Nope. Not unless they offer a trial version soon after launch. I think all developers should offer a trial version from the get-go. If I'm going to pay monthly for a product, I want to try it first. Cryptic really let me down with STO and it will take a great deal for them to get me back.
Also, to out the obvious, the thread is tilted towards saying "no, never again." It's not like people will say "yes, always and forever", so the most positive you can get is "sure I'll give their future games a look." But the real purpose of the thread is to collect people saying "no never again."
But companies don't worry about people saying "never again" when they haven't even seen the product yet. People change their mind all the time, and when they say "never" they only mean "not right now" / "not similar to last time."
The only reason I am playing STO is because it's Star Trek. Otherwise, this type of game design sucks. I hate instancing and I hate load screens. LOL.....like I said, if it wasn't Star Trek...
The only reason I am playing STO is because it's Star Trek. Otherwise, this type of game design sucks. I hate instancing and I hate load screens. LOL.....like I said, if it wasn't Star Trek...
first of all who are you? second spare me the personal attack. Your rant has exactly zero to do with the post I repsonded to and everything to do with trolling. What is it the last couple days? Fanboys gone wild?
CDF has been redeployed to 3rd party websites. Dissent has been eradicated from the official boards, so they need to shore up the lines elsewhere. The consequences of new gamers learning the truth of STO may endanger their LTS worth.
As much as I'd like to say, "No, never again," the truth is if Cryptic got their grubby little paws on some other interesting IP, like, I don't know, Discworld or Earthsea, or heck even the Dresden Files, I might at least sign up for beta again. But probably not.
It's like when journalists would interview scientists about the Large Hadron Collider and ask if it was going to turn the Earth into a black hole. The physicist would always say, "Probably not." The journalist was thinking, "Oh crap, stop the presses! Doom!" but the physicist was thinking, "It's also probably not going to turn the Earth into a giant pink bunny."
Also, to out the obvious, the thread is tilted towards saying "no, never again." It's not like people will say "yes, always and forever", so the most positive you can get is "sure I'll give their future games a look." But the real purpose of the thread is to collect people saying "no never again."
But companies don't worry about people saying "never again" when they haven't even seen the product yet. People change their mind all the time, and when they say "never" they only mean "not right now" / "not similar to last time."
No means no, and never may well mean never. My folks had a Ford. It broke down on them a lot. They decided never to buy one again, and they never did.
A lot of people who felt burned by SOE when they did their alleged bait and switch in SWG, said they'd never play another SOE game. Some said they'd never buy anything made by Sony again, and they never have. They probably never will.
When someone tells me something, I usually don't assume they mean something else. I can see that going awry.
The only reason I am playing STO is because it's Star Trek. Otherwise, this type of game design sucks. I hate instancing and I hate load screens. LOL.....like I said, if it wasn't Star Trek...
*comforts you so that mean, evil instancing won't hurt you anymore*
/back on topic
I never played STO personally, but I did enjoy CoH for what it was. I wanted to try CO as well but haven't yet.
Still, it always boggles my mind when people dislike a game and immediately jump to the conclusion that everything else out of the studio must be awful, or not worth playing. Certainly I could see being more dubious when hearing promises for future releases, or being more careful about trying their product before purchsing. Perhaps even going so far as to say I wouldn't want to play another game by that studio for X amount of time, but completely fleeing from it in horror? For what? They didn't live up to your lofty expectations? ok....
All I can think is how utterly absurd it would be if someone saw a bad movie and said "Damn I'm never seeing another Universal movie ever again!" or "That was the worst soft drink ever! I'll never buy another Coke product!" umm alrighty. Needless to say that studios can change dramatically over the course of time, or that titles by the same studio can often vary wildly, but whatever. Just because you posted super-awesome-idea6 on their forum and they didn't immediately implement it is hardly evidence of anything, ineptness, stupidity, malicious-desire-to-ruin-your-life-personally, or otherwise.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
Probably not since I figured out they suck at developing games. All their games are virtually the same. They can't make a game that isn't epicly instanced then I don't want to play them. I still feel bad for the people who bought life time memberships for this and for champions.
I have never been so disapointed with a MMO as I am with STO. It was supposed to be a groundbreaking online world of the Star Trek IP. all they did was put the name "star trek" in it, put some voices in from the show, and some ship models and maybe some online features in a fully instanced world and called it Star Trek Online.
Again was extremely dissapointed in this game Of all people to make a STO MMO why in the holy mother of god would it be cryptic to take over development..? wish Sierra/Vivendi games could have done it instead of cryptic.
