Best way I can describe it is this ... People go to a Star Trek convention to see Star Trek stuff, not watch an MMA fight. Sure, it's probably easier to set up an MMA fight (pull two guys from a gym and give them gloves) and put a Star Trek banner over the building. But what are people going to do when they get inside? Leave.
Great Analogy! I was thinking something similar.
I just don't think Cryptic was a good choice to develop this game. They have their own little style of MMO that they know how to make and they aren't willing to think much beyond that.
I figure that when Cryptic got the rights to this game from Perpetual there was a meeting in the board room which went something like this:
*It is a dark and stormy night. Lightning flashes as the camera zooms in on an evil looking office building...*
Ordinary Executive: "Gentlemen! We have acquired the rights to develop a Star Trek MMO! Before us another developer named Perpetual had the rights to make this game and they already have a pretty detailed outline for the design of the game. We can make the game they were working on but it will take many years, a huge budget and we will need to create an engine for the game to use..."
Sinister Executive: " OR!... huh, huh, huh... get this: We DON'T do any of that stuff. Instead we just take the same cartoony game engine we used to make Champions Online, slap an outer space skin on it and call it a Star Trek game! We can probably get it done in just a few years and we only need to hire a handfull of guys to alter the graphics a bit and make up some quests for the players to kill Andorian Boars and return 10 snouts to some random NPC or whatever. By the time the players figure out we just developed another WoW clone we will have already taken their money and run away over the nearest hill with it! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Cryptic CEO: "Yeah, lets go with that second thing you guys said. The one where we don't do a lot of work or spend much money. That sounds good."
Sinister Executive: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Cryptic CEO: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Ordinary Executive: "Why are you guys laughing in a evil tone like that?"
Atari Executive: "And we will put SecuROM in the game too! HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Ordinary Executive: "Where did this Atari guy come from? Why is HE laguhing like that now too?"
Sinister Executive: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Cryptic CEO: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Ordinary Executive: "Alright, thats enough of this, I'm outta here. Enjoy laughing about some crappy MMO you are going to make."
Microsoft Executive: *Runs into room out of breath* "Sorry I'm late guys! Okay, so we are porting this thing to Xbox too, right?"
Sorry mate, but I am going to call you on this one, it is very wrong to think that Perpetual had a better game in mind, I do not know if you followed them, but I did, Perpetual had in mind a Star Trek game with only the federation, and pretty much only PVE, at least Cryptic has made two sides (and who knows more to come in the future) and with PvP as well.
It seems Perpetual just could not create something out of the potential, and they admitted it in the end as well.
Here is a link with their closing statement, and I actually posted an upset reply in there too (#22).
So please get your facts before inventing hypothetical and erroneous stories, Cryptic did something that Perpetual could not, they pulled it off. And I am looking forward to it.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Cryptic did something that Perpetual could not, they pulled it off. And I am looking forward to it.
Perhaps you are the one who needs to check his facts. As of yet, Cryptic has not pulled anything off as this game is still ATLEAST a year away from release if not more.
If you have read this forum as much as I have you would know that Perpetual's game design has been disected many times in the past and people have admitted there were flaws in their plan. I'm not going to deny that. And if you check my post history you will see that I have never directly said I wanted player crews or any other extreme features. My point that I made with my previous posts and all other posts on this forum is simply this: I'm dissapointed in Cryptic because they had a chance to do something new and innovative but instead choose to make Champions Online in space. Thats all I'm trying to say.
As for PvP, you really made me laugh with that one. Check out the "PvP" in Cryptics last two games and then try to tell me you think STO will have good PvP. Seriously, you really do need to check your facts on this one because Cryptic's track record when it comes to PvP is really quite poor.
P.S. That article you linked to pretty much says its impossible to make a good Star Trek MMO. If thats true, Cryptic has already failed. Not saying I agree with the article, just saying you might not want to link to things which defeat your own arguement.
Cryptic did something that Perpetual could not, they pulled it off. And I am looking forward to it.
P.S. That article you linked to pretty much says its impossible to make a good Star Trek MMO. If thats true, Cryptic has already failed. Not saying I agree with the article, just saying you might not want to link to things which defeat your own arguement.
I link to things of truth. It is not about me wining an argument as it is all of us geting a better understanding of the challenges involved in making an MMOG out of this IP.
Cryptic is about to launch Closed beta, and while it is true that the game has not launched yet at this stage, there is very little indication that it will be canceled like previous attempts.
Is there disapointment? Yes there is nothing can ever be perfect.
But to activelly try to mock the effort because one is disappointed shows ill intentioned motives, specially since it has not been launched yet, you are passing judgment on it without even giving it a fair try...how does that give weight to your arguments?
Same goes for the PvP aspect, and while Cryptic may not have a good record about it that doe snot mean that they can't improve it.
As for that Article, it said how difficult of a challenge it is to make an MMO out of the ST IP, it said it was impossible to expect Perpetual to make 2 games in one (Land and Space) when there is records such as SWG that have done it before them and when Cryptic did it, we saw it live in the various presentations, both Land and Space.
So technically, Cryptic pulled it off, where Perpetual thought it impossible, the Article has value because it clearly expresses Perpetual's point of view in handling the IP and the challenges it had, from its own perspective, to surmount. yet where Perpetual failed to find solutions, Cryptic seems to have found them.
Maybe the fact that Cryptic used an existing 8 year old Engine to make STO constitutes one of these solutions, where perpetual was maybe looking at it and trying to invest effort and time in making a completelly new engine from scratch.
So, the article has its value, and Cryptic may not have made everyone's Dream STO game, but they have made nevertheless a nice STO game that many people will enjoy and are looking forward to playing.
All I am saying is give the game the benefit of the doubt till you can play it and evaluate it for what it is not for what you think it is at this time, based on conjecture and assumptions.
You argue how, the industry is not taking the risk of doing something new and different but have you asked yourself that maybe us the players with attitudes such as these in this thread maybe contributing to the non risk taking because we are willing to destroy games before these have even had a chance to release based on our dislike of such or such feature?
Of course they are going to follow a formula that insure some subscriptions under these circumstances, they would be shooting themselves on the foot otherwise.
Possible?
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
The problem with STO....in my opinion stems from the design team sitting down at the outset and rather then saying... "How do we figure out how to make a game that fits the Star Trek IP." They said.... "How do we figure out how to make the Star Trek IP fit the type of game we're familiar with making."
