Wo wo wo. I got to the start of your article and had to stop reading to post this.
Star Trek Online is NOT Gene Roddenberry's creation and if Gene is returned to us one day he will be very unhappy with Cryptic forcing the "perfect circle" shape of Star Trek into their "square hole" of a game that is severely lacking.
"It's like a finger pointing away to the moon... Don't concentrate on the finger or you'll miss all the heavenly glory" (Bruce Lee)
(Insert your favourite mmo here): ......And behold, a pale horse.... And a million hellishly bad mmos followed with it.
I honestly can't believe they allow tripe like this to be posted. The "article" as it were was SO one sided it was sickening. I'm surprised the author doesn't feel embarassed after posting it.
I'm sure someone has mentioned it, but one huge reason it's not fair...
EVE was released in 2003.
STO was released in 2010.
In 7 years, who knows how good or bad STO will be. It could have 10 races with unique ships and tons of planets to explore. 7 years of development time is a HUGE difference.
I think for what was compared the release dates of the games don't matter much if at all. Many of the problems that give STO low marks are based strictly off of design decisions and not a lack of development time, will they add more places to go in the game sure but if it is still designed like open space is now it will always compare unfavorably against EVE which actually feels like a vast expanse of space.
I think we all know older doesn't mean better even in mmorpgs Dark And Light is now an older game and is still worse than most anything released since it.
This. The majority of problems with STO have to do with the fundamental design of the game. It is literally built on the Champions Online game engine, which is why it has the exact same heavy instancing, grossly oversized proportions, and lack of mission depth, among other issues. The Champions Online engine is simply not built for the kind of massive universe exploration that defines the Star Trek IP. What the game needs isn't more development time; it needs a significant overhaul of the game architecture.
EVE is garbage because of one fundamental and fatal flaw: the developers have sticky fingers and cheat. No amount of bling or features can compensate for players paying to play a rigged game for the amusement of the developers. It's no true sandbox when you can find yourself on the opposite team from the developers and their buddies and they set up or "rig" your side to take the fall for their jollies.
Endgame in EVE is a joke. Sorry but I don't call being a faceless cog in some alliance an endgame, when all they're really doing is doing the same thing street gangs do: an endless largeley pointless fight for turf.
This. The majority of problems with STO have to do with the fundamental design of the game. It is literally built on the Champions Online game engine, which is why it has the exact same heavy instancing, grossly oversized proportions, and lack of mission depth, among other issues. The Champions Online engine is simply not built for the kind of massive universe exploration that defines the Star Trek IP. What the game needs isn't more development time; it needs a significant overhaul of the game architecture.
Lack of mission depth? Have you ever played Eve lol
I think this would have been a fair comparison if they matched up EvE at release with STO at release. Both equally horrendous. EvE is a niche champion, the uber nerds dream, but to a regular human being it is a boring waste of time where you don't even have to participate in 90% of the gameplay.
I understand that this is the authors personal thoughts on the two games. I kinda agree but disagre at the same time. I agree that EVE is a better built game with tons more depth than STO, however I disagre with the machup because I feel the two games are slightly differnt in playstyle. EVE is a tactical "thinking-persons" game while STO is more your "MMO for the rest of us" type of game. Though it dosn't have the subscribers STO = A wanabie WoW in space with lots of instances while EVE = UO in space.
With that being said I'm subscribed to EVE and I also have a lifetime mebership to STO. I feel that both games are rather differnt in their appeal, however once Dust and EVE station interriors come out I think STO should start to worry. For now though both games play differntly.
I don't tknow the Star Trek game but I've played EVE for quite a while and it's not as great as the reviewer makes it. Skilling up takes years. Travelling takes hours. Finding a remotely balanced PvP fight takes hours. You don't have characters, just ships. Mining is the most boring thing I've ever done in a game. A lot of people who have more accounts because you can only train one at a time - with fixed skilling speed (it requires 28 years to train all the skills). Legal ways to buy each others characters and in-game money with RL money.
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.
Have to agree, although I was kind of expecting such from this site. They've always been heavily biased, when it comes to EVE.
A complete waste of the "reviews" times. We don't need to be informed EVE is better than STO in many ways. They also conveniently didn't cover the (space) combat, and that you aren't tied to just being a ship in STO. Those are amongst the few things STO does better, but they are key.
On a personal level I find EVE extremely dull, and even though I can appreciate it offers a lot more all round as a package, STO was actually a lot more fun (while it lasted).
In EVE I also found the community not to be that great (more elitist, if anything) and also due to being a ship felt next to zero ties to my character. The only "sorrow" I felt when being destroyed, was having re-purchase things. The character skill system also has zero immersion, as its simply time based. Hence one doesn't feel they are actually making the achievement for themselves. I also had a sence of it having the WoW syndrome, ie. a community playing it simply because they couldn't find anyting else.