The only reason I am playing STO is because it's Star Trek. Otherwise, this type of game design sucks. I hate instancing and I hate load screens. LOL.....like I said, if it wasn't Star Trek...
*comforts you so that mean, evil instancing won't hurt you anymore*
/back on topic
I never played STO personally, but I did enjoy CoH for what it was. I wanted to try CO as well but haven't yet.
EDIT: I don't need to point out how rediculous this post is. You haven't played the games discussed, but blindly insult hose who have for their informed opinions. You aren't worth it.
No, the company is run by several ego maniacs who believe their "vision" is the end all be all in game design. Even though the public is screaming at them to do it right. They keep making flagshipped games. They rushed both champions and STO out the door and they are making another one for spring 2011? WTF is this an MMO cloning factory? The arrogance of their leadership is off the chart. It's almost as bad as Mythic. Almost
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison
Maybe. If they pull their heads out of their butts and start making some better games, then yes. Otherwise, if they keep making games like CO and STO, then no.
You can't use the tools if you don't know they exist... http://www.ic3.gov - Internet Crime Complaint Center - Report cyber crimes to the FBI.
Just bought the CO box for 19.99 from Best Buy with 1 included month. A price I'm happy with. Don't buy the digital download from BB it is screwed up and charges 29.99 plus 5.99 dl fee.
Wish I had waited to try STO for 29.99 or less. I paid 60 bucks for the regular edition.
Ouch, you were ripped off. It'sd only £2.99 in the UK and €3.99 in the rest of Europe
As much as I hated CO and how badly STO was treated (basically as quick cash cow) that is not the reason I would avoid future Cryptic games. I mean a beta can unveil these issues, and they did for me. Their responses, thread locking, widespread banning, not honoring their own freaking sale, stacking a cash shop with playable races while their game is broken and bleeding subs... their behavior as a business has just been awful. I can only imagine what might happen if I had to contact customer service, and god forbid, expect service for the 15 bucks a month I would be paying them.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
I liked what Cryptic was doing with COH and COV. I played those games in what I think of as their golden age--right after COV came out and a year or two afterwards.
Having said that, I was not at all impressed with what I saw from them in CO or STO. The issues are really simple for me: C-store cash grabs (respecs and playable races especially) and rushed development.
These two problems make for bad and limited game-play, and multiple layers of fees. Not interested.
Go back to a healthier development process and lose the Microtransaction fees on top of the sub, and I'd check them out.
I played CoH/V at roughly the same time as you, from Heroes launch in Europe which if i remember correctly was at least 6 months after it came out in the US, through CoV's release and played it quite heavily over a 3 year period with the odd break here and there.
I highlighted what i think is the difference between the thinking behind CoH/V and CO/STO. In CoH/V grouping was emphasized right from the very minute you encounter The Hollows at around level 5 or 6. Pretty much all the way through the game things are thrown at you that scream at you to make friends and find people to play with, respecs being one of the most obvious. In Co & STO on the other hand you can simply buy the respec and have it instantly without any of the fun that could have been had if they'd done it in the same way for them. Someone mentioned the word soulless earlier, very fitting.
No one makes me buy any mmo. So ,,yes..when then chance becomes available for me to try a new game...for free..then I will. Only then ..and if I like it..will i purchase. This includes Cryptic. No video game company,imo, is beyond redemption. Especially if they manage to produce a great game to the contrary of past efforts.
aren't Cryptic already developing another MMO... i'm sure they've hinted at/said it enough times and of course have said many many times that CO and STO's ips weren't the last they had planned...
meh... depends on how the next one turns out, CO and STO were released so close to each other.... there really is hardly any difference in the UI, layout, format etc of the game.
either says a lot about their engine, or very little about their engine.. heh :P but 3rd time lucky, they can always learn from mistakes...
unlike Mythic who managed to ruin WARs atmosphere of the warhammer world and still make it worse than the little past gem DAoC.... that took effort !
"nothing actually matters, we're just slightly evolved monkeys clinging to a dying piece of rock hurtling through space waiting for our eventual death." - Frankie Boyle, Mock The Week
I don't like this new Cryptic, the old Cryptic was much better.
The old Cryptic gave me a fair deal for my subscription and cared that I was getting value for money. Monthly subscription for STO should have been $3/month instead of $15/month to fairly reflect the content provided. After perhaps a year $15/month may have been fair. A F2P model with store might have kept me if I believed they cared about me being a customer.
