If you took, "No sorry" as trying to be insulting then i don't know what to tell you, it wasn't meant to be and there was no scarsacm in my post, you see what you want to as i've already stated before.

I think i'll take the opinion of adventure gamers/star trek fans/ and my own over yours, if you think that Judgement Rights and 25TH are crap then you don't know gaming, end of discussion.

Going after somebody's grammar on a forum is the action of the truly desperate, at least we know that much about you now...willing to stoop to any level to insult and redicule, nice.

I'm done with you, you have nothing to say that i want to read and your video game knowledge could fit in a thimble with room to spare.

And you said you got to me? hmmm i didn't make a full page rant trying to counter you...who has the thin skin now?

consider yourself blocked, have a good one.

I apologize, i thought you were insinuating that casual gamers shouldn't be involved in higher-tier aspects of the game, my bad.

Originally posted by dsebutchr

I just hoped it would bother one of you as much as it has you.  You've mentioned it twice so you understood exactly what I meant and it ticked you off.

 

Mission accomplished, regardless.

 No, i wanted you to show proof of people 'making fun' of others, you failed to provide it because it doesn't exist instead you gave the typical "pfft whatever" response that translates to:

"i was wrong but i won't retract my statement because that would be me admitting my mistake"

You accomplished nothing except to prove that you see what isn't there, your inability to admit it, and your trollish nature.

It mattered enough for you to bring it up in your last post.

*shrug* oh well.

Originally posted by dhayes68

   

Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want.  You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?

  You're right, Star Trek should be hardcore, it shouldn't be a game that even the most casual gamer can pick up and play...it should have a complex system that takes weeks to learn fully, it should be built so you have to spend months shipping ore, mining, or doing other fetch and carry missions until they're able to do anything in-game.

Oh, right that's been done...EVE online...Star Trek is not Eve Online.

The lamest thing i've ever heard is a so-called gamer who thinks that other gamers shouldn't be able to participate unless they're 'hardcore' and dedicated, so because a gamer and Star Trek fan who wants to play this game but can only afford to give one day a week shouldn't be able to get into the deeper part of the game because they've haven't earned it?

How elitist can one person get? must be a blast grouping up with you.

Nobody said anything about this game 'catering to the casual gamer' but for everybody to have fun and enjoy themselves, there is a difference, if you can't see it then i don't know what to tell you.

Originally posted by dsebutchr

I can see a lot of you...well all but one of you want a sandbox STO game.  I think one of you, the one your all making fun of, gets it.

I think you should all take a look at what Cryptic has done in the past and then look at what they have said you can do in this new game.  Then remind yourself of what they've done in the past again.

I wont make judgements until the beta.  I think anyone doing so is just wasting their time.  But then mmorpg.com is known for having more trolls than any other two websites combined.

 I don't see anybody 'making fun' of anyone on here, could you point out the example please?

 At this point i'm happy this game is still being worked on after Perpetual, it deserves that much....as for Cryptic's track record in the past,that can be pointed out with many companies, Activision, EA, SoE, Atari, Lucasarts, should we now naysay anything that is brought out by them as well?

I'm willing to simply watch as Cryptic makes this, Cryptic hasn't been around since 1999, they are still a young company and has managed to do a fairly decent job considering the competition they've had over the last nine years.

Originally posted by grimboj

Previous star trek games have been absolute fail because exploration makes for a VERY boring game. Any game they produce that isn't a crew based war simulator will fail drastically.

  Sorry, but no.

 Star Trek games have been in many different areas and most of these games did quite well, we've had adventure games both text-based and graphical, FPS games, tactical games, build-your-own-ship games and yes action/adventure games.

the few that totally invalidates your comment is Star Trek 25Th Anniversary and Judgement Rights which both play out as mini Star Trek episode and are considered to be some of the best titles released in the Star Trek series.

Final Unity was the same, using both combat and adventure elements together,ST: Starfleet Academy i would consider to be more of a Starfleet cadet simulator than a combat sim, although both do exist in-game.

Originally posted by grimboj

Originally posted by jircris

If you actualy read the damned thing you would have seen this.  "CZ: At launch, we are probably only going to have ship interiors available during mission instances, however we hope to add the ability to players to freely walk around their ship and host gatherings in an expansion pack."

