-. --- .-.. .-.. ... .-- .... --- .-. . .--. --- .-. - .-.-.-
--------------------------------------------------------
Promote what you love instead of bashing what you hate.
Yep. Also people are a bit more forgiving (to an extent, at least) towards a company who puts out their first MMO, versus those companies who have already released MMOs. AoC's Funcom got hammered (and rightly so) because they had a previous horrible release in AO, and they repeated many of the same mistakes. SWG wasn't SOE's first launch either, nor was WAR Mythic's first foray into the MMO market. STO is Cryptic's third MMO, and the second using their new engine. All of those companies should have known better.
On the other hand, a company owning up to a mistake and trying to make good on it can earn a bit of goodwill from players; both Funcom (with AO's launch) and CRS (with WWIIOnline's launch) appologized for the horrible condition their games launched in, and stopped the clock for a bit on the free thirty days (CRS actually stopped the clock for half a year). These days you generally only see a company own up to a mistake in an interview from some outgoing executive (Mythic and Funcom immediately come to mind); the proverbial sacrificial lambs, if you will.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
I too hope that STO improves beyond it's current position quickly enough to survive. That's the key right now, not only does it need to improve but it needs to do so fast enough to firstly stop the slow bleed away of subscribers and secondly grow it's base. It has, at best, 12 months to do that, because at some point in those two months the new Star Wars MMO will come out, and most STO subscribers I expect will at least try it out.
And yes, I will conceede that Cryptic is trying hard to turn around STO's terrible launch - but the point I continue to make, both on these forums and the STO ones, is that Cryptic has only itself to blame for it's terrible launch, and that because of that launch, the game will be permanently less than what it would otherwise have been.
It's also really important I think that we continue to remind Cryptic of the issues in the game so that they will continue to strive to improve it, and maybe then someday, it'll be worthy of the original title of this thread.
allthough i agree with your sntiment that it would be great to see cryptic make the improvements that would make the game great, there is 2 major issues that make this almost impossible
1- many ex-customers such as myself are no longer willing to give cryptic another chance under any circumstances after the pathetic launch of sto, and even more so due to the attitude of their employee's (people who think sto is not great "just dont get it" comes to mind)
2- cryptic has moved on to their next game... nwn...
i find it very very very unlikely that cryptic is going to throw good money after bad to try to save a game that has tanked. its sad that they released a less than half finished product... its far worse that they spent months making excuses and insulting the people who called them on it before they finally admitted that the game just was not even close to what people expected from a product associated witht the star trek name.
good luck cryptic, i will not be buying another of your products.
IF THE ONLY DEFENCE FOR CRITICISM OF A GAME IS CALLING SOMEONE A TROLL OR HATER, THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE GAME
With that attitude why play any game? You're just going to be dissapointed. I quit AoC the first month of release. Tried it again that November and been with them ever since.
I never vowed to never play a Funcom game again. I think that's just crazy, in my opinion. Crytpics next game may be awesome, you never know.
I know I'm looking forward to the NWN game and the D&D game Atari is doing for XBOX Live.
.. .... .- - . - .-. --- .-.. .-.. ... .-- .... --- .-. . .--. --- .-. - .-.-.-
--------------------------------------------------------
Promote what you love instead of bashing what you hate.
Because MMO companies are no different than any other company, and if a person gets ripped off, treated badly, or sold a massively inferior product, they are justified in not giving that company any more business?
There are several companies or businesses I won't do business with, because of bad experiences and the companies' handling of them. This is not an usual thing, happens every day with airlines, restaurants, and all kinds of other businesses. And if a company puts out a crappy product or treats a person badly (and has a history of treating that particular person badly) what would that person be to go right back to that comapny the next time they release a new product? Naive? Gullible? Stupid?
The mistake that apologists make about MMOs and MMO companies is they think these things are in some special catagory, and deserving of every excuse in the book for bad quality / ineptitude/ bad service, when in reality, MMOs and MMO companies are companies like any other.
And should be treated as such.
I thought that was my point? No mmo is going to be released in such a flawless manner so you're setting yourself up for dissapointment. If you think DCUO, Rift, Star Wars will be released in a errorless way I think you'll be surprised, in my opinion.
You can call me Naive, stupid or gullibe for going back to AoC after I quit the first month. But for me they fixed what needed to be fixed in order for me to enjoy their game. And I do and I have zero regrets. The moment it stops being fun and enjoyable I will unsubscribe.