A: Cryptic is about to launch Closed beta, and while it is true that the game has not launched yet at this stage, there is very little indication that it will be canceled like previous attempts. B: But to activelly try to mock the effort because one is disappointed shows ill intentioned motives, specially since it has not been launched yet, you are passing judgment on it without even giving it a fair try...how does that give weight to your arguments? C: Same goes for the PvP aspect, and while Cryptic may not have a good record about it that doe snot mean that they can't improve it. As for that Article, it said how difficult of a challenge it is to make an MMO out of the ST IP, it said it was impossible to expect Perpetual to make 2 games in one ... So technically, Cryptic pulled it off, where Perpetual thought it impossible.
A: Launch does not equal success. I can name quite a few games which launched but were far from a success... or even far from being FUN for that matter. If Cryptic makes a mediocre MMO, that will only put them one tiny notch above someone who didn't make make an MMO at all.
B: The ever presistent fanboy arguement: "If you haven't tried it you can't say anything bad about it!" or its lesser malformed clone "If you didn't like it then you obviously didn't give it a fair chance!" I don't really like being kicked in the balls either, but perhaps I haven't given that a fair chance either?
No, the game isn't out yet (though you often talk like it is) so I haven't played it. But to say that I have to play it to know if I will like it or not is absurd. The developers have already told us their plans for the game and it isn't the game itself I dislike, its the plan. If you examine all my complaints closely you will see they are all things about the game which the developers have told us they plan to do. Micro-Transactions, instances, console ports, ect. If you tell me that you are planning to cook a pizza out of dung beatles and sewer rats do I have to try that too before I can say I won't like it? Or will you allow me to simply use common sense to deduct that things I don't like when combined into one object will still be unplesant for me?
C: It doesn't mean they will either. Once again you assume that Cryptic has had success at something they are historically bad at when there is not yet any evidence to support that opinion.
Once again, you claim that Cryptic has "pulled it off" when you yourself claim we can't judge the game because it isn't out yet. Why is it NOT okay for me to judge the game when it isn't out yet but its completely okay for you to declare that it has been "pulled off" when it isn't out yet? This is complete hypocrisy!
As for the article, it really proves very little other than that Cryptic has an uphill battle ahead of them which they have yet to win. The article says very little about things like player crews, instances or other issues which Cryptic has already decided on. Instead it talks about issues like the difficulty of making space, a naturally empty and boring place, fun to explore and the difficulty of creating content which can be played by ships of many different sizes. These are issues which Cryptic has yet to even attempt to address and the possibility that they could fail to address them properly is still very much on the table.
The same problem persists with all of your arguements: You speak as if the game is already here and already a success, in essence rendering judgement without having seen the product for yourself... and yet you try demonize me for simply having the opposite opinion based on the same evidence. Complete hypocrisy.
Saying that "no one wants to play a crew member" is as moronic as saying "no one wanted to be a dancer" (or shopkeeper, miner, explorer, ranger, musician, etc) in SWG...there were LOTS of players who wanted to do those things, just like there are lots of people who would want to be "science officers".
If Cyptic were serious about doing the ST world properly, they could have designed a game where you *could* just be a captain and solo - hiring NPCs or being assigned them for the alternate positions...possibly even having to run from console to console on the ship in combat if they wanted to micro manage things...but that also let 2,3,4 etc people fly a ship together. They didn't want to, because that is not what this is about.
Cryptic is out to make a cheapass game quick both for profit and to prove they can with their 2year MMO design package...quick and dirty is the name of the game here, nothing more. Don't be surprised when they dump it off to some operating/sub company later either.
Good point Eric ... there are a lot of people that put combat way down on the list of things to do in an MMO.
And there were a lot of things going on when SWG started to tank, but I'm still a firm believer that by removing the purpose of the most conversational players (entertainers), they tipped a precipice that was unrecoverable. Even with all the crazy changes, had they left a purpose for the people that just wanted to be "in" star wars, I personally think that game would've leveled off in player lose a long time ago. But once people left, found different places with the same friends, SOE couldn't answer the question 'Why should I come back?'
I remember cryptic said "We can't change the colors of your powers" for CoH and NcSoft just released Issue 16 which enable players to change the colors of their powers. fact is it can be done Cryptic is just saying "No we don't want to do it" in other words they are being lazy.
A: Cryptic is about to launch Closed beta, and while it is true that the game has not launched yet at this stage, there is very little indication that it will be canceled like previous attempts. B: But to activelly try to mock the effort because one is disappointed shows ill intentioned motives, specially since it has not been launched yet, you are passing judgment on it without even giving it a fair try...how does that give weight to your arguments? C: Same goes for the PvP aspect, and while Cryptic may not have a good record about it that doe snot mean that they can't improve it. As for that Article, it said how difficult of a challenge it is to make an MMO out of the ST IP, it said it was impossible to expect Perpetual to make 2 games in one ... So technically, Cryptic pulled it off, where Perpetual thought it impossible.
A: Launch does not equal success. I can name quite a few games which launched but were far from a success... or even far from being FUN for that matter. If Cryptic makes a mediocre MMO, that will only put them one tiny notch above someone who didn't make make an MMO at all.
B: The ever presistent fanboy arguement: "If you haven't tried it you can't say anything bad about it!" or its lesser malformed clone "If you didn't like it then you obviously didn't give it a fair chance!" I don't really like being kicked in the balls either, but perhaps I haven't given that a fair chance either?
No, the game isn't out yet (though you often talk like it is) so I haven't played it. But to say that I have to play it to know if I will like it or not is absurd. The developers have already told us their plans for the game and it isn't the game itself I dislike, its the plan. If you examine all my complaints closely you will see they are all things about the game which the developers have told us they plan to do. Micro-Transactions, instances, console ports, ect. If you tell me that you are planning to cook a pizza out of dung beatles and sewer rats do I have to try that too before I can say I won't like it? Or will you allow me to simply use common sense to deduct that things I don't like when combined into one object will still be unplesant for me?
C: It doesn't mean they will either. Once again you assume that Cryptic has had success at something they are historically bad at when there is not yet any evidence to support that opinion.
Once again, you claim that Cryptic has "pulled it off" when you yourself claim we can't judge the game because it isn't out yet. Why is it NOT okay for me to judge the game when it isn't out yet but its completely okay for you to declare that it has been "pulled off" when it isn't out yet? This is complete hypocrisy!