I believe future Cryptic MMOs will operate the same way so easy decision to make: no deal.
I've never had to bail on any MMO as quickly as I had to bail on STO.
I'm not a fan of the engine they have sued for Co and STO as I think it is graphically ugly and the template that Cryptic have used for these games has produced a very basic looking game for me. I dont think either game is necessarily bad and they have some good features. However they do not really add anything new to the genre and have no unique experience that makes me want to stay with them.
I personally think the ppl who sold the Star Trek I.P. should have aimed higher in terms of design requirements as this could have been as valuable an I.P. as Star Wars was for S.O.E. (pre CU) and LOTRO continues to be for Turbine.
I would like to see Cryptic innovate in an MMO and produce something that can hold interest past the initial trial either through deep lore, great mechanics or visual polish.
Is this hypothetical game a fun game from Cryptic, or a game from Cryptic that isn't fun?
I wonder if Parker Bros. gets this kind of hate from people who buy Monopoly and then don't enjoy it. Do you think the Parker Bros. forums are a-blaze with hate posts about how 'monopoly' didn't capture the feel of Atlantic City? That "monopoly's" property system sequesters player from healthy socialization? That "monopoly" is just a re-skinning of "the game of Life"?
Do you think people are debating whether they should boycott Parker Bros. future games because of the unethical deal they received with "Monopoly"?
I swear, some gamers have the dumbest things to get passionate about.
You bought a video game, it was a let down. Buyer be ware. What if Cryptic's next game is hella fun and gets blockbuster reviews in every category including customer service? Cryptic wasn't trying to screw anyone. They wanted to make a game they hoped people would enjoy and thus they could earn a living by entertaining you. They failed. They aren't evil, they had a set back. This level of hate is ludicrous and shameful.
Save your indignation and boycotts for truly evil corporations that are actually doing bad things like forcing children to work for slave wages and long hours or purposefully leave unsafe conditions in factories, knowing employees will die, simply because it is cheaper than upgrading equipment. THESE are actual things ACTUALLY happening by real corporations and yet, I bet the shirt on your back was made by a 9 year old in Vietnam and 1 in the morning as you speculate wheter Cryptic deserves your business because of the pain Star Trek Online caused you.
This planet is doomed.
Actually, Monopoly was stolen wholesale from a game invented a Quaker who was living in Atlantic City, that's why you see all those Monopoly clones on the market that use everything but the exact name. Parker Bros. lost lawsuits trying to prevent Monopoly clones because they idea wasn't originally theirs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_%28game%29#History
Comparing Monopoly to STO isn't a good analogy anyway mainly because Monopoly is a decently designed game, and it stands up well to many of its competitors. STO does not stand up to anything released in the Pay to Play MMORPG market, and indeed would not exist if it wasn't coasting on the "Star Trek" name.
Plenty of people dislike Monopoly (no one says it's a rip off of the Game of Life because both games are vastly different,) but I doubt anyone could claim that Monopoly is a poorly designed game, or not compteitive in its market.
Oh, and for gamers video games are their hobby! Telling gamers to not be passionate about video games is like telling a stamp collector to stop caring about stamps, a coin collector to stop collecting coins, a model train buff that he spent way too much time building his model train, and telling a film buff that he cares too much about films. I can't believe you're telling people to "stop being so passionate about your hobby."
(Also, I shouldn't have to mention this, but Star Trek is also many people's hobby. Having two of your hobbies butchered in a single blow sure hurts, not that you'd care or understand. Sci-fi film buffs who are Star Trek buffs get to experience ecstasy whenever they watch Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, why can't I, as an MMO buff and Star Trek buff, expect the same level of quality?)
Comments
Nope.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Nope. Not unless they offer a trial version soon after launch. I think all developers should offer a trial version from the get-go. If I'm going to pay monthly for a product, I want to try it first. Cryptic really let me down with STO and it will take a great deal for them to get me back.
Also, to out the obvious, the thread is tilted towards saying "no, never again." It's not like people will say "yes, always and forever", so the most positive you can get is "sure I'll give their future games a look." But the real purpose of the thread is to collect people saying "no never again."
But companies don't worry about people saying "never again" when they haven't even seen the product yet. People change their mind all the time, and when they say "never" they only mean "not right now" / "not similar to last time."
Cryptic is trying a Customer Development approach to MMO creation.
The only reason I am playing STO is because it's Star Trek. Otherwise, this type of game design sucks. I hate instancing and I hate load screens. LOL.....like I said, if it wasn't Star Trek...
