If you're going to compare games, at least let them have something in common other than the backdrop. I understand the whole point is to get readers to click on the article but it's a bad article. How do you even compare game worlds where one is vast (Eve) and the other is a bunch of interconnected instances?
To match them up based on the space setting was clearly a bad idea as many people have already said. I think a comparisson between Eve and anothe sandbox, like DFO or UO would have been more appropriate.
EvE vs Pre-CU SWG would be a good read I think
Perhaps, but pitting a game that no longer exists (and is now shit) might not be entirely fair. We've already witnessed Adam Tingle's very, very rose-tinted spectacles in action and I really don't need another "back in my day" rant!
Same applies to E&B!
ok..fine...EvE vs SWG-Emu :P
oh ya???????
Eve vs. Shores of Hazeron
and
StarQuest Online vs. StarTrek Online
that should carry enough bias and pessimism to last a good 2 years.
my first reaction to the title was "are you serious? why bother?" but it was a pretty entertaining read. Its an opinion piece, and while the author's favorite is clear, I don't think its unfair towards STO.
I think it would be cool if the author of these comparisions could present a few basics about each game in the beginning of the article however- time each game has been out since release, possibly production costs of each game, estimated subscriptions of each game, stuff like that. It would at least provide some interesting insight into the games.
STO, well.... It's a really bad copy of WoW with a Star Trek skin. No innovation, no personality and a really awful developer in Cryptic and the community is lacking in many ways. Not to mention that Cryptic stomped over the Star Trek IP with it's size 20 boots. Just to make it self appear good to it's shareholders.
Eve in this fight, comparable to Dr. Steven Hawking. Brilliant, deep, refined, sophisticated. A small amount of time with them allows for expansion of your thoughts. It opens you up to a different world.
STO is more like a VERY slow 1st grader which just learned not to pee in his pants, standing there with his finger in his nose.
9/10...10/10... Cmon man, seriusly, get real. Eve have huge flaws that shouldn't be ignored and even if the ''player base''(more alts) is growing its growing extremely slowly and the population is not that big either and there are reasons for that. I mean, if it was that good player would flock to it. I ''played''(waiting for my skills to end so I can queue another) it a quite long time and I never got into it. Player vs environement is patheticly bad. Combat is boring, laggy, extremely unbalanced. Interface is AWFUL, nuff'said.
Really the game really have a lot of flaws. I never played STO but I always disliked the cheesy universe of ST so yeah, I will pass... plus all the bad things I heard about it.
What an awful review. The reviewer spends the readers time showing off his personal bias in an already unfair comparison. The reviewer assumes that his readers should like what he likes and dislike what he dislikes about these games. He then goes on to unfairly weight the likes/dislikes so that EVE gets a superior score. (I personally found it to be offensively prejudicial the fact that the author decided to count STO's similarity with Champions Online as a negative aspect. Twice.)
When first playing STO, I too struggled with making something out of the game. for example, it was unlike other games in terms of gameplay, and had to exist alongside tons of pre-existing lore. But now, just months after the game's release, it's easy to understand. The game is intended to be episodic and arcade-like, and it excels at both. If you don't like those fundamental aspects then you won't like the game.
EVE is intended to be open-ended, non-directional, highly cooperative, with the game developing slowly and methodically. If you like the gameplay of STO, you may not like playing EVE.
Neither STO nor EVE had the same handicaps or aptitudes at their genesis. And as someone stated in an earlier thread, EVE has had years to come to be what it is today; STO only months. But even that doesn't mean anything. We could revisit STO six years hence and it would still be a very different game than today's EVE. The ultimate question in reviewing these games should be, "Is it good at what it is, and is it fun in that context?" Sure STO loses a point or two for being new and glitchy. I seem to remember EVE having some technical problems in the beginning and at times along the way. But in the final analysis STO should earn a score very much closer to EVE's.
I would give STO 7/10, and EVE 8/10. The reason why EVE doesn't get a perfect score is primarily that it has very poor customization and can be very boring to play. STO loses major points for STILL not addressing glitches that have been in the game since before two content updates. MMORPG Rule #4: Stop adding content until you fix what you already have! Otherwise, both games are highly recommended. They are both good examples of the fun and variety one can have in space-themed MMO's.
