Originally posted by Brenelael

...It's actually a very small and vocal cross section of the fan base that has any problems with the direction this game is going in...

 

Bren

Remember, that's what they said about SWG after the NGE bomb. And look how that turned out.

Originally posted by Guillermo197

Originally posted by Shannia

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by Chastian (STO "Correspondent")

Star Trek fans are genrally happy they finally have a Trek MMO that is made by a reputable developer, who know what Star Trek is about.

 Oh god... I see that a guy with a grand total of 12 posts has become the STO Correspondent. If this is anything like when "Amazing Avery" became the Correspondent for AoC then we are in for several years of warnings and bans every time we say anything bad about this game... until it releases and everyone sees what is truly going on, despite what the "Correspondent" would have us believe.

Shame on the owners of this site...

I'm guessing Chastian is someone "hiding" in pen name and is a recognized member of the STO community or else I have to agree Raltar. While I don't hold management against not picking me to be a writer or mod, someone with just 12 posts hardly seems credible. 

Don't mind these so called Trekkies. Just give them one or maybe a couple months tops... and they crawl back to their forums, be silent and pretend STO never existed. 

I don't recall ever saying that I was a "trekkie" of any kind,  nor do I see such a comment in Shannia's post either. Unlike some of the other posters in this thread I've never been to a convention nor can I brag about owning any props used on the show. I'm  just a gamer who wants to be able to discuss a game without some guy who just registered for this site yesterday getting promoted to a staff member and telling everyone that I'm some sort of minority and my opinion doesn't count.

Its strage that I see several people running around in this thread screaming at the top of their lungs that this game is going to be just fine and that everyone who thinks differently is some kind of minority in the community. And yet, the majority of the replies to this thread (as well as most of the other threads in this forum) are from people who are concerned about what the future of this game will look like and are willing to provide clear reasons WHY they are concerned. Yet certain people are determined to ignore that and silence any negative opinion on this game.

This site made the same mistake when they appointed their "Correspondent" for Age of Conan. And I think we all remember how that game turned out at launch and how that made the "Correspondent" look after all his months spent defending the game.

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Brenelael

Go to any other website that discusses this game and see for yourself. The response to STO especially after the PAX demo has been overwhelmingly positive. This site just seems to attract the negative types. Anywhere else the posts are about ten to one in favor of STO the way it is. 

Bren

I notice that as well. It seems like every new MMO in development gets lambasted on this web sight before it even has a chance to come out in Beta. They don't last long on official sites because trolling and flaming aren't allowed so they have to go somewhere. Some of the naysayers here  were banned from the STO website for posting the same garbage over and over again.
 

You two make a very good point... and the irony of it is that the point you are making is exactly why you are both completely WRONG.

The only defense you seem to be able to offer for this game is that the reviews of it on the official forums and on major news sites are "overwhelmingly positive" because you already banned everyone from those sites that would offer a different opinion. Well obviously the response will appear to be "overwhelmingly positive" if you banned everyone who might have something else to say! Thats just circular logic.

Your problem is that you assume everyone who doesn't like this game (or who doesn't like every game) is obviously some kind of "troll" or "flamer" whose opinion should be dissmissed out of hand just because they are a "naysayer" of some sort. You won't consider the possibility that people who have negative opinions of this game might have good reasons for having such an opinion. As I've pointed out before the AoC developers and fanboys had the same theory and they were also quick to swing the ban hammer to silence any negative opinions of their game. But suprise, suprise, many of the so-called "naysayers" were proven correct in their predictions about the game. Never mind that many of them had played in the beta and had seen the problems with the game first hand, they still got treated as "flamers" or "trolls" and were given the ban hammer all the same in spite of their experience with the game.

And it isn't just AoC which had that problem either. Many other games have suffered as a result of communities that labeled all "naysayers" as mere trolls. SWG, Shadowbane, Darkfall, Dark and Light, ect...

You can continue to pretend that this game is perferct and that anyone who thinks differently is wrong. And you can even call on the power of your new "Correspondent" to swing the ban hammer at anyone you don't agree with. But all of my 10+ years of experience as an avid MMO gamer has tought me that philosophy will end poorly for you.