As for the article, it really proves very little other than that Cryptic has an uphill battle ahead of them which they have yet to win. The article says very little about things like player crews, instances or other issues which Cryptic has already decided on. Instead it talks about issues like the difficulty of making space, a naturally empty and boring place, fun to explore and the difficulty of creating content which can be played by ships of many different sizes. These are issues which Cryptic has yet to even attempt to address and the possibility that they could fail to address them properly is still very much on the table.
The same problem persists with all of your arguements: You speak as if the game is already here and already a success, in essence rendering judgement without having seen the product for yourself... and yet you try demonize me for simply having the opposite opinion based on the same evidence. Complete hypocrisy.
I am not the one making a Mockery of Cryptic, you are.
And there is nothing Hypocritical about my arguments, nice attempt to calling hypocrisy.
Simply put, I like the Plan they have for the game, just the same as you do not like it. We will simply have to agree to disagree, and you going on your merry way and my going to play STO when it launches.
Until it launches none of us knows if it will succeed or not whether we like its plan or not. None of us can be right until we can play it. And until we do, all we can say is opinions and make conjecture and assumptions.
You may not like how Fried Fish looks in a plate but your opinion will not be taken seriously until you actually try it, its like that, unless you can tell me you have a crystal ball that can predict the future (or in this case the past, looking in to see how the meeting with Cryptic went)...
Good luck to you!
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
So technically, Cryptic pulled it off, where Perpetual thought it impossible.
Once again, you claim that Cryptic has "pulled it off" when you yourself claim we can't judge the game because it isn't out yet. Why is it NOT okay for me to judge the game when it isn't out yet but its completely okay for you to declare that it has been "pulled off" when it isn't out yet? This is complete hypocrisy!
The same problem persists with all of your arguements: You speak as if the game is already here and already a success, in essence rendering judgement without having seen the product for yourself... and yet you try demonize me for simply having the opposite opinion based on the same evidence. Complete hypocrisy.
I am not the one making a Mockery of Cryptic, you are.
Until it launches none of us knows if it will succeed or not whether we like its plan or not. None of us can be right until we can play it. And until we do, all we can say is opinions and make conjecture and assumptions.
You seem to be very good at contradicting yourself and changing your opinions to suit the suituation you find yourself in. Have you ever considered running for President of the United States? You would do atleast as well as John Kerry did. You and he have a lot in common.
Meanwhile I stand by my opinion, despite your refusal to actually debate me: STO is going in a direction which meets Cryptic's (very low) standards but not the standards of the fans who will play this game. Or the fans who will NOT play it.
P.S. You might want to set Wikipedia and Youtube aside for a moment to dust off your old dictionary. Look up the defnintion of "Mockery" because you aren't using it correctly.
woah,,that was soe, and we all know they could screw up anything good
SOE has enough stuff that you can blame them for without making stuff up. Nice try though.
As for the Star Trek thing, I bring up the argument that hasn't been refuted by the multi-player crew group. How do you make each thing fun to play.
yup, getting back to star trek, man i have no idea how they can be made and still be fun, but hey i will wait and try it before i start saying "its gonna fail" so my whole point is i really think if done right you may not even notice the missing elements...if you are having "fun" in a game its really easy to miss or overlook the "wadda been nice" features of a game. so i say, i will wait till i can play it and check how it scores on my "fun" meter
LOl . way to evade teh question. The answer is YOU CANNOT. I can't think a way and I don't think the developer did. Thus, it is out because it is no fun.
Plus, how many people would like to be the comm officer whose game play element consists of saying "hailing freq open" and nothing else? I would much rather be the captain.
Originally posted by Raltar Meanwhile I stand by my opinion, despite your refusal to actually debate me: STO is going in a direction which meets Cryptic's (very low) standards but not the standards of the fans who will play this game. Or the fans who will NOT play it.
Maybe you missed the avatar, but I'm a fan and I like the direction this game is going in. Once again you fall into the same naysayer trap of thinking you speak for everyone or a specific group when in fact you are just one person with an opinion.
Originally posted by Raltar Meanwhile I stand by my opinion, despite your refusal to actually debate me: STO is going in a direction which meets Cryptic's (very low) standards but not the standards of the fans who will play this game. Or the fans who will NOT play it.
Maybe you missed the avatar, but I'm a fan and I like the direction this game is going in. Once again you fall into the same naysayer trap of thinking you speak for everyone or a specific group when in fact you are just one person with an opinion.
And the pot calls the kettle black again...
If you read my post carefully you will see I never claimed to speak for ALL fans. Only the fans who have expressed their concerns on this forum (which I'm sure you have noticed are many) and in perticular the ones like myself who have said we will not play this game if development continues in the direction it has been going so far. I think I echoed their concerns pretty well since we see that time and time again people are posting replies to these threads with comments like "Cryptic is just making the type of game they know how to make" or "they won't include all those features because they want to get the game out sooner."
Originally posted by Raltar Meanwhile I stand by my opinion, despite your refusal to actually debate me: STO is going in a direction which meets Cryptic's (very low) standards but not the standards of the fans who will play this game. Or the fans who will NOT play it.
Maybe you missed the avatar, but I'm a fan and I like the direction this game is going in. Once again you fall into the same naysayer trap of thinking you speak for everyone or a specific group when in fact you are just one person with an opinion.
And the pot calls the kettle black again...
If you read my post carefully you will see I never claimed to speak for ALL fans. Only the fans who have expressed their concerns on this forum (which I'm sure you have noticed are many) and in perticular the ones like myself who have said we will not play this game if development continues in the direction it has been going so far. I think I echoed their concerns pretty well since we see that time and time again people are posting replies to these threads with comments like "Cryptic is just making the type of game they know how to make" or "they won't include all those features because they want to get the game out sooner."
Well the game is set in it's path at this point so all of this complaining is going to get you absolutely nothing for your trouble. At this point all I can say is if you don't like it just don't play, it really is that simple. I on the other hand will reserve my final judgment until I can actually play the game as I think pre-judging a game or judging it on other factors that have no direct connection to the game is rather ignorant. All I can say at this point is if it's fun I'll play it and if it isn't I won't but what features are in or out of the game are irrelevant to me as this says nothing about the fun factor of a game I haven't even played yet. Will Cryptic deliver a fun filled Star Trek experience with STO? The answer to that is I don't know and neither do you as neither of us have actually played it yet to make that judgment.