Its not Star Trek either
For such a long post, you're quite a hypocrit.
CDF has been redeployed to 3rd party websites. Dissent has been eradicated from the official boards, so they need to shore up the lines elsewhere. The consequences of new gamers learning the truth of STO may endanger their LTS worth.
As much as I'd like to say, "No, never again," the truth is if Cryptic got their grubby little paws on some other interesting IP, like, I don't know, Discworld or Earthsea, or heck even the Dresden Files, I might at least sign up for beta again. But probably not.
It's like when journalists would interview scientists about the Large Hadron Collider and ask if it was going to turn the Earth into a black hole. The physicist would always say, "Probably not." The journalist was thinking, "Oh crap, stop the presses! Doom!" but the physicist was thinking, "It's also probably not going to turn the Earth into a giant pink bunny."
So I repeat, probably not.
No means no, and never may well mean never. My folks had a Ford. It broke down on them a lot. They decided never to buy one again, and they never did.
A lot of people who felt burned by SOE when they did their alleged bait and switch in SWG, said they'd never play another SOE game. Some said they'd never buy anything made by Sony again, and they never have. They probably never will.
When someone tells me something, I usually don't assume they mean something else. I can see that going awry.
*comforts you so that mean, evil instancing won't hurt you anymore*
/back on topic
I never played STO personally, but I did enjoy CoH for what it was. I wanted to try CO as well but haven't yet.
Still, it always boggles my mind when people dislike a game and immediately jump to the conclusion that everything else out of the studio must be awful, or not worth playing. Certainly I could see being more dubious when hearing promises for future releases, or being more careful about trying their product before purchsing. Perhaps even going so far as to say I wouldn't want to play another game by that studio for X amount of time, but completely fleeing from it in horror? For what? They didn't live up to your lofty expectations? ok....
All I can think is how utterly absurd it would be if someone saw a bad movie and said "Damn I'm never seeing another Universal movie ever again!" or "That was the worst soft drink ever! I'll never buy another Coke product!" umm alrighty. Needless to say that studios can change dramatically over the course of time, or that titles by the same studio can often vary wildly, but whatever. Just because you posted super-awesome-idea6 on their forum and they didn't immediately implement it is hardly evidence of anything, ineptness, stupidity, malicious-desire-to-ruin-your-life-personally, or otherwise.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
Probably not since I figured out they suck at developing games. All their games are virtually the same. They can't make a game that isn't epicly instanced then I don't want to play them. I still feel bad for the people who bought life time memberships for this and for champions.
I have never been so disapointed with a MMO as I am with STO. It was supposed to be a groundbreaking online world of the Star Trek IP. all they did was put the name "star trek" in it, put some voices in from the show, and some ship models and maybe some online features in a fully instanced world and called it Star Trek Online.
Again was extremely dissapointed in this game
Of all people to make a STO MMO why in the holy mother of god would it be cryptic to take over development..? wish Sierra/Vivendi games could have done it instead of cryptic.
EDIT: I don't need to point out how rediculous this post is. You haven't played the games discussed, but blindly insult hose who have for their informed opinions. You aren't worth it.
No, the company is run by several ego maniacs who believe their "vision" is the end all be all in game design. Even though the public is screaming at them to do it right. They keep making flagshipped games. They rushed both champions and STO out the door and they are making another one for spring 2011? WTF is this an MMO cloning factory? The arrogance of their leadership is off the chart. It's almost as bad as Mythic. Almost
The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison
Maybe. If they pull their heads out of their butts and start making some better games, then yes. Otherwise, if they keep making games like CO and STO, then no.
You can't use the tools if you don't know they exist...
http://www.ic3.gov - Internet Crime Complaint Center - Report cyber crimes to the FBI.
http://www.spamcop.net - SpamCop.net - Report spam and scam emails.
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/ - Network Solutions WHOIS - Investigate and reveal suspcious websites.
Ouch, you were ripped off. It'sd only £2.99 in the UK and €3.99 in the rest of Europe
As much as I hated CO and how badly STO was treated (basically as quick cash cow) that is not the reason I would avoid future Cryptic games. I mean a beta can unveil these issues, and they did for me. Their responses, thread locking, widespread banning, not honoring their own freaking sale, stacking a cash shop with playable races while their game is broken and bleeding subs... their behavior as a business has just been awful. I can only imagine what might happen if I had to contact customer service, and god forbid, expect service for the 15 bucks a month I would be paying them.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
I played CoH/V at roughly the same time as you, from Heroes launch in Europe which if i remember correctly was at least 6 months after it came out in the US, through CoV's release and played it quite heavily over a 3 year period with the odd break here and there.