People on these forums are indeed REALLY negative about EVERY single possible aspect of this game. Seems everyone knows everything about it already, even though it is still in Alpha and a GREAT deal of changes can and probably will be made.

I'll be frank (Hi Frank!), the Star Trek game we all want... IT CANNOT EXIST. Ever. Period. The mechanics, the graphics, the sheer immensity of it is currently, and probably forever will be, beyond our technological capability. Will you all complain because the Borg didnt REALLY assimulate you?

I am a trekkie. I am a gamer. Do I realize that these are two, totally different things? Yes. And honestly, some of you do not.

Lets go over some of the problems I have noticed...

1. We are "Captain of a Ship" : Well, no. Captain is a rank. The technically correct term is we are the Commanding Officer (CO) of the ship. So, Cryptic got the language wrong. get over that immediately. And yes, we have to be the commanding officer because quite frankly it is nearly impossible to make a COMPLETE MMO that is fun to sit in one room remodulating the shields for all 4 hours that you played the game that night. There is only so much a GAME can transfer over from ideology.

2. Instances :  Given the design and scope of the game, I am not entirely sure about how this will be implemented and such. My guess would be certain missions/planets that really cannot have too many Starfleet Officers doing. ALL of Starfleet cannot be on the same planet saving so-and-so at same exact time right? It really depends on the population limit they have in mind and can be done well enough. It will also sorta help with the whole StarTrek feel... imagine "Hey Captain Bob, you're here too? Well, Im supposed to kill that Klingon General as well! Go figure buddy... so, just tell me when you're done killing him and then I'll go kill him next."   basically, do not freak out just yet over the mere word. I dislike instances, but at least I am willing to waitt to see how they pull it off.

3. Not being able to go around your own ship.  I have not heard any details saying you couldn't. But then again, I haven't heard any details to say you could. So, this is NOT their issue, it's your own. Will you next complain that the game's DVD doesnt wash your car and walk your dog too? Besides, if this is a feature so desired by the community, do you think that they will simply say "NO NEVER EVER"? Doubtful. If it isnt in the game at launch, and is so desired by people, they WILL make it an expansion, especially since there are so many more missions that can involve the interior of your own ship.

4. Comparing it to Champions Online? Really? I mean just really? You mean you were bored playing a game that is almost exactly like another game that you've played before? I AM IN UTTER SHOCK. See... Champions Online has been cone before... City of Heroes. Star Trek Online, has not. So... really... no comparrison. At all. Holy crap they are made by the same company! Well, Safeway and taco bell are the same company, and you'll be hard pressed getting a safeway club card at Taco Bell.

In the end, if you're disappointed, all you have to blame is YOURSELF. You alone are building up expectations for what this game is supposed to be. In the end though, at least let the thing get into Beta before writting it off on gameplay mechanics....

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Brenelael

Go to any other website that discusses this game and see for yourself. The response to STO especially after the PAX demo has been overwhelmingly positive. This site just seems to attract the negative types. Anywhere else the posts are about ten to one in favor of STO the way it is. 

Bren

I notice that as well. It seems like every new MMO in development gets lambasted on this web sight before it even has a chance to come out in Beta. They don't last long on official sites because trolling and flaming aren't allowed so they have to go somewhere. Some of the naysayers here  were banned from the STO website for posting the same garbage over and over again.
 

You two make a very good point... and the irony of it is that the point you are making is exactly why you are both completely WRONG.

The only defense you seem to be able to offer for this game is that the reviews of it on the official forums and on major news sites are "overwhelmingly positive" because you already banned everyone from those sites that would offer a different opinion. Well obviously the response will appear to be "overwhelmingly positive" if you banned everyone who might have something else to say! Thats just circular logic.

Your problem is that you assume everyone who doesn't like this game (or who doesn't like every game) is obviously some kind of "troll" or "flamer" whose opinion should be dissmissed out of hand just because they are a "naysayer" of some sort. You won't consider the possibility that people who have negative opinions of this game might have good reasons for having such an opinion. As I've pointed out before the AoC developers and fanboys had the same theory and they were also quick to swing the ban hammer to silence any negative opinions of their game. But suprise, suprise, many of the so-called "naysayers" were proven correct in their predictions about the game. Never mind that many of them had played in the beta and had seen the problems with the game first hand, they still got treated as "flamers" or "trolls" and were given the ban hammer all the same in spite of their experience with the game.