A: I think pre-judging a game or judging it on other factors that have no direct connection to the game is rather ignorant. B: what features are in or out of the game are irrelevant to me as this says nothing about the fun factor of a game I haven't even played yet. C: Will Cryptic deliver a fun filled Star Trek experience with STO? The answer to that is I don't know and neither do you as neither of us have actually played it yet to make that judgment.
A: No... direct connection to the game? Features don't have anything to do with games now? Well [censored] all this MMO stuff then! I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
Seriously though, the type of fuel you put in your car may not seem to matter much to your driving exprience... but it will start to matter a whole lot when you forget to put the fuel in there! Or use the wrong type. If the features in this game don't appeal to me at all, and in fact seem to hurt the game in my opinion, aren't I justfied in assuming I won't enjoy the game? That seems to just be common sense.
B: As I said above, I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
C: Oh and here we are again, the classic fanboy defense: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
I'll cut straight to the chase here: You have completely missed the point. I do not want a "fun filled Star Trek experience" from STO. I want a stable, reliable, unique, innovative and long term MMO from STO. Its an MMO FIRST and a Star Trek game SECOND. If they can't make a fun MMO, then they can't make a fun Star Trek MMO either. Which is why I believe that their decisions reguarding instances, cash shops and console development will hurt this game badly.
A: I think pre-judging a game or judging it on other factors that have no direct connection to the game is rather ignorant. B: what features are in or out of the game are irrelevant to me as this says nothing about the fun factor of a game I haven't even played yet. C: Will Cryptic deliver a fun filled Star Trek experience with STO? The answer to that is I don't know and neither do you as neither of us have actually played it yet to make that judgment.
A: No... direct connection to the game? Features don't have anything to do with games now? Well [censored] all this MMO stuff then! I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
Seriously though, the type of fuel you put in your car may not seem to matter much to your driving exprience... but it will start to matter a whole lot when you forget to put the fuel in there! Or use the wrong type. If the features in this game don't appeal to me at all, and in fact seem to hurt the game in my opinion, aren't I justfied in assuming I won't enjoy the game? That seems to just be common sense.
B: As I said above, I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
C: Oh and here we are again, the classic fanboy defense: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
I'll cut straight to the chase here: You have completely missed the point. I do not want a "fun filled Star Trek experience" from STO. I want a stable, reliable, unique, innovative and long term MMO from STO. Its an MMO FIRST and a Star Trek game SECOND. If they can't make a fun MMO, then they can't make a fun Star Trek MMO either. Which is why I believe that their decisions reguarding instances, cash shops and console development will hurt this game badly.
LOL... Well...
A. I was referring to pre-judging STO based on CO, CoH or any other game that you feel "may" be like STO... Until you play it you just don't know, period.
B. I've seen many games that seemed to have sucktastic feature sets that actually turned out to be pretty fun games. On the other hand I've also seen plenty of games that seemed to have a feature list straight out of a dream that turned out to suck balls. A pre-release feature list tells you zero, zip, nada about whether or not a game will be fun. Only playing it will tell you that.
C. Whatever dude... if someone doesn't share your opinion it's really easy to label them a 'fanboy' and dismiss them isn't it... This is also known as the classic troll reply by the way. See? It works both ways.
You've completely missed the point here. This is a GAME. A GAME is supposed to be FUN... PERIOD. It's a GAME first and everything else is second. If it is fun people will stick around for the long haul regardless of what features are in or not in the game. Your proposed Star Trek life simulator seems more like a second job to me. No thank you, I play games to have funand forget about work for a little while.
A: I think pre-judging a game or judging it on other factors that have no direct connection to the game is rather ignorant. B: what features are in or out of the game are irrelevant to me as this says nothing about the fun factor of a game I haven't even played yet. C: Will Cryptic deliver a fun filled Star Trek experience with STO? The answer to that is I don't know and neither do you as neither of us have actually played it yet to make that judgment.
A: No... direct connection to the game? Features don't have anything to do with games now? Well [censored] all this MMO stuff then! I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
Seriously though, the type of fuel you put in your car may not seem to matter much to your driving exprience... but it will start to matter a whole lot when you forget to put the fuel in there! Or use the wrong type. If the features in this game don't appeal to me at all, and in fact seem to hurt the game in my opinion, aren't I justfied in assuming I won't enjoy the game? That seems to just be common sense.
B: As I said above, I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
C: Oh and here we are again, the classic fanboy defense: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
I'll cut straight to the chase here: You have completely missed the point. I do not want a "fun filled Star Trek experience" from STO. I want a stable, reliable, unique, innovative and long term MMO from STO. Its an MMO FIRST and a Star Trek game SECOND. If they can't make a fun MMO, then they can't make a fun Star Trek MMO either. Which is why I believe that their decisions reguarding instances, cash shops and console development will hurt this game badly.
LOL... Well...
A. I was referring to pre-judging STO based on CO, CoH or any other game that you feel "may" be like STO... Until you play it you just don't know, period.
B. I've seen many games that seemed to have sucktastic feature sets that actually turned out to be pretty fun games. On the other hand I've also seen plenty of games that seemed to have a feature list straight out of a dream that turned out to suck balls. A pre-release feature list tells you zero, zip, nada about whether or not a game will be fun. Only playing it will tell you that.
C. Whatever dude... if someone doesn't share your opinion it's really easy to label them a 'fanboy' and dismiss them isn't it... This is also known as the classic troll reply by the way. See? It works both ways.
You've completely missed the point here. This is a GAME. A GAME is supposed to be FUN... PERIOD. It's a GAME first and everything else is second. If it is fun people will stick around for the long haul regardless of what features are in or not in the game. Your proposed Star Trek life simulator seems more like a second job to me. No thank you, I play games to have FUN and forget about work for a little while.
Bren
He still can't answer as to how he can predict that the game won't be stable,reliable,innovative,unique and long term when it hasn't even come out yet. If asking that question makes one a fanboy then I'll gladly wear the cape. This is a classic case of "The Devs aren't making the game like X therfore I hate it." That pretty much sums it up for most drama queens and is the reason for my sig...
Here is the bottom line: For all your ranting and raving your only defense is the same tired fanboy arguement over and over: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
To which I reply: I don't need to eat a pie full of diseased cockroaches to know that it isn't safe.
Instances = Bad
Cash Shops = Bad
Console development = Bad
Thus...
STO = BAD
End of story.
I'm off to play Fallen Earth, a real Sandbox game where you can actually play the way you want. Smell you fanboys later.
(P.S. If you guys think I'm one of the people asking for player crews then you haven't read any of my posts.)