 

I'm not going to pay once to play the game then pay a second time to get all the features I wanted originally.

STO's only unique features for MMO veterans were going to be that a party = a ships crew.

I dont like COH because its just a thousand identical instances with no variety or dynamic environments.

 

MMO players > trekkies.

Also a lot of players are both and will not blindly play a game based on its IP.

Since very, very few online games don't have expansions one must wonder what online games you're currently playing.

It would be an expansion, and if they go the route that EvE is going it won't cost you a red cent, saying you'll have to 'pay again' is jumping the gun.

So, let's say for arguments sake you get Star Trek Online and this expansion does come out and you do indeed have to pay, again for arguments sake lets say it carries a fairly standard price of $39.99...along with more planets to explore and more detailed planet enviorments they also have more ship parts, the starship/ship interiors and let us say they add the Breen as well as a playable race, i don't know about you but that sounds like it would be worth the $39.99 to me.

I imagine the fighting to be much like Starfleet Command III personally.

I made a joke thread of "To Captain or not to Captain" and i stated that if i had my choice i would love to be Chief Medical Officer and i stand by that....if i was playing with friends only and never, ever had to LFG.

Being captain to me is just fine if i have no choice, because almost every single Star Trek game ever released besides the FPS and that dreadful Q online card game that laster all of five minutes, you're always the Captain.

As Chief medical Officer on a ship with a crew that knew what it was really doing out there my toon would probably looking out some window or getting hammered in ten-forward until they either:

A: Went on an away mission

B: Got involved in a ship-to-ship skirmish

"Well that's the point of online games dude, you fight and explore" is what i hear as people read this, and they would be right....but what about when that ship you're serving on has a cloaking device and doing nothing but fetch-and-carry missions; unless your a captain or helmsman your going to get bored real quick.

The decision is the right one because it's been proven both online and off to work, everybody want to be something grand and you can't get to much grander than captain, look at what people list off when they say "i don't want to be Captain, i'd rather be..." and you'll see what i mean...Chief medical, Chief Engineer, Head of Security....nobody EVER says "I want to be the guy who cleans out the Waste Reclamation Units"

Originally posted by damian7  

oh yes please facepalm that's quite manly.

since when are any dictionaries current to computer and/or internet items?  please do tell when "lol" was able to be looked up in a dictionary?  how many years after "lol" was being used was it added to said dictionaries?

and if you'd have looked at the wikipedia page, you'd have found a definition which suited you.  i only pasted two of many definitions, as they fit the bill.  and what i pasted is an actual explanation, not just a single line or two.

but whatever, vaporware, failware, whatever it doesn't change that it's one, if not both.

 

shouldn't you be playing this wonderful game that's been spammed all over the internet for the past year?  oh, did you not get into the pay-to-play beta?  i'm sorry if you can't; but it really doesn't change anything.  i guess by your definition that duke nuke'em for ever isn't vaporware either?

 

 

 edit:  joined 01/22/09 eh?  are you a paid damage controller, or just volunteer?

  There's no need to be insulting/scarcastic, i believe that i answered your response without it so i fail to see why i deserve it.

Because i'm new this site that means i'm some paid apologist? i believe my posting history clearly shows that i'm neither for or against Darkfall but am patiently waiting to see the outcome, i've also pointed out how releasing a game in this state with the market being saturated as it is as a 'bad move' in another thread...and you even replied to it, so either you didn't even bother to read it before replying or only see what you want to see.

The term "Vaporware" has been around since the inception of software, naturally there will be many definitions, that doesn't mean they're correct...software cannot be Vaporware if it's been released.

Duke Nukem is Vaporware, i'll explain this step by step using DN:F as the example:

DN:F Was shown at E3 1998, 3D Realms only stated it'll be released "When it's done".

DN:F 1998 was scrapped...Vaporware..the game they are currently working on will not be the same game, brand new engine, improved graphics and different story, this has already been stated by George Broussard.

Just because a new game is being made does not make the old game they were working not Vaporware, it's very simple...they promised a game, they did not deliver...Vaporware, unless you can show me somebody who owns a copy of DN:F released back in 1998/2000+

DN and 3D Realms was a bad example to pick and i know why you did, because my first link cites it as an example, and they're right....the chances of us seeing the new DN:F is marginal at best if you take 3D Realms track record into account.