And it isn't just AoC which had that problem either. Many other games have suffered as a result of communities that labeled all "naysayers" as mere trolls. SWG, Shadowbane, Darkfall, Dark and Light, ect...

You can continue to pretend that this game is perferct and that anyone who thinks differently is wrong. And you can even call on the power of your new "Correspondent" to swing the ban hammer at anyone you don't agree with. But all of my 10+ years of experience as an avid MMO gamer has tought me that philosophy will end poorly for you.

So way off I don't even know where to begin. No one is assuming that this game is perfect and no one is saying that disagreeing is a bad thing. It becomes a bad thing when you state the same point over and over and over and over again. I've stated many things that are unpopular with that community and if you ever visited that site you would know that. The difference is I make my point and move on. I don't post "This game fails because it doesn't have this in it" in every thread.  When you do that then you have crossed the line into trolling and any half way well moderated site will eventually kick you off.

Your comments about beta would make more sense if this game actually was IN beta but it isn't. So saying that the game will fail before we've even hit beta seems pretty stupid. Again, I'd recommend actually checking the official site before assuming that it's a place that doesn't allow disagreement. There are disagreements in there all the time about everything from crafting to combat. The only time a thread gets locked is when the disagreements get out of control. The only time someone gets banned is when they are so indignant and disrespectful to others that there is little choice. That is what actually happens on the official site. Either check it out yourself or continue to be ignorant. I don't care. But don't ever try and say that site is full of nothing but fanboys because it is a complete lie.

Originally posted by Raltar

You two make a very good point... and the irony of it is that the point you are making is exactly why you are both completely WRONG.

The only defense you seem to be able to offer for this game is that the reviews of it on the official forums and on major news sites are "overwhelmingly positive" because you already banned everyone from those sites that would offer a different opinion. Well obviously the response will appear to be "overwhelmingly positive" if you banned everyone who might have something else to say! Thats just circular logic.

Your problem is that you assume everyone who doesn't like this game (or who doesn't like every game) is obviously some kind of "troll" or "flamer" whose opinion should be dissmissed out of hand just because they are a "naysayer" of some sort. You won't consider the possibility that people who have negative opinions of this game might have good reasons for having such an opinion. As I've pointed out before the AoC developers and fanboys had the same theory and they were also quick to swing the ban hammer to silence any negative opinions of their game. But suprise, suprise, many of the so-called "naysayers" were proven correct in their predictions about the game. Never mind that many of them had played in the beta and had seen the problems with the game first hand, they still got treated as "flamers" or "trolls" and were given the ban hammer all the same in spite of their experience with the game.

And it isn't just AoC which had that problem either. Many other games have suffered as a result of communities that labeled all "naysayers" as mere trolls. SWG, Shadowbane, Darkfall, Dark and Light, ect...

You can continue to pretend that this game is perferct and that anyone who thinks differently is wrong. And you can even call on the power of your new "Correspondent" to swing the ban hammer at anyone you don't agree with. But all of my 10+ years of experience as an avid MMO gamer has tought me that philosophy will end poorly for you.

You have to also look at what the people are actually complaining about, I was one of those guys who played AOC in beta and thought that right after the starter Island the game goes downhill, I was also one of those guys that thought Darkfall was a load of tosh and right now I think what this guy is complaining about is going down with a bit of tosh value if you understand what I mean.

Sharding is not an issue, it was done in Guild Wars and that game was praised for it, it is being done in CO and MY gameplay is the better for it. From my point of view what this poster is complaining about has no real significance unless the general public doesn't understand how to work around sharding or maybe if Cryptic executes it poorly.....but from looking at CO I dont think it should be a big problem.

 I personally worry about STO as I do not enjoy any of cryptic's current titles...but from reading implementations, it sounds at least a tad different from their other games (which to me is a plus).  The same ol' cliche "its not an mmo", "the graphics suck" etc etc are bound to happen, but more-over hearing that the main dev is hoping over...is what worries me.