TL;DR guys. Here is the bottom line: For all your ranting and raving your only defense is the same tired fanboy arguement over and over: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!" To which I reply: I don't need to eat a pie full of diseased cockroaches to know that it isn't safe. Instances = Bad Cash Shops = Bad Console development = Bad Thus... STO = BAD End of story. I'm off to play Fallen Earth, a real Sandbox game where you can actually play the way you want. Smell you fanboys later.
(P.S. If you guys think I'm one of the people asking for player crews then you haven't read any of my posts.)
Doesn't look like you're having much fun yet...
"In summary, this game seems like it has potental and I really hope it turns out to be worth the effort in the long run. But right now it just isn't a lot of fun. Honestly I think there is a reason the developers aren't offering a free trial right now and I regret putting money down on this game so soon. I would advise anyone else looking at this game to wait atleast a couple of weeks for things to simmer down a bit. When the players begin to spread out away from the starter towns, the developers work out a few more bugs and we get more information about what this game looks like at the higher levels, it could be worth the prucahse."(this was his review on the Fallen Earth Forums)
TL;DR guys. Here is the bottom line: For all your ranting and raving your only defense is the same tired fanboy arguement over and over: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!" To which I reply: I don't need to eat a pie full of diseased cockroaches to know that it isn't safe. - Classic Strawman Argument. Coming up with a totally asinine comparison is really lame, sorry dude Instances = Bad - your opinion Cash Shops = Bad - your opinion Console development = Bad - your opinion Thus... STO = BAD - Sorry but you base this on nothing at all but speculation, contrived information and of course your opinion. End of story. I'm off to play Fallen Earth, a real Sandbox game where you can actually play the way you want. Smell you fanboys later. - Ending your argument with an insult? Tsk, Tsk.
(P.S. If you guys think I'm one of the people asking for player crews then you haven't read any of my posts.) - My comment had nothing to do with player crews.
If you want to slam the door on STO with no real information to base your decision on more power to you. Have fun playing Fallen Earth it actually looks like it may be a great game. See you around.
That pretty much sums it up for most drama queens and is the reason for my sig...
It's the reason for my sig as well. It's a while loop for beating a dead horse that has no exit condition(meaning it's an endless loop). That pretty much sums up most of them as well.
man, it's "star trek" build it, and they will come.....
I'm betting that's just what the makers of Matrix Online said.
And Dungeons & Dragons Online.
Both of which were, I might add, perfectly 'fun,' yet floundered anyway. I don't think the inducement of endorphin rushes are the end-all, be-all of game design.
Favorites: EQ, EVE | Playing: None. Mostly VR and strategy | Anticipating: CU, Pantheon
Comments
Hahaha, cool post, OP. Alas so true.
A Star Trek game which is only WASD pew pew is really so poor.
Omg this post is theh win ..i cant stop laughing lol...but the most funny thing is...some people will still play this game even if it sucks..
Great Analogy! I was thinking something similar.
I just don't think Cryptic was a good choice to develop this game. They have their own little style of MMO that they know how to make and they aren't willing to think much beyond that.
I figure that when Cryptic got the rights to this game from Perpetual there was a meeting in the board room which went something like this:
*It is a dark and stormy night. Lightning flashes as the camera zooms in on an evil looking office building...*
Ordinary Executive: "Gentlemen! We have acquired the rights to develop a Star Trek MMO! Before us another developer named Perpetual had the rights to make this game and they already have a pretty detailed outline for the design of the game. We can make the game they were working on but it will take many years, a huge budget and we will need to create an engine for the game to use..."
Sinister Executive: " OR!... huh, huh, huh... get this: We DON'T do any of that stuff. Instead we just take the same cartoony game engine we used to make Champions Online, slap an outer space skin on it and call it a Star Trek game! We can probably get it done in just a few years and we only need to hire a handfull of guys to alter the graphics a bit and make up some quests for the players to kill Andorian Boars and return 10 snouts to some random NPC or whatever. By the time the players figure out we just developed another WoW clone we will have already taken their money and run away over the nearest hill with it! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Cryptic CEO: "Yeah, lets go with that second thing you guys said. The one where we don't do a lot of work or spend much money. That sounds good."
Sinister Executive: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Cryptic CEO: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Ordinary Executive: "Why are you guys laughing in a evil tone like that?"
Atari Executive: "And we will put SecuROM in the game too! HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Ordinary Executive: "Where did this Atari guy come from? Why is HE laguhing like that now too?"
Sinister Executive: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Cryptic CEO: "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!"
Ordinary Executive: "Alright, thats enough of this, I'm outta here. Enjoy laughing about some crappy MMO you are going to make."
Microsoft Executive: *Runs into room out of breath* "Sorry I'm late guys! Okay, so we are porting this thing to Xbox too, right?"
Sorry mate, but I am going to call you on this one, it is very wrong to think that Perpetual had a better game in mind, I do not know if you followed them, but I did, Perpetual had in mind a Star Trek game with only the federation, and pretty much only PVE, at least Cryptic has made two sides (and who knows more to come in the future) and with PvP as well.
It seems Perpetual just could not create something out of the potential, and they admitted it in the end as well.
Here is a link with their closing statement, and I actually posted an upset reply in there too (#22).
http://www.eldergame.com/2007/12/star-trek-the-hardest-mmo-ip-ever/
So please get your facts before inventing hypothetical and erroneous stories, Cryptic did something that Perpetual could not, they pulled it off. And I am looking forward to it.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Perhaps you are the one who needs to check his facts. As of yet, Cryptic has not pulled anything off as this game is still ATLEAST a year away from release if not more.
If you have read this forum as much as I have you would know that Perpetual's game design has been disected many times in the past and people have admitted there were flaws in their plan. I'm not going to deny that. And if you check my post history you will see that I have never directly said I wanted player crews or any other extreme features. My point that I made with my previous posts and all other posts on this forum is simply this: I'm dissapointed in Cryptic because they had a chance to do something new and innovative but instead choose to make Champions Online in space. Thats all I'm trying to say.
As for PvP, you really made me laugh with that one. Check out the "PvP" in Cryptics last two games and then try to tell me you think STO will have good PvP. Seriously, you really do need to check your facts on this one because Cryptic's track record when it comes to PvP is really quite poor.
P.S. That article you linked to pretty much says its impossible to make a good Star Trek MMO. If thats true, Cryptic has already failed. Not saying I agree with the article, just saying you might not want to link to things which defeat your own arguement.