Originally posted by grapevine On a personal level I find EVE extremely dull, and even though I can appreciate it offers a lot more all round as a package, STO was actually a lot more fun (while it lasted). In EVE I also found the community not to be that great (more elitist, if anything) and also due to being a ship felt next to zero ties to my character. The only "sorrow" I felt when being destroyed, was having re-purchase things. The character skill system also has zero immersion, as its simply time based. Hence one doesn't feel they are actually making the achievement for themselves. I also had a sence of it having the WoW syndrome, ie. a community playing it simply because they couldn't find anyting else.
This suffers exactly same fallacy as the article, just from opposite end of the view.
In order to evaluate a subject, you have to understand the prior objective. It is what the subject is supposed to achieve, the design, intentions and logic behind it.
Then, when you compare two subjects, you compare those objectives and how they are achieving it.
EVE Online was never supposed to be based on character progression nor really have any progression in that regard thus you are right it does not feel as an achievement. And that is right, because it was never meant to as STO was never meant to be huge open space living universe.
Both are not game failures, they are simply meant as that. Whether you personally like it or not is just a matter of your personal taste and that still does not make one better than another.
On a personal level I find EVE extremely dull, and even though I can appreciate it offers a lot more all round as a package, STO was actually a lot more fun (while it lasted).
In EVE I also found the community not to be that great (more elitist, if anything) and also due to being a ship felt next to zero ties to my character. The only "sorrow" I felt when being destroyed, was having re-purchase things. The character skill system also has zero immersion, as its simply time based. Hence one doesn't feel they are actually making the achievement for themselves. I also had a sence of it having the WoW syndrome, ie. a community playing it simply because they couldn't find anyting else.
This suffers exactly same fallacy as the article, just from opposite end of the view.
In order to evaluate a subject, you have to understand the prior objective. It is what the subject is supposed to achieve, the design, intentions and logic behind it.
Then, when you compare two subjects, you compare those objectives and how they are achieving it.
EVE Online was never supposed to be based on character progression nor really have any progression in that regard thus you are right it does not feel as an achievement. And that is right, because it was never meant to as STO was never meant to be huge open space living universe.
Both are not game failures, they are simply meant as that. Whether you personally like it or not is just a matter of your personal taste and that still does not make one better than another.
Well me finding EVE dull isn't a fallacy, and niether is how little immersed I felt. All MMORPG are about character progession, so I'm afraid I have to disagree with you 100% on that re. EVE. EVE has it, but its just done in a way that I personally felt it distanced me from my character. Likewise the community I came across (I played for three months) were either gankers or simply didn't talk much to anyone outside their corporation, which only added to the lack of immetion as places seemed dead.
In STO I had more fun leveling, and did actually feel more of a bond with my character. The community was more vocal, so I felt much more immersed into the game wide community. However at end game, it had nothing more to offer. Which for a MMORPG isn't exactly great.
EVE or STO being good, or bad, has nothing to do with what I said. I also never said either failed, or one was better, other than stating EVE offered a more rounded package. EVE has increased its subscriptions ten fold since launch, which is an achievement for the industry. STO, while niche, still has a decent level of players.
How about a fair article? Lets say EVE year one vs STO year one and then MAYBE it will be a little more accurate and worth the time I spent reading this one. In the past two years I played both games and yes, EVE out did STO in nearly every category. But there is a difference between the two. I'm STILL playing STO.
EVE got boring after awhile. Yes it has a good story but the game started turning into freaking homework. Had to do mining, had join a corp, had do some of the same missions over and over (honestly how many times do I have to warp to a nearby system to take out some rogue drones?). While the expansions sounded nice in theory, it was more like 5 minutes of excitement for a weeks worth of boredom. Plus the player involvement in EVE storyline was very shallow.
STO keeps getting better and better. Yes it still needs a lot of work but it is headed in the right direction. The Klingon faction is being filled out soon and they've started work on a third I believe. Not to mention that in STO you can be both a ship and a person (and its actually important that you do both).
Funny thing is with Dust514 and Incarna I would imagine that in a few years EVE will be the complete sci-fi mmo, ground combat and all. Within a few years you will not be able to log onto STO.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
How about a fair article? Lets say EVE year one vs STO year one and then MAYBE it will be a little more accurate and worth the time I spent reading this one. In the past two years I played both games and yes, EVE out did STO in nearly every category. But there is a difference between the two. I'm STILL playing STO.
EVE got boring after awhile. Yes it has a good story but the game started turning into freaking homework. Had to do mining, had join a corp, had do some of the same missions over and over (honestly how many times do I have to warp to a nearby system to take out some rogue drones?). While the expansions sounded nice in theory, it was more like 5 minutes of excitement for a weeks worth of boredom. Plus the player involvement in EVE storyline was very shallow.