And as an aside, FFXIV on this site has not derived an obscene amount of negative feedback...like say that of of Old Repulic, so there is hope sometimes new games don't get soaked in Hater-ade.  And I might even try STO, Old Republic, and FFXIV...man next year is going to be expensive :)

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Brenelael

Go to any other website that discusses this game and see for yourself. The response to STO especially after the PAX demo has been overwhelmingly positive. This site just seems to attract the negative types. Anywhere else the posts are about ten to one in favor of STO the way it is. 

Bren

I notice that as well. It seems like every new MMO in development gets lambasted on this web sight before it even has a chance to come out in Beta. They don't last long on official sites because trolling and flaming aren't allowed so they have to go somewhere. Some of the naysayers here  were banned from the STO website for posting the same garbage over and over again.
 

You two make a very good point... and the irony of it is that the point you are making is exactly why you are both completely WRONG.

The only defense you seem to be able to offer for this game is that the reviews of it on the official forums and on major news sites are "overwhelmingly positive" because you already banned everyone from those sites that would offer a different opinion. Well obviously the response will appear to be "overwhelmingly positive" if you banned everyone who might have something else to say! Thats just circular logic.

Your problem is that you assume everyone who doesn't like this game (or who doesn't like every game) is obviously some kind of "troll" or "flamer" whose opinion should be dissmissed out of hand just because they are a "naysayer" of some sort. You won't consider the possibility that people who have negative opinions of this game might have good reasons for having such an opinion. As I've pointed out before the AoC developers and fanboys had the same theory and they were also quick to swing the ban hammer to silence any negative opinions of their game. But suprise, suprise, many of the so-called "naysayers" were proven correct in their predictions about the game. Never mind that many of them had played in the beta and had seen the problems with the game first hand, they still got treated as "flamers" or "trolls" and were given the ban hammer all the same in spite of their experience with the game.

And it isn't just AoC which had that problem either. Many other games have suffered as a result of communities that labeled all "naysayers" as mere trolls. SWG, Shadowbane, Darkfall, Dark and Light, ect...

You can continue to pretend that this game is perferct and that anyone who thinks differently is wrong. And you can even call on the power of your new "Correspondent" to swing the ban hammer at anyone you don't agree with. But all of my 10+ years of experience as an avid MMO gamer has tought me that philosophy will end poorly for you.

No, just no. I'm talking about everywhere not just STO.com. Even sites that allow drive by posting like YouTube are overwhelmingly positive since the Pax Demo. Just go and look at the comments under any video that came out of that show. Even before the Pax show the comments on other forums weren't nearly as negative as they are here. Oh well enough of this off topic stuff.

Bren

Originally posted by DanaDark

People on these forums are indeed REALLY negative about EVERY single possible aspect of this game. Seems everyone knows everything about it already, even though it is still in Alpha and a GREAT deal of changes can and probably will be made.

I'll be frank (Hi Frank!), the Star Trek game we all want... IT CANNOT EXIST. Ever. Period. The mechanics, the graphics, the sheer immensity of it is currently, and probably forever will be, beyond our technological capability. Will you all complain because the Borg didnt REALLY assimulate you?

I am a trekkie. I am a gamer. Do I realize that these are two, totally different things? Yes. And honestly, some of you do not.

Lets go over some of the problems I have noticed...

1. We are "Captain of a Ship" : Well, no. Captain is a rank. The technically correct term is we are the Commanding Officer (CO) of the ship. So, Cryptic got the language wrong. get over that immediately. And yes, we have to be the commanding officer because quite frankly it is nearly impossible to make a COMPLETE MMO that is fun to sit in one room remodulating the shields for all 4 hours that you played the game that night. There is only so much a GAME can transfer over from ideology.