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
P.S. That article you linked to pretty much says its impossible to make a good Star Trek MMO. If thats true, Cryptic has already failed. Not saying I agree with the article, just saying you might not want to link to things which defeat your own arguement.
I link to things of truth. It is not about me wining an argument as it is all of us geting a better understanding of the challenges involved in making an MMOG out of this IP.
Cryptic is about to launch Closed beta, and while it is true that the game has not launched yet at this stage, there is very little indication that it will be canceled like previous attempts.
Is there disapointment? Yes there is nothing can ever be perfect.
But to activelly try to mock the effort because one is disappointed shows ill intentioned motives, specially since it has not been launched yet, you are passing judgment on it without even giving it a fair try...how does that give weight to your arguments?
Same goes for the PvP aspect, and while Cryptic may not have a good record about it that doe snot mean that they can't improve it.
As for that Article, it said how difficult of a challenge it is to make an MMO out of the ST IP, it said it was impossible to expect Perpetual to make 2 games in one (Land and Space) when there is records such as SWG that have done it before them and when Cryptic did it, we saw it live in the various presentations, both Land and Space.
So technically, Cryptic pulled it off, where Perpetual thought it impossible, the Article has value because it clearly expresses Perpetual's point of view in handling the IP and the challenges it had, from its own perspective, to surmount. yet where Perpetual failed to find solutions, Cryptic seems to have found them.
Maybe the fact that Cryptic used an existing 8 year old Engine to make STO constitutes one of these solutions, where perpetual was maybe looking at it and trying to invest effort and time in making a completelly new engine from scratch.
So, the article has its value, and Cryptic may not have made everyone's Dream STO game, but they have made nevertheless a nice STO game that many people will enjoy and are looking forward to playing.
All I am saying is give the game the benefit of the doubt till you can play it and evaluate it for what it is not for what you think it is at this time, based on conjecture and assumptions.
You argue how, the industry is not taking the risk of doing something new and different but have you asked yourself that maybe us the players with attitudes such as these in this thread maybe contributing to the non risk taking because we are willing to destroy games before these have even had a chance to release based on our dislike of such or such feature?
Of course they are going to follow a formula that insure some subscriptions under these circumstances, they would be shooting themselves on the foot otherwise.
Possible?
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
This is truth.
Want a taste of religion? Lick a witch.
A: Launch does not equal success. I can name quite a few games which launched but were far from a success... or even far from being FUN for that matter. If Cryptic makes a mediocre MMO, that will only put them one tiny notch above someone who didn't make make an MMO at all.
B: The ever presistent fanboy arguement: "If you haven't tried it you can't say anything bad about it!" or its lesser malformed clone "If you didn't like it then you obviously didn't give it a fair chance!" I don't really like being kicked in the balls either, but perhaps I haven't given that a fair chance either?
No, the game isn't out yet (though you often talk like it is) so I haven't played it. But to say that I have to play it to know if I will like it or not is absurd. The developers have already told us their plans for the game and it isn't the game itself I dislike, its the plan. If you examine all my complaints closely you will see they are all things about the game which the developers have told us they plan to do. Micro-Transactions, instances, console ports, ect. If you tell me that you are planning to cook a pizza out of dung beatles and sewer rats do I have to try that too before I can say I won't like it? Or will you allow me to simply use common sense to deduct that things I don't like when combined into one object will still be unplesant for me?
C: It doesn't mean they will either. Once again you assume that Cryptic has had success at something they are historically bad at when there is not yet any evidence to support that opinion.
As for the article, it really proves very little other than that Cryptic has an uphill battle ahead of them which they have yet to win. The article says very little about things like player crews, instances or other issues which Cryptic has already decided on. Instead it talks about issues like the difficulty of making space, a naturally empty and boring place, fun to explore and the difficulty of creating content which can be played by ships of many different sizes. These are issues which Cryptic has yet to even attempt to address and the possibility that they could fail to address them properly is still very much on the table.
The same problem persists with all of your arguements: You speak as if the game is already here and already a success, in essence rendering judgement without having seen the product for yourself... and yet you try demonize me for simply having the opposite opinion based on the same evidence. Complete hypocrisy.
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
Saying that "no one wants to play a crew member" is as moronic as saying "no one wanted to be a dancer" (or shopkeeper, miner, explorer, ranger, musician, etc) in SWG...there were LOTS of players who wanted to do those things, just like there are lots of people who would want to be "science officers".
If Cyptic were serious about doing the ST world properly, they could have designed a game where you *could* just be a captain and solo - hiring NPCs or being assigned them for the alternate positions...possibly even having to run from console to console on the ship in combat if they wanted to micro manage things...but that also let 2,3,4 etc people fly a ship together. They didn't want to, because that is not what this is about.
Cryptic is out to make a cheapass game quick both for profit and to prove they can with their 2year MMO design package...quick and dirty is the name of the game here, nothing more. Don't be surprised when they dump it off to some operating/sub company later either.
Good point Eric ... there are a lot of people that put combat way down on the list of things to do in an MMO.
And there were a lot of things going on when SWG started to tank, but I'm still a firm believer that by removing the purpose of the most conversational players (entertainers), they tipped a precipice that was unrecoverable. Even with all the crazy changes, had they left a purpose for the people that just wanted to be "in" star wars, I personally think that game would've leveled off in player lose a long time ago. But once people left, found different places with the same friends, SOE couldn't answer the question 'Why should I come back?'
I remember cryptic said "We can't change the colors of your powers" for CoH and NcSoft just released Issue 16 which enable players to change the colors of their powers. fact is it can be done Cryptic is just saying "No we don't want to do it" in other words they are being lazy.
A: Launch does not equal success. I can name quite a few games which launched but were far from a success... or even far from being FUN for that matter. If Cryptic makes a mediocre MMO, that will only put them one tiny notch above someone who didn't make make an MMO at all.
B: The ever presistent fanboy arguement: "If you haven't tried it you can't say anything bad about it!" or its lesser malformed clone "If you didn't like it then you obviously didn't give it a fair chance!" I don't really like being kicked in the balls either, but perhaps I haven't given that a fair chance either?
No, the game isn't out yet (though you often talk like it is) so I haven't played it. But to say that I have to play it to know if I will like it or not is absurd. The developers have already told us their plans for the game and it isn't the game itself I dislike, its the plan. If you examine all my complaints closely you will see they are all things about the game which the developers have told us they plan to do. Micro-Transactions, instances, console ports, ect. If you tell me that you are planning to cook a pizza out of dung beatles and sewer rats do I have to try that too before I can say I won't like it? Or will you allow me to simply use common sense to deduct that things I don't like when combined into one object will still be unplesant for me?