STO keeps getting better and better. Yes it still needs a lot of work but it is headed in the right direction. The Klingon faction is being filled out soon and they've started work on a third I believe. Not to mention that in STO you can be both a ship and a person (and its actually important that you do both).
So inconclusion: the article=FAIL
Why should the article be about EVE year one?Is STO competing against EVE year one in the current marketplace or against EVE as it is today?Potential customers are gonna choose between the games as they stand right now so the article is completely justified in comparing both as they are today.
I agree that the article was something along the lines of pitting a toddler up against a rottweiler - it was just not going to end well for STO.
That said, there have been a few interesting match-ups mentioned that I'd like to see:
Darkfall vs. EVE would be a good one given the similar player-bases.
SW:TOR will be really interesting after it's been released.
...and for nostalgia's sake, pre-CU SWG vs. EVE. I love both games, but I'd personally have to give EVE the nod here, though it'd be close; pre-CU SWG just had too many awesome and unique mechanics and methods of gameplay.
-Wrayeth "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Comments
Jesus Chryst!!
I sorta like STO and i looove Eve! (Different flavors even if they both ''in space'')
But Comparing an Industry giant (like EVE) to something like STO is,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,
well lets just say it was a no brainer to guess that you would give eve the higher remarks.
PS Terminatus;
Yeah, miss E&B it was my first love:D (First MMO)
Wo wo wo. I got to the start of your article and had to stop reading to post this.
Star Trek Online is NOT Gene Roddenberry's creation and if Gene is returned to us one day he will be very unhappy with Cryptic forcing the "perfect circle" shape of Star Trek into their "square hole" of a game that is severely lacking.
"It's like a finger pointing away to the moon... Don't concentrate on the finger or you'll miss all the heavenly glory" (Bruce Lee)
(Insert your favourite mmo here): ......And behold, a pale horse.... And a million hellishly bad mmos followed with it.
Trek fandom is 99% crap (STO very much included!). I highly doubt anything good will come out of user-generated content for STO.
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
I honestly can't believe they allow tripe like this to be posted. The "article" as it were was SO one sided it was sickening. I'm surprised the author doesn't feel embarassed after posting it.
Sanguinous Rex
Aslan ch'Shran
www.paxgaming.com
This. The majority of problems with STO have to do with the fundamental design of the game. It is literally built on the Champions Online game engine, which is why it has the exact same heavy instancing, grossly oversized proportions, and lack of mission depth, among other issues. The Champions Online engine is simply not built for the kind of massive universe exploration that defines the Star Trek IP. What the game needs isn't more development time; it needs a significant overhaul of the game architecture.
EVE is garbage because of one fundamental and fatal flaw: the developers have sticky fingers and cheat. No amount of bling or features can compensate for players paying to play a rigged game for the amusement of the developers. It's no true sandbox when you can find yourself on the opposite team from the developers and their buddies and they set up or "rig" your side to take the fall for their jollies.
Endgame in EVE is a joke. Sorry but I don't call being a faceless cog in some alliance an endgame, when all they're really doing is doing the same thing street gangs do: an endless largeley pointless fight for turf.
Lack of mission depth? Have you ever played Eve lol
Sanguinous Rex
Aslan ch'Shran
www.paxgaming.com
I think this would have been a fair comparison if they matched up EvE at release with STO at release. Both equally horrendous. EvE is a niche champion, the uber nerds dream, but to a regular human being it is a boring waste of time where you don't even have to participate in 90% of the gameplay.
Please choose from here, this is what I want to see on the next Fighting Talk for a really fair fight:
God versus Richard Dawkins
Elephant versus Mouse
Human torch versus Frosty the Snowman
Starsky and Hutch versus Burke and Hare
EvE rullz!
I understand that this is the authors personal thoughts on the two games. I kinda agree but disagre at the same time. I agree that EVE is a better built game with tons more depth than STO, however I disagre with the machup because I feel the two games are slightly differnt in playstyle. EVE is a tactical "thinking-persons" game while STO is more your "MMO for the rest of us" type of game. Though it dosn't have the subscribers STO = A wanabie WoW in space with lots of instances while EVE = UO in space.
With that being said I'm subscribed to EVE and I also have a lifetime mebership to STO. I feel that both games are rather differnt in their appeal, however once Dust and EVE station interriors come out I think STO should start to worry. For now though both games play differntly.
so youre going to give up on writing flamebait articles that compares games? cause thats the best idea.
Games i'm playing right now...
"In short, I thought NGE was a very bad idea" - Raph Koster talking about NGE on his blog at raphkoster.com
I don't tknow the Star Trek game but I've played EVE for quite a while and it's not as great as the reviewer makes it. Skilling up takes years. Travelling takes hours. Finding a remotely balanced PvP fight takes hours. You don't have characters, just ships. Mining is the most boring thing I've ever done in a game. A lot of people who have more accounts because you can only train one at a time - with fixed skilling speed (it requires 28 years to train all the skills). Legal ways to buy each others characters and in-game money with RL money.