2. Instances :  Given the design and scope of the game, I am not entirely sure about how this will be implemented and such. My guess would be certain missions/planets that really cannot have too many Starfleet Officers doing. ALL of Starfleet cannot be on the same planet saving so-and-so at same exact time right? It really depends on the population limit they have in mind and can be done well enough. It will also sorta help with the whole StarTrek feel... imagine "Hey Captain Bob, you're here too? Well, Im supposed to kill that Klingon General as well! Go figure buddy... so, just tell me when you're done killing him and then I'll go kill him next."   basically, do not freak out just yet over the mere word. I dislike instances, but at least I am willing to waitt to see how they pull it off.

3. Not being able to go around your own ship.  I have not heard any details saying you couldn't. But then again, I haven't heard any details to say you could. So, this is NOT their issue, it's your own. Will you next complain that the game's DVD doesnt wash your car and walk your dog too? Besides, if this is a feature so desired by the community, do you think that they will simply say "NO NEVER EVER"? Doubtful. If it isnt in the game at launch, and is so desired by people, they WILL make it an expansion, especially since there are so many more missions that can involve the interior of your own ship.

4. Comparing it to Champions Online? Really? I mean just really? You mean you were bored playing a game that is almost exactly like another game that you've played before? I AM IN UTTER SHOCK. See... Champions Online has been cone before... City of Heroes. Star Trek Online, has not. So... really... no comparrison. At all. Holy crap they are made by the same company! Well, Safeway and taco bell are the same company, and you'll be hard pressed getting a safeway club card at Taco Bell.

 

In the end, if you're disappointed, all you have to blame is YOURSELF. You alone are building up expectations for what this game is supposed to be. In the end though, at least let the thing get into Beta before writting it off on gameplay mechanics....

Extremely well said. Bravo good sir, BRAVO!

Bren

I don't understand why people are so concerned about Star Trek Online. The reasoning of if Champions Online is bad then their next game will be bad too.  For one thing Perpetual created the major part of the game but had to sell it off when they went bankrupt.  Perpetual were a fine group who sadly had some bad luck, however their work was at the best of standards.

I was lucky enough to be invited to play the beta of Gods and Heroes: Rome Rising; a game almost ready however cancelled for the sake of Star Trek.  Gods and Heroes was a fantastic game with interesting quests, solid graphics and imaginative concepts. I fretted when I learned that they decided to drop their near complete game, considering it was of a quality to best any game out at that time and I am sure since; if it was only allowed to grow to its fullest potential.

So, knowing that their second game was of the highest of standards, surely Perpetual must have had some great work in line for the game they chose to see them through their financial distress, Star Trek Online. Sadly they sold it off but, I can not see any valid reason why Cryptic would alter the fine work of Perpetual. If they did so then they are foolish.

All I can say is have faith in the talent of Perpetual and the foresight of Cryptic to create a game worthy of the name Star Trek. Besides just wait a little while longer and we'll have Star Wars soon. It's being made by the best of all studios Bioware. I for one can't wait to play a game with complex story arcs and well thought out quests; the things that Bioware are the best at.

Secondly there will be the great game Guild Wars 2 with a storyline that actually has a purpose and direction, something that is missing in most MMOs. Next year is going to be a fantastic year for questers (at least for those of us that love to play games that have a meaning and not just "pretty" to look at and bash happy).

Originally posted by plaguess 

I dont see STO fans accepting this mirrored instancing stuff. and personally I cant even fathom 1 console gamer wanting to play a star trek game anyway so cryptic is stripping the game down for a console audience that wont be there.

My guess is STO will initially attract a large percentage of fans from the other large sc-fi ip, star wars galaxies. i cant see those players liking STO with instancing considering swg had such massive open worlds. I played swg at launch and it had zero instances. every world was wide open.

mirrored instancing wasnt accepted by age of conan gamers either. I was there at launch and I knew entire guilds that cancelled when they found out why they couldnt see each other at a guild meeting in-game.

We gamers of this genre have put up with a general dumbing down of the industry. we have put up with really bad launches and incomplete games. we have put up with things like the nge. we put up with the hype and the general lying to play the game. but this is where i say enough. i wont watch my favorite form of entertainment turn into a cheap multiplayer game

I played SWG from launch until a month after the NGE, and I'm fine with the mirrored instancing in CO. In fact, it was another SOE game with large zones, EQ, that convinced me that instancing would be necessary (200 level 50s jammed into Lower Guk before the release of the first expansion.) I thought AoC did its instancing very well, and if I wanted anything changed at all it would be to make it easier to cross from once instance to another to make it easier to group.