C: It doesn't mean they will either. Once again you assume that Cryptic has had success at something they are historically bad at when there is not yet any evidence to support that opinion.
As for the article, it really proves very little other than that Cryptic has an uphill battle ahead of them which they have yet to win. The article says very little about things like player crews, instances or other issues which Cryptic has already decided on. Instead it talks about issues like the difficulty of making space, a naturally empty and boring place, fun to explore and the difficulty of creating content which can be played by ships of many different sizes. These are issues which Cryptic has yet to even attempt to address and the possibility that they could fail to address them properly is still very much on the table.
The same problem persists with all of your arguements: You speak as if the game is already here and already a success, in essence rendering judgement without having seen the product for yourself... and yet you try demonize me for simply having the opposite opinion based on the same evidence. Complete hypocrisy.
I am not the one making a Mockery of Cryptic, you are.
And there is nothing Hypocritical about my arguments, nice attempt to calling hypocrisy.
Simply put, I like the Plan they have for the game, just the same as you do not like it. We will simply have to agree to disagree, and you going on your merry way and my going to play STO when it launches.
Until it launches none of us knows if it will succeed or not whether we like its plan or not. None of us can be right until we can play it. And until we do, all we can say is opinions and make conjecture and assumptions.
You may not like how Fried Fish looks in a plate but your opinion will not be taken seriously until you actually try it, its like that, unless you can tell me you have a crystal ball that can predict the future (or in this case the past, looking in to see how the meeting with Cryptic went)...
Good luck to you!
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Once again, you claim that Cryptic has "pulled it off" when you yourself claim we can't judge the game because it isn't out yet. Why is it NOT okay for me to judge the game when it isn't out yet but its completely okay for you to declare that it has been "pulled off" when it isn't out yet? This is complete hypocrisy!
The same problem persists with all of your arguements: You speak as if the game is already here and already a success, in essence rendering judgement without having seen the product for yourself... and yet you try demonize me for simply having the opposite opinion based on the same evidence. Complete hypocrisy.
I am not the one making a Mockery of Cryptic, you are.
Until it launches none of us knows if it will succeed or not whether we like its plan or not. None of us can be right until we can play it. And until we do, all we can say is opinions and make conjecture and assumptions.
You seem to be very good at contradicting yourself and changing your opinions to suit the suituation you find yourself in. Have you ever considered running for President of the United States? You would do atleast as well as John Kerry did. You and he have a lot in common.
Meanwhile I stand by my opinion, despite your refusal to actually debate me: STO is going in a direction which meets Cryptic's (very low) standards but not the standards of the fans who will play this game. Or the fans who will NOT play it.
P.S. You might want to set Wikipedia and Youtube aside for a moment to dust off your old dictionary. Look up the defnintion of "Mockery" because you aren't using it correctly.
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
Please Cryptic .. look at their past.. now what they have done to Champions online. .. sure Startrek will be killer! HAHAHA
SOE has enough stuff that you can blame them for without making stuff up. Nice try though.
As for the Star Trek thing, I bring up the argument that hasn't been refuted by the multi-player crew group. How do you make each thing fun to play.
yup, getting back to star trek, man i have no idea how they can be made and still be fun, but hey i will wait and try it before i start saying "its gonna fail" so my whole point is i really think if done right you may not even notice the missing elements...if you are having "fun" in a game its really easy to miss or overlook the "wadda been nice" features of a game. so i say, i will wait till i can play it and check how it scores on my "fun" meter
LOl . way to evade teh question. The answer is YOU CANNOT. I can't think a way and I don't think the developer did. Thus, it is out because it is no fun.
Plus, how many people would like to be the comm officer whose game play element consists of saying "hailing freq open" and nothing else? I would much rather be the captain.
Maybe you missed the avatar, but I'm a fan and I like the direction this game is going in. Once again you fall into the same naysayer trap of thinking you speak for everyone or a specific group when in fact you are just one person with an opinion.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Maybe you missed the avatar, but I'm a fan and I like the direction this game is going in. Once again you fall into the same naysayer trap of thinking you speak for everyone or a specific group when in fact you are just one person with an opinion.
And the pot calls the kettle black again...
If you read my post carefully you will see I never claimed to speak for ALL fans. Only the fans who have expressed their concerns on this forum (which I'm sure you have noticed are many) and in perticular the ones like myself who have said we will not play this game if development continues in the direction it has been going so far. I think I echoed their concerns pretty well since we see that time and time again people are posting replies to these threads with comments like "Cryptic is just making the type of game they know how to make" or "they won't include all those features because they want to get the game out sooner."
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
Maybe you missed the avatar, but I'm a fan and I like the direction this game is going in. Once again you fall into the same naysayer trap of thinking you speak for everyone or a specific group when in fact you are just one person with an opinion.
And the pot calls the kettle black again...
If you read my post carefully you will see I never claimed to speak for ALL fans. Only the fans who have expressed their concerns on this forum (which I'm sure you have noticed are many) and in perticular the ones like myself who have said we will not play this game if development continues in the direction it has been going so far. I think I echoed their concerns pretty well since we see that time and time again people are posting replies to these threads with comments like "Cryptic is just making the type of game they know how to make" or "they won't include all those features because they want to get the game out sooner."
Well the game is set in it's path at this point so all of this complaining is going to get you absolutely nothing for your trouble. At this point all I can say is if you don't like it just don't play, it really is that simple. I on the other hand will reserve my final judgment until I can actually play the game as I think pre-judging a game or judging it on other factors that have no direct connection to the game is rather ignorant. All I can say at this point is if it's fun I'll play it and if it isn't I won't but what features are in or out of the game are irrelevant to me as this says nothing about the fun factor of a game I haven't even played yet. Will Cryptic deliver a fun filled Star Trek experience with STO? The answer to that is I don't know and neither do you as neither of us have actually played it yet to make that judgment.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
A: No... direct connection to the game? Features don't have anything to do with games now? Well [censored] all this MMO stuff then! I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
Seriously though, the type of fuel you put in your car may not seem to matter much to your driving exprience... but it will start to matter a whole lot when you forget to put the fuel in there! Or use the wrong type. If the features in this game don't appeal to me at all, and in fact seem to hurt the game in my opinion, aren't I justfied in assuming I won't enjoy the game? That seems to just be common sense.