EVE really isn't that good.
Cast your vote: The importance of character customisation
Have to agree, although I was kind of expecting such from this site. They've always been heavily biased, when it comes to EVE.
A complete waste of the "reviews" times. We don't need to be informed EVE is better than STO in many ways. They also conveniently didn't cover the (space) combat, and that you aren't tied to just being a ship in STO. Those are amongst the few things STO does better, but they are key.
On a personal level I find EVE extremely dull, and even though I can appreciate it offers a lot more all round as a package, STO was actually a lot more fun (while it lasted).
In EVE I also found the community not to be that great (more elitist, if anything) and also due to being a ship felt next to zero ties to my character. The only "sorrow" I felt when being destroyed, was having re-purchase things. The character skill system also has zero immersion, as its simply time based. Hence one doesn't feel they are actually making the achievement for themselves. I also had a sence of it having the WoW syndrome, ie. a community playing it simply because they couldn't find anyting else.
Why would these two games be compared? They're nothing alike.
This suffers exactly same fallacy as the article, just from opposite end of the view.
In order to evaluate a subject, you have to understand the prior objective. It is what the subject is supposed to achieve, the design, intentions and logic behind it.
Then, when you compare two subjects, you compare those objectives and how they are achieving it.
EVE Online was never supposed to be based on character progression nor really have any progression in that regard thus you are right it does not feel as an achievement. And that is right, because it was never meant to as STO was never meant to be huge open space living universe.
Both are not game failures, they are simply meant as that. Whether you personally like it or not is just a matter of your personal taste and that still does not make one better than another.
20 years? more like 2 months lol
Well me finding EVE dull isn't a fallacy, and niether is how little immersed I felt. All MMORPG are about character progession, so I'm afraid I have to disagree with you 100% on that re. EVE. EVE has it, but its just done in a way that I personally felt it distanced me from my character. Likewise the community I came across (I played for three months) were either gankers or simply didn't talk much to anyone outside their corporation, which only added to the lack of immetion as places seemed dead.
In STO I had more fun leveling, and did actually feel more of a bond with my character. The community was more vocal, so I felt much more immersed into the game wide community. However at end game, it had nothing more to offer. Which for a MMORPG isn't exactly great.
EVE or STO being good, or bad, has nothing to do with what I said. I also never said either failed, or one was better, other than stating EVE offered a more rounded package. EVE has increased its subscriptions ten fold since launch, which is an achievement for the industry. STO, while niche, still has a decent level of players.
Lets face it STO was extremely disappointing, however EVE is also not for everyone. If you don't like watching paint dry then steer well clear!
How about a fair article? Lets say EVE year one vs STO year one and then MAYBE it will be a little more accurate and worth the time I spent reading this one. In the past two years I played both games and yes, EVE out did STO in nearly every category. But there is a difference between the two. I'm STILL playing STO.
EVE got boring after awhile. Yes it has a good story but the game started turning into freaking homework. Had to do mining, had join a corp, had do some of the same missions over and over (honestly how many times do I have to warp to a nearby system to take out some rogue drones?). While the expansions sounded nice in theory, it was more like 5 minutes of excitement for a weeks worth of boredom. Plus the player involvement in EVE storyline was very shallow.
STO keeps getting better and better. Yes it still needs a lot of work but it is headed in the right direction. The Klingon faction is being filled out soon and they've started work on a third I believe. Not to mention that in STO you can be both a ship and a person (and its actually important that you do both).
So inconclusion: the article=FAIL
Ground Combat:
EVE=0
STO=3
Doing one great vs doing both half a$$ed
EVE +10
STO -10
Funny thing is with Dust514 and Incarna I would imagine that in a few years EVE will be the complete sci-fi mmo, ground combat and all. Within a few years you will not be able to log onto STO.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Why should the article be about EVE year one?Is STO competing against EVE year one in the current marketplace or against EVE as it is today?Potential customers are gonna choose between the games as they stand right now so the article is completely justified in comparing both as they are today.
I agree that the article was something along the lines of pitting a toddler up against a rottweiler - it was just not going to end well for STO.
That said, there have been a few interesting match-ups mentioned that I'd like to see:
Darkfall vs. EVE would be a good one given the similar player-bases.
SW:TOR will be really interesting after it's been released.
...and for nostalgia's sake, pre-CU SWG vs. EVE. I love both games, but I'd personally have to give EVE the nod here, though it'd be close; pre-CU SWG just had too many awesome and unique mechanics and methods of gameplay.
-Wrayeth
"Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"