You may think of it as turning it into a "cheap multiplayer game", but I don't think "massively multiplayer online" has to mean everybody jammed into one zone or instance all fighting over the same mobs, which is ultimately the end result of single instance games.

Champions has made me fearful of the entire MMO industry. There is no doubt that Cryptic will ruin Star Trek beyond all comprehension and that is really a shame. Cryptic might well be even more ignorant than SOE.

Originally posted by ktanner3

A: no one is saying that disagreeing is a bad thing. It becomes a bad thing when you state the same point over and over and over and over again.

B: Your comments about beta would make more sense if this game actually was IN beta but it isn't. So saying that the game will fail before we've even hit beta seems pretty stupid.

A: So... by your own logic you are a troll because you have posted on more then one of these threads saying the same thing in each? Funny how your own logic keeps working aginst you, isn't it? Just because a large number of people have the same opinion and want to be able to use the internet to share that opinion with others does not make them trolls. And if you do not want to discuss things with people why bother visiting a forum on the itnernet at all?

See, long running forums which have a small but dedicated base of regular users tend to become very hostile to outsiders because whenever a new user visits the forum and learns a bit about the subject matter being discussed he will make a post sharing his opinion on the subject. Of course, chances are that 50 other people have come by in the last week and done the same thing. From their perspective they were doing exactly what they thought the forum was there to do: Share opinions. From the perspective of the small base of regular users on that forum however, it appears that this new user is posting the same thing that has already been discussed 5000 times.

That is the sort of mindset you seem to be falling into. You seem to think that because we had one thread talking about ship crews (or instances or 3D movement or micro-transactions or whatever other feature of the game people may be inclined to complain about) and you gave your opinoon on it, that means the subject has been resolved and should never be discussed ever again. You aren't apparently willing to factor in two major issues: One, just because you stated your opinion doesn't mean everyone is going to stop talking about it. And two, people who are new to the discussion are going to want to talk about it as well when they arrive. So like it or not, you need to start expecting to see threads about subjects which have been discussed in the past continue to pop up over time.  

If you can't handle that then the only thing I can suggest which may help you is to stop visiting forums on the internet.

B: I wasn't talking about beta. I was giving you an example of my experience with another major MMO as a way of explaining my point to you. Just because my experience with that game happened to be during its beta testing doesn't translate into some need for STO to be in beta testing before I'm allowed to criticize it. Rather than talking about AoC, I could have instead chosen to discuss my experience with Shadowbane, which took place from over two years before the release of the game until six months after release. Or I could have talked about my experience with SWG, which took place several years after its release. Or I could have talked about my experience with Dark and Light or Planetside or any of a half dozen other MMOs I've played which all shared similar traits which I could have made refrence to in order to back up my point.

And to reiterate that point: The official forums for MMOs are nearly always biased in favor of the developer and the fanboys of the game. You may claim the STO forums aren't that way and perhaps they aren't but it doesn't change the experiences that myself and many other internet users have had with official forums. Which is exactly why many of us choose to skip the "official" forum completely and come to 3rd party sites like this one where we can actually share our negative opinions of a game freely without fear of being mistreated by the staff (usually).

@ Brenelael: Youtube comments? I'm hardly impressed that a bunch of random you tube viewers who know very little about the game and have probably done little or no research into what freatures it will have were impressed by a trailer made to advertise the game. Thats like saying that because someone liked a commercial they saw on TV it obviously means the product itself will be good. Every game released since 1990 has had a flashy trailer with lots of loud music and colorful explosions, but how many of those games turned out to be good in the end? Very few. Nothing you or anyone else have to say about a trailer is going to distract me from what the developers have already confirmed about their plans for this game.

@ Goeegoanna: ...uh... WHAT? You are aware that Perpetual's original design and vision for STO has be completely thrown out in the trash, right? The game currently being developed by Cryptic has nothing to do with it and does not even use the same engine. Attempting to attribute any of the design decisions made for this game to Perpetual is just completely wrong.