B: As I said above, I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
C: Oh and here we are again, the classic fanboy defense: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
I'll cut straight to the chase here: You have completely missed the point. I do not want a "fun filled Star Trek experience" from STO. I want a stable, reliable, unique, innovative and long term MMO from STO. Its an MMO FIRST and a Star Trek game SECOND. If they can't make a fun MMO, then they can't make a fun Star Trek MMO either. Which is why I believe that their decisions reguarding instances, cash shops and console development will hurt this game badly.
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
A: No... direct connection to the game? Features don't have anything to do with games now? Well [censored] all this MMO stuff then! I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
Seriously though, the type of fuel you put in your car may not seem to matter much to your driving exprience... but it will start to matter a whole lot when you forget to put the fuel in there! Or use the wrong type. If the features in this game don't appeal to me at all, and in fact seem to hurt the game in my opinion, aren't I justfied in assuming I won't enjoy the game? That seems to just be common sense.
B: As I said above, I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
C: Oh and here we are again, the classic fanboy defense: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
I'll cut straight to the chase here: You have completely missed the point. I do not want a "fun filled Star Trek experience" from STO. I want a stable, reliable, unique, innovative and long term MMO from STO. Its an MMO FIRST and a Star Trek game SECOND. If they can't make a fun MMO, then they can't make a fun Star Trek MMO either. Which is why I believe that their decisions reguarding instances, cash shops and console development will hurt this game badly.
LOL... Well...
A. I was referring to pre-judging STO based on CO, CoH or any other game that you feel "may" be like STO... Until you play it you just don't know, period.
B. I've seen many games that seemed to have sucktastic feature sets that actually turned out to be pretty fun games. On the other hand I've also seen plenty of games that seemed to have a feature list straight out of a dream that turned out to suck balls. A pre-release feature list tells you zero, zip, nada about whether or not a game will be fun. Only playing it will tell you that.
C. Whatever dude... if someone doesn't share your opinion it's really easy to label them a 'fanboy' and dismiss them isn't it... This is also known as the classic troll reply by the way. See? It works both ways.
You've completely missed the point here. This is a GAME. A GAME is supposed to be FUN... PERIOD. It's a GAME first and everything else is second. If it is fun people will stick around for the long haul regardless of what features are in or not in the game. Your proposed Star Trek life simulator seems more like a second job to me. No thank you, I play games to have fun and forget about work for a little while.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
A: No... direct connection to the game? Features don't have anything to do with games now? Well [censored] all this MMO stuff then! I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
Seriously though, the type of fuel you put in your car may not seem to matter much to your driving exprience... but it will start to matter a whole lot when you forget to put the fuel in there! Or use the wrong type. If the features in this game don't appeal to me at all, and in fact seem to hurt the game in my opinion, aren't I justfied in assuming I won't enjoy the game? That seems to just be common sense.
B: As I said above, I'll just go make a tetris clone, call it "Star Trek Online" and I'll make a fortune since features apparently don't matter anymore.
C: Oh and here we are again, the classic fanboy defense: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
I'll cut straight to the chase here: You have completely missed the point. I do not want a "fun filled Star Trek experience" from STO. I want a stable, reliable, unique, innovative and long term MMO from STO. Its an MMO FIRST and a Star Trek game SECOND. If they can't make a fun MMO, then they can't make a fun Star Trek MMO either. Which is why I believe that their decisions reguarding instances, cash shops and console development will hurt this game badly.
LOL... Well...
A. I was referring to pre-judging STO based on CO, CoH or any other game that you feel "may" be like STO... Until you play it you just don't know, period.
B. I've seen many games that seemed to have sucktastic feature sets that actually turned out to be pretty fun games. On the other hand I've also seen plenty of games that seemed to have a feature list straight out of a dream that turned out to suck balls. A pre-release feature list tells you zero, zip, nada about whether or not a game will be fun. Only playing it will tell you that.
C. Whatever dude... if someone doesn't share your opinion it's really easy to label them a 'fanboy' and dismiss them isn't it... This is also known as the classic troll reply by the way. See? It works both ways.
You've completely missed the point here. This is a GAME. A GAME is supposed to be FUN... PERIOD. It's a GAME first and everything else is second. If it is fun people will stick around for the long haul regardless of what features are in or not in the game. Your proposed Star Trek life simulator seems more like a second job to me. No thank you, I play games to have FUN and forget about work for a little while.
Bren
He still can't answer as to how he can predict that the game won't be stable,reliable,innovative,unique and long term when it hasn't even come out yet. If asking that question makes one a fanboy then I'll gladly wear the cape. This is a classic case of "The Devs aren't making the game like X therfore I hate it." That pretty much sums it up for most drama queens and is the reason for my sig...
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
TL;DR guys.
Here is the bottom line: For all your ranting and raving your only defense is the same tired fanboy arguement over and over: "You can't say anything bad about it if you haven't played it!"
To which I reply: I don't need to eat a pie full of diseased cockroaches to know that it isn't safe.
Instances = Bad
Cash Shops = Bad
Console development = Bad
Thus...
STO = BAD
End of story.
I'm off to play Fallen Earth, a real Sandbox game where you can actually play the way you want. Smell you fanboys later.
(P.S. If you guys think I'm one of the people asking for player crews then you haven't read any of my posts.)
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
Doesn't look like you're having much fun yet...
"In summary, this game seems like it has potental and I really hope it turns out to be worth the effort in the long run. But right now it just isn't a lot of fun. Honestly I think there is a reason the developers aren't offering a free trial right now and I regret putting money down on this game so soon. I would advise anyone else looking at this game to wait atleast a couple of weeks for things to simmer down a bit. When the players begin to spread out away from the starter towns, the developers work out a few more bugs and we get more information about what this game looks like at the higher levels, it could be worth the prucahse."(this was his review on the Fallen Earth Forums)
*mod edit*
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
If you want to slam the door on STO with no real information to base your decision on more power to you. Have fun playing Fallen Earth it actually looks like it may be a great game. See you around.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
It's the reason for my sig as well. It's a while loop for beating a dead horse that has no exit condition(meaning it's an endless loop). That pretty much sums up most of them as well.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
I'm betting that's just what the makers of Matrix Online said.
And Dungeons & Dragons Online.
Both of which were, I might add, perfectly 'fun,' yet floundered anyway. I don't think the inducement of endorphin rushes are the end-all, be-all of game design.