Must be slow day at the office, this is like apples and oranges here, two very different games and ideas, kinda like comparing checkers to battleship..LOL I think your use of bandwidth could have been used for something better../shrug
i dont understand what the point of this article was. it seemed like an excuse to destroy STO, which has been doing a fine job at that by itself. the two games never could be compared, they have nothing in common. another bad article by mmorpg.com
i played both games and still can't fathom how Eve gets a near perfect score! If the game is so good to be near perfect wouldn't it be the King of the block instead of WoW? I certainly found plenty of flaws in the game that I stopped playing it and apparently many others came up with the same conclusions as it is just a nich game. Comparing a mature game to a newly released one is just plain silly especially as they only have space in common. One thing I disagree with totally is STO's space combat is way more engaging then Eve's (my opinion) and since Eve doesn't even have ground combat I don't see how it could possibly of beat STO in that overall category lol! Once you came out with an article that gave one game a near perfect scores and the other near disaster scores you should of realized the comparison was not worthy of publishing!
I enjoyed the Article ... it gives Cryptic a heads up as to what STO should have been able to achieve.
Remember everyone, if you want future SciFi games to be good... and not Trash like Cryptic put out. Then you need to hold them to a high standard and what better standard than EvE-Online.
I feel the Author has made a very good point.
WE DONT LIKE CASH GRABING DEVELOPERS THAT DISH OUT CRAP!
i played both games and still can't fathom how Eve gets a near perfect score! If the game is so good to be near perfect wouldn't it be the King of the block instead of WoW? I certainly found plenty of flaws in the game that I stopped playing it and apparently many others came up with the same conclusions as it is just a nich game. Comparing a mature game to a newly released one is just plain silly especially as they only have space in common. One thing I disagree with totally is STO's space combat is way more engaging then Eve's (my opinion) and since Eve doesn't even have ground combat I don't see how it could possibly of beat STO in that overall category lol! Once you came out with an article that gave one game a near perfect scores and the other near disaster scores you should of realized the comparison was not worthy of publishing!
It's not that EvE is that good , it's in comparison to STO , EVE is that good. Which stated in simpler terms STO suckage was complete. The field of competion is currently limited , Cryptic released a crap product and tried to tell people it was AAA. Which by there own admission , it wasn't . It probably never will simply by the design decisions that were made in the rush to release the product. It'll always remain a niche game that will probably survive on 50 k subs , as Cryptic intended.
I don't even think its 50K subs! ... You keep seeing people complaining about population on there forums. Some players cannot even finish grouped missions because they can't make up 5 players! same with the PVP ... its just is not happening.
They have had more interviews in the last month with different sites than they have episodes in the entire game! ..and on that point it feel like they trying to bail water out of the sinking ship, while pretending they enjoying the feeling!
To match them up based on the space setting was clearly a bad idea as many people have already said. I think a comparisson between Eve and anothe sandbox, like DFO or UO would have been more appropriate.
I think most of you guys are making too big a deal out of nothing it's not like the site is shutting down next week, there will be plenty more articles like these and alot of those matchups can be brought up at that point and time. As avid enough fans of these games we even seek out information and opinion articles like this one (which can hardly be denied by anyone who bothered to even reply here). Cryptic has to take the good with the bad because it was their own choice to enter this ring I don't think we need to be wasting time defending what they did especially if you can also agree it is a horrible game. That's just my two cents on this though.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
finally one of these x vs y thingies that i agree with!
well it really wasnt too fair of a fight, Eve is parsecs (that's more than light years) ahead of STO. a previous poster had a good idea; DF vs eve would have been more interesting (eve still wins tho!!!)
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Yeah, not really a fair match. STO had such a bad launch that it would hard for it to compete at all.
If STO had wion at all I am sure there would have been a riot.
"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." parrotpholk
I dont believe you really played STO to end game, otherwise you would of never made the comment about STO having crafting and PVP at endgame. The crafting design is the worst ever and there is no PVP at endgame. NO ONE crafts at endgame. There is no reason to craft since the drops are 10 times better than anything you could craft. You may also want to look at the threads over at the official STO forums and take a look at the "I waited 90 minutes for PVP and gave up" posts.
On the other end of the coin, this is not a fair matchup with Eve having 7 years of development and being an open-ended sandbox while STO is under a year and is really nothing more than a single-player game with a subscription and microtransactions.