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by ktanner3

A: no one is saying that disagreeing is a bad thing. It becomes a bad thing when you state the same point over and over and over and over again.

B: Your comments about beta would make more sense if this game actually was IN beta but it isn't. So saying that the game will fail before we've even hit beta seems pretty stupid.

 

A: So... by your own logic you are a troll because you have posted on more then one of these threads saying the same thing in each? Funny how your own logic keeps working aginst you, isn't it? Just because a large number of people have the same opinion and want to be able to use the internet to share that opinion with others does not make them trolls. And if you do not want to discuss things with people why bother visiting a forum on the itnernet at all?

See, long running forums which have a small but dedicated base of regular users tend to become very hostile to outsiders because whenever a new user visits the forum and learns a bit about the subject matter being discussed he will make a post sharing his opinion on the subject. Of course, chances are that 50 other people have come by in the last week and done the same thing. From their perspective they were doing exactly what they thought the forum was there to do: Share opinions. From the perspective of the small base of regular users on that forum however, it appears that this new user is posting the same thing that has already been discussed 5000 times.

That is the sort of mindset you seem to be falling into. You seem to think that because we had one thread talking about ship crews (or instances or 3D movement or micro-transactions or whatever other feature of the game people may be inclined to complain about) and you gave your opinoon on it, that means the subject has been resolved and should never be discussed ever again. You aren't apparently willing to factor in two major issues: One, just because you stated your opinion doesn't mean everyone is going to stop talking about it. And two, people who are new to the discussion are going to want to talk about it as well when they arrive. So like it or not, you need to start expecting to see threads about subjects which have been discussed in the past continue to pop up over time.  

If you can't handle that then the only thing I can suggest which may help you is to stop visiting forums on the internet.

B: I wasn't talking about beta. I was giving you an example of my experience with another major MMO as a way of explaining my point to you. Just because my experience with that game happened to be during its beta testing doesn't translate into some need for STO to be in beta testing before I'm allowed to criticize it. Rather than talking about AoC, I could have instead chosen to discuss my experience with Shadowbane, which took place from over two years before the release of the game until six months after release. Or I could have talked about my experience with SWG, which took place several years after its release. Or I could have talked about my experience with Dark and Light or Planetside or any of a half dozen other MMOs I've played which all shared similar traits which I could have made refrence to in order to back up my point.

And to reiterate that point: The official forums for MMOs are nearly always biased in favor of the developer and the fanboys of the game. You may claim the STO forums aren't that way and perhaps they aren't but it doesn't change the experiences that myself and many other internet users have had with official forums. Which is exactly why many of us choose to skip the "official" forum completely and come to 3rd party sites like this one where we can actually share our negative opinions of a game freely without fear of being mistreated by the staff (usually).

 

 

Another example of things you can get away with here that you don't on an official site: Taking somebody's words and twisting them completely out of context. It's obvious that you are incapable of seeing my point and only want to re-interate the same ignorance over again. I think we are done here.

Originally posted by ktanner3

Taking somebody's words and twisting them completely out of context.

Woah, I would reply to this but I need to run to my kitchen to get my fire extinguisher. My irony detector burst into flames after it saw your last post. That hasn't happened since the last time my neighbors pot called my kettle black.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Just now you're realizing that STO will be a failure? You haven't been keeping up with the news on that game.

 

Oh, I don't know if it will be a failure. It might turn out to be a very fun space combat game.

I do think that most Trek fans will hate it, though.

Trekkies will hate it.  Star Trek fans will enjoy it. 

There is a difference.

only time will tell. Just give it a try

Originally posted by Wrender

Champions has made me fearful of the entire MMO industry. There is no doubt that Cryptic will ruin Star Trek beyond all comprehension and that is really a shame. Cryptic might well be even more ignorant than SOE.

I don't understand the logic, and I couldn't disagree more. =/

Well to semi defend the post about the logic of being scared at what depth MMO's are allowing to become because of CO is a good worry. Again as a lifetime sub to the game, I have come across a few things that "scare" me about the success of STO, there is a big BUT in there thou, I will get to that.