I highlighted what i think is the difference between the thinking behind CoH/V and CO/STO. In CoH/V grouping was emphasized right from the very minute you encounter The Hollows at around level 5 or 6. Pretty much all the way through the game things are thrown at you that scream at you to make friends and find people to play with, respecs being one of the most obvious. In Co & STO on the other hand you can simply buy the respec and have it instantly without any of the fun that could have been had if they'd done it in the same way for them. Someone mentioned the word soulless earlier, very fitting.
No one makes me buy any mmo. So ,,yes..when then chance becomes available for me to try a new game...for free..then I will. Only then ..and if I like it..will i purchase. This includes Cryptic. No video game company,imo, is beyond redemption. Especially if they manage to produce a great game to the contrary of past efforts.
aren't Cryptic already developing another MMO... i'm sure they've hinted at/said it enough times and of course have said many many times that CO and STO's ips weren't the last they had planned...
meh... depends on how the next one turns out, CO and STO were released so close to each other.... there really is hardly any difference in the UI, layout, format etc of the game.
either says a lot about their engine, or very little about their engine.. heh :P but 3rd time lucky, they can always learn from mistakes...
unlike Mythic who managed to ruin WARs atmosphere of the warhammer world and still make it worse than the little past gem DAoC.... that took effort !
"nothing actually matters, we're just slightly evolved monkeys clinging to a dying piece of rock hurtling through space waiting for our eventual death." - Frankie Boyle, Mock The Week
Nope.
I don't like this new Cryptic, the old Cryptic was much better.
The old Cryptic gave me a fair deal for my subscription and cared that I was getting value for money. Monthly subscription for STO should have been $3/month instead of $15/month to fairly reflect the content provided. After perhaps a year $15/month may have been fair. A F2P model with store might have kept me if I believed they cared about me being a customer.
I believe future Cryptic MMOs will operate the same way so easy decision to make: no deal.
I've never had to bail on any MMO as quickly as I had to bail on STO.
I'm not a fan of the engine they have sued for Co and STO as I think it is graphically ugly and the template that Cryptic have used for these games has produced a very basic looking game for me. I dont think either game is necessarily bad and they have some good features. However they do not really add anything new to the genre and have no unique experience that makes me want to stay with them.
I personally think the ppl who sold the Star Trek I.P. should have aimed higher in terms of design requirements as this could have been as valuable an I.P. as Star Wars was for S.O.E. (pre CU) and LOTRO continues to be for Turbine.
I would like to see Cryptic innovate in an MMO and produce something that can hold interest past the initial trial either through deep lore, great mechanics or visual polish.
Best of luck to them
To err is human....to play is divine
Never bought one of their games, all they had inspired poor to mediocre quality at most. and i was right.
Never at launch again! .....
I will wait for 6 months ...then see what the forums / reviews say ....and make up my mind.
On this one the all the reviews got it right ... its bad!
Actually, Monopoly was stolen wholesale from a game invented a Quaker who was living in Atlantic City, that's why you see all those Monopoly clones on the market that use everything but the exact name. Parker Bros. lost lawsuits trying to prevent Monopoly clones because they idea wasn't originally theirs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_%28game%29#History
Comparing Monopoly to STO isn't a good analogy anyway mainly because Monopoly is a decently designed game, and it stands up well to many of its competitors. STO does not stand up to anything released in the Pay to Play MMORPG market, and indeed would not exist if it wasn't coasting on the "Star Trek" name.
Plenty of people dislike Monopoly (no one says it's a rip off of the Game of Life because both games are vastly different,) but I doubt anyone could claim that Monopoly is a poorly designed game, or not compteitive in its market.
Oh, and for gamers video games are their hobby! Telling gamers to not be passionate about video games is like telling a stamp collector to stop caring about stamps, a coin collector to stop collecting coins, a model train buff that he spent way too much time building his model train, and telling a film buff that he cares too much about films. I can't believe you're telling people to "stop being so passionate about your hobby."
(Also, I shouldn't have to mention this, but Star Trek is also many people's hobby. Having two of your hobbies butchered in a single blow sure hurts, not that you'd care or understand. Sci-fi film buffs who are Star Trek buffs get to experience ecstasy whenever they watch Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, why can't I, as an MMO buff and Star Trek buff, expect the same level of quality?)
Cryptic never more.