"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
Matching EVE online vs Star Trek Online is like matching up a 40k Librarian (extremly powerfull sorcerer for those that dont know of the 40k universe) with a ... potato...
Comments
If you're going to compare games, at least let them have something in common other than the backdrop. I understand the whole point is to get readers to click on the article but it's a bad article. How do you even compare game worlds where one is vast (Eve) and the other is a bunch of interconnected instances?
oh ya???????
Eve vs. Shores of Hazeron
and
StarQuest Online vs. StarTrek Online
that should carry enough bias and pessimism to last a good 2 years.
my first reaction to the title was "are you serious? why bother?" but it was a pretty entertaining read. Its an opinion piece, and while the author's favorite is clear, I don't think its unfair towards STO.
I think it would be cool if the author of these comparisions could present a few basics about each game in the beginning of the article however- time each game has been out since release, possibly production costs of each game, estimated subscriptions of each game, stuff like that. It would at least provide some interesting insight into the games.
EVE Online consistently wins awards http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=4155&tid=1 is ground breaking and as one of the best developers in CCP. The community is also one of the best I've ever know online.
STO, well.... It's a really bad copy of WoW with a Star Trek skin. No innovation, no personality and a really awful developer in Cryptic and the community is lacking in many ways. Not to mention that Cryptic stomped over the Star Trek IP with it's size 20 boots. Just to make it self appear good to it's shareholders.
I've made my point.
Jumping on the bandwagon:
Eve in this fight, comparable to Dr. Steven Hawking. Brilliant, deep, refined, sophisticated. A small amount of time with them allows for expansion of your thoughts. It opens you up to a different world.
STO is more like a VERY slow 1st grader which just learned not to pee in his pants, standing there with his finger in his nose.
Not the best of matchups ever man.
9/10...10/10... Cmon man, seriusly, get real. Eve have huge flaws that shouldn't be ignored and even if the ''player base''(more alts) is growing its growing extremely slowly and the population is not that big either and there are reasons for that. I mean, if it was that good player would flock to it. I ''played''(waiting for my skills to end so I can queue another) it a quite long time and I never got into it. Player vs environement is patheticly bad. Combat is boring, laggy, extremely unbalanced. Interface is AWFUL, nuff'said.
Really the game really have a lot of flaws. I never played STO but I always disliked the cheesy universe of ST so yeah, I will pass... plus all the bad things I heard about it.
-------------------------------------
Before: developers loved games and made money.
Now: developers love money and make games.
What an awful review. The reviewer spends the readers time showing off his personal bias in an already unfair comparison. The reviewer assumes that his readers should like what he likes and dislike what he dislikes about these games. He then goes on to unfairly weight the likes/dislikes so that EVE gets a superior score. (I personally found it to be offensively prejudicial the fact that the author decided to count STO's similarity with Champions Online as a negative aspect. Twice.)
When first playing STO, I too struggled with making something out of the game. for example, it was unlike other games in terms of gameplay, and had to exist alongside tons of pre-existing lore. But now, just months after the game's release, it's easy to understand. The game is intended to be episodic and arcade-like, and it excels at both. If you don't like those fundamental aspects then you won't like the game.
EVE is intended to be open-ended, non-directional, highly cooperative, with the game developing slowly and methodically. If you like the gameplay of STO, you may not like playing EVE.
Neither STO nor EVE had the same handicaps or aptitudes at their genesis. And as someone stated in an earlier thread, EVE has had years to come to be what it is today; STO only months. But even that doesn't mean anything. We could revisit STO six years hence and it would still be a very different game than today's EVE. The ultimate question in reviewing these games should be, "Is it good at what it is, and is it fun in that context?" Sure STO loses a point or two for being new and glitchy. I seem to remember EVE having some technical problems in the beginning and at times along the way. But in the final analysis STO should earn a score very much closer to EVE's.
I would give STO 7/10, and EVE 8/10. The reason why EVE doesn't get a perfect score is primarily that it has very poor customization and can be very boring to play. STO loses major points for STILL not addressing glitches that have been in the game since before two content updates. MMORPG Rule #4: Stop adding content until you fix what you already have! Otherwise, both games are highly recommended. They are both good examples of the fun and variety one can have in space-themed MMO's.