If you keep holding on to that chip on your shoulder, all that anger is going to eat you up. It's just a video game.
.. .... .- - . - .-. --- .-.. .-.. ... .-- .... --- .-. . .--. --- .-. - .-.-.-
--------------------------------------------------------
Promote what you love instead of bashing what you hate.
I am not the one trying to defend the indefensible, nor attacking every poster who citizicises a particular game.
In regards to MMOs, there is "not flawless" i.e. some bugs and polish issues or server issues that get fixed, and then there is "crap" because of lazy design choices, rushed production, and disservice to an IP. What we have with STO is clearly the latter.
Heh, if you think I am least bit concerned or angry about STO, you need to get out of the basement more. STO is the joke that keeps on giving. If anything, I look forward to reading the next Cryptic fiasco with STO and the laughs I get from the CDF types are better than from most things on TV.
Keep trying tho...
I'm not trying anything. I don't care one ounce if you or any others hate STO. I enjoy it and will do so till it stops. That's just the way it works for me. No opinion from someone else is going to change that. If the game packs up and closes tomorrow I won't lose any sleep over it. It's a game and nothing more.
I'm glad you get your jollies reading posts for STO. Atleast they are enjoying a game.
.. .... .- - . - .-. --- .-.. .-.. ... .-- .... --- .-. . .--. --- .-. - .-.-.-
--------------------------------------------------------
Promote what you love instead of bashing what you hate.
What I don't get is if you hate sto so much, why bother reading threads? Why not move on to your next game? you don't see me in all my ex games calling them crap and telling the people that like them that they are losers or stupid for liking the games. Yet you still make comments like they did a disservice to an IP. At least they made the game for it. the last company didn't do squat with it for years. The game is star trek. It has the feel, the sounds, the look of star trek. A company could spend 10 years making star trek and there would still be pissed off people out there because they didn't include the feature that "they" wanted in it.
Now, I can fully understand your hatred if you were a klingon. They did get shafted in many aspects but the federation was done well in my opinion. With that said, there are still things I would love to see in the game, that is not currently there.
I would love to be fighting from my bridge instead of third person view. I would love for my helmsman to fly the ship so that I don't have to and can concentrate on the battle at hand. I would love true exploration where there are unlimited zones and you the lone ship exploring the unknown galaxy. Tons of other things that I would like to see but I am not sure if they are even possible to do with the current game engine. There are a lot of things I wished they had done differently in the game, but in the end, to me, it is still a fun game. I feel like I am in the star trek universe when playing as does others that are playing.
Hey, maybe I should ask you how you felt about the awards that cryptic won for 2010. But then again, you would probably just ramble on about how crappy the game was at launch and no way should they have won anything. You sit here and complain about how the game was and yet the game has improved tons in lots of ways but you seem to ignore that and want to make it sound like its gotten even worse since its launch. I mean, really, have you decided to make it your lifes goal to try and steer people away from the game? I mean, seriously, I hate sony with a passion but I am not going to try and convince people to not buy their games.
hey doomsday 01 and sevenwind... have you read the little blurb at the bottom of my posts?
keep calling people haters! it works, every time you do sto gets better!
HONEST!
IF THE ONLY DEFENCE FOR CRITICISM OF A GAME IS CALLING SOMEONE A TROLL OR HATER, THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE GAME
I have seen plenty of your posts Raistalin69, you had to put that comment into your tag line because you are a hater and that is the only way you could retaliate. Move along now... Nothing to see here for you...
Edit note: I felt that may have been a little to harsh for poor Raistalin. If you actually want to DISCUSS like your tag line suggests, then please feel free to discuss. So far you guys haven't been doing much of that at all. You say CRITICISM, yet there has been no critiquing, there has just been blame and hate. So, bring it, lets critique the game that YOU think STO should have been.
2nd Edit note: Let me also point out to you and your band of friends, that it was YOU that chose to come into a thread where people actually like the game and have been trying to slam it. its not like you have been actively discussing anything, you guys throw out some hate which in most cases has been out right false statements and then you try to come back with, check out my tag line. So seriously, if you want to discuss, please feel free to chime in. But if you want to spout out crap, then please go elsewhere.
Hrmm, Daddy got himself a new tag line to