The problem lays within a few things about CO, first off the game launched was not the game we got 1 day later. The patch changed everything from what it was to what it is now. The mass exidous from the game is well known, cryptic employees can go off about "how we can't see the numbers only they can" bla bla bla, but as a player I see with my "Eyes" what I see. I logged in the last two days to see people but not the people I seen at launch day, I am not talking beta I am talking day 1 where we had actual paying members.

These forums and your own offical one are full of people leaving in mass, you don't want to admit that that is fine, but if anyone (I can pacificly know one name , but won't go into harrasment here or trolling) that if he/she gets their hands on any part of STO , STO will undoublty take the same fall. THAT is the true essence of many that beleive that STO can be introuble even before it launches.

The big BUT however is, for those that actually follow the game, we know it has been stated that their are two seperate teams runing the different games which is good. BUT any company has it's employees in most respects able to interact of put their "two cents in" encluding when they are in a spot of managment. This is the conern, this is the worry, CO was a great game , but made hard by the "numbers" and not the content because the hardcore gamers where leveing to quickly.

Personally I LOVED the original CO in beta and day 1 launch, my login in along with others would show this. As soon as that patch took effect I barly log in, I have latly to "test " test the latest and greatest but the game is now "grind fest 101". No thanx.

This in the end is what people worry about among other things, such as how the same engine is used in both games, the same teams are basicly next to each other (in theory) . The point to it all is , usually what happens to one happens to the other and sadly your company will have to prove this otherwise.

While CO and STO are totally two different games, there are many things that make the allot closer and having the same company also being involved makes that even more so. I believe allot of what you and the devs have stated in the past in how this game is different and the teams are different, but it will take time to prove that wrong. No matter what you say here, there will be those that doubt it, because in the end we in the general MMO community have been burned allot and now we are more cautious then ever in beleiving in any MMO games atm.

I beleive STO will be awsome, but I can't say I don't have my doubts because of what happened and still is happening in CO, but then again I beleive what you say and I beleive what the devs say, only time will tell if this remains so.

Originally posted by Chastian

I don't understand the logic, and I couldn't disagree more. =/

"every Star Trek fan wants to be the Captain"

That alone says Cryptic doesn't know a damned thing about Star Trek.

Actually, if you look at Perpetual's customer survey's, the Captain was a position desired by almost 30% of respondents. The next most popular position was engineering.... which was 20%. So yes, Star Trek fans, mmo players, they want to be a captain. They also want to do Engineering.

Guess what? You can be both. You have your chief engineering Bridge Officer, and your captain, and you spend skill points on both, rank them up, outfit them, give them weapons, tools, kits, etc. It satisfies everyone's desires.

Its actually quite brilliant.

Now as to CO. CO is run by Bill Roper. STO is run by Craig Zinkievich. Craig and Bill are not the same people, and in fact have very different development ideologies. Thats part of what happened with the Day 1 patch, is a development ideology. In game development, there is a big debate about how you handle patching and changing content. Do you violently twist the wheel in the opposite direction, or do you turn it gently? Roper seems to feel big violent changes are best, and I disagree with that, as it jostles the players, and they will tend to leave if the changes are too big(like SWG-NGE).

There is also the fact that CO used to be Marvel Universe Online, but, when Cryptic lost that license, they had to scramble to find a replacement. They also had to scramble and replace content they had been working on for over a year, as well as planned content. Plus, at the time, Cryptic was a lot smaller of a development studio, making it a bit lacking in content development.

By no means is this an excuse for some of the content issues in CO, but part of an explanation. It does help explain why some quests feel unfinished, and why things feel so... lackluster. It is kind of fun, I will admit, but not fun enough to make me sub or buy the box.

In contrast, STO has a fairly large team now, and they haven't had to change their IP-base midway through development. They are working on exploration right now, and they will talk about it when they are ready to talk about it. Like I, and others, have said before, we had concerns, and everytime, Cryptic answered them extremely well. Space combat looks fun, and tactical, and it requires way more thought than most RPG battle systems do. Ground combat is coming. Player progression is great, allowing for lots of variety in players. We'll see more, and our concerns will be answered.