Must be slow day at the office, this is like apples and oranges here, two very different games and ideas, kinda like comparing checkers to battleship..LOL I think your use of bandwidth could have been used for something better../shrug
Only thing I think STO is better at than EVE is the learning curve. Sad but true, had high hopes for STO but just shoddy design.
This is no fight. It's like a nuclear strike on neanderthals.
i dont understand what the point of this article was. it seemed like an excuse to destroy STO, which has been doing a fine job at that by itself. the two games never could be compared, they have nothing in common. another bad article by mmorpg.com
i played both games and still can't fathom how Eve gets a near perfect score! If the game is so good to be near perfect wouldn't it be the King of the block instead of WoW? I certainly found plenty of flaws in the game that I stopped playing it and apparently many others came up with the same conclusions as it is just a nich game. Comparing a mature game to a newly released one is just plain silly especially as they only have space in common. One thing I disagree with totally is STO's space combat is way more engaging then Eve's (my opinion) and since Eve doesn't even have ground combat I don't see how it could possibly of beat STO in that overall category lol! Once you came out with an article that gave one game a near perfect scores and the other near disaster scores you should of realized the comparison was not worthy of publishing!
I enjoyed the Article ... it gives Cryptic a heads up as to what STO should have been able to achieve.
Remember everyone, if you want future SciFi games to be good... and not Trash like Cryptic put out. Then you need to hold them to a high standard and what better standard than EvE-Online.
I feel the Author has made a very good point.
WE DONT LIKE CASH GRABING DEVELOPERS THAT DISH OUT CRAP!
LOL.
Couldn't have said it better myself. MMORPG is getting desperate.
It's not that EvE is that good , it's in comparison to STO , EVE is that good. Which stated in simpler terms STO suckage was complete. The field of competion is currently limited , Cryptic released a crap product and tried to tell people it was AAA. Which by there own admission , it wasn't . It probably never will simply by the design decisions that were made in the rush to release the product. It'll always remain a niche game that will probably survive on 50 k subs , as Cryptic intended.
I don't even think its 50K subs! ... You keep seeing people complaining about population on there forums. Some players cannot even finish grouped missions because they can't make up 5 players! same with the PVP ... its just is not happening.
They have had more interviews in the last month with different sites than they have episodes in the entire game! ..and on that point it feel like they trying to bail water out of the sinking ship, while pretending they enjoying the feeling!
Thats SAD!
Note to author: Articles like this current one end careers.....and not in a good way.
Star Trek Online is the glass joe of mmo's...
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
I think most of you guys are making too big a deal out of nothing it's not like the site is shutting down next week, there will be plenty more articles like these and alot of those matchups can be brought up at that point and time. As avid enough fans of these games we even seek out information and opinion articles like this one (which can hardly be denied by anyone who bothered to even reply here). Cryptic has to take the good with the bad because it was their own choice to enter this ring I don't think we need to be wasting time defending what they did especially if you can also agree it is a horrible game. That's just my two cents on this though.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
eve doesn't have Spock, nuff said. lol. for real though, they need to put Chuck Norris in eve. game over.
finally one of these x vs y thingies that i agree with!
well it really wasnt too fair of a fight, Eve is parsecs (that's more than light years) ahead of STO. a previous poster had a good idea; DF vs eve would have been more interesting (eve still wins tho!!!)
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower
My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.
Henry Rollins
Yeah, not really a fair match. STO had such a bad launch that it would hard for it to compete at all.
If STO had wion at all I am sure there would have been a riot.
"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." parrotpholk
I dont believe you really played STO to end game, otherwise you would of never made the comment about STO having crafting and PVP at endgame. The crafting design is the worst ever and there is no PVP at endgame. NO ONE crafts at endgame. There is no reason to craft since the drops are 10 times better than anything you could craft. You may also want to look at the threads over at the official STO forums and take a look at the "I waited 90 minutes for PVP and gave up" posts.
On the other end of the coin, this is not a fair matchup with Eve having 7 years of development and being an open-ended sandbox while STO is under a year and is really nothing more than a single-player game with a subscription and microtransactions.
Matching EVE online vs Star Trek Online is like matching up a 40k Librarian (extremly powerfull sorcerer for those that dont know of the 40k universe) with a ... potato...
Eve vs STO is kind of like bringing a knife to a gun fight. No real competition there.