AV promised as game as well, but because it didn't come out on time that makes it Vaporware to you and others...no sorry that doesn't make it Vaporware because people are currently playing and have purchased this game...not Vaporware, nobody was able to buy DN:F back in '98 and i very much doubt if people will be able to buy DN:F anytime soon if at all.

I hope that puts things in a better light, since it's obvious that we're going to agree to disagree  i'll bow out gracefuly now, you seem to have your mind made up about me and my tactics anyways so i fail to see why this discussion should continue.

Originally posted by damian7

Originally posted by TheGrue

Ok not to de-rail this, but people putting Vaporware in their posts is starting to give me a /facepalm headache so here we go:

This game is not Vaporware, Vaporware is a game or other piece of software that while advertised and hyped  does not come out, this game is sold (getting a copy now or not makes no difference) people bought it, they own it, they play it.....not Vaporware.

 

http://knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Vaporware/

 

"Vaporware is software that is preannounced by a developer, but never emerges as an actual product. The term implies deception; that is, it implies that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility".

While Tasos may be guilty of some of this, the bottom line is that it is out and playable, hence not Vaporware....saying that not getting a copy constitutes this as Vaporware is invalid, that's like saying that Mario 64 was Vaporware simply because people had a hard time getting it during the Nintendo 64 release.

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware

 

 

there's quite a number of definitions for vaporware.  that's fine if you pick one definition which doesn't apply; but don't ignore the other definitions which definitely do apply... learn what the term means and use it correctly.

 

 

 So by your post you believe that the meaning of Vaporware on Wikipedia is correct and the rest wrong? i feel anotner /facepalm headache coming on.

 Using Wikipedia as a source for anything is a mistake friend, it's right about half the time and even that's debatable considering anybody can waltz in and change it to suit their own view.

Vaporware defined by knowledgebrush is valid, if you choose to not accept it as such because it doesn't fall into what you want it too, well that's fine...illogical but fine, i'll give other examples

http://dictionary.infoplease.com/vaporware

va•por•ware

Pronunciation: (v?'pur-wâr"), [key]
—n.
Computer Jargon.a product, esp. software, that is promoted or marketed while it is still in development and that may never be produced.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaporware

Pronunciation: \?v?-p?r-?wer\
Function: noun
Date: 1984
: a computer-related product that has been widely advertised but has not and may never become available
 

http://www.yourdictionary.com/vaporware

a commercial software product that has received much advance promotion but whose ultimate appearance on the market has become doubtful because of continual delays
 

I don't think i need to go on especially when all three examples say the same thing, but by all means keep using wiki as a credible sourse of information and i'll use the one's that actually are a credible source of information.

Ok not to de-rail this, but people putting Vaporware in their posts is starting to give me a /facepalm headache so here we go:

This game is not Vaporware, Vaporware is a game or other piece of software that while advertised and hyped  does not come out, this game is sold (getting a copy now or not makes no difference) people bought it, they own it, they play it.....not Vaporware.

http://knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Vaporware/

"Vaporware is software that is preannounced by a developer, but never emerges as an actual product. The term implies deception; that is, it implies that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility".

While Tasos may be guilty of some of this, the bottom line is that it is out and playable, hence not Vaporware....saying that not getting a copy constitutes this as Vaporware is invalid, that's like saying that Mario 64 was Vaporware simply because people had a hard time getting it during the Nintendo 64 release.

Originally posted by leone2nd

PvP is not a carrot that should be dangled in front of players. it should happen instantly. Also heavily PvE focused MMOs brought all the wrong crowd in the MMO world. They shouldn't been playing MMOs in the first place. Just some random single player and have the irc open.

 Not trying to de-rail the topic, but i disagree with this totally.

PvP can be balanced, the problem is that most developers don't do it...look at EvE for example, even a carebear is PvP at all times but as long as they stay in high-sec they're safe move out of it and it's on.

Not a bad PvP system in my opinion but besides that having different servers for PvP, RP, PvE, and PvP/PvE can work but when you have a larger population on the PvE servers (which is usually the case) why stick around on the rest? so you can beat-up on the same people over and over? no thanks.

PvE brining in the wrong crowd is also false, MMO's became mainstream, they started becoming popular and that draws in a lot of people both good and bad, to lump in every PvE player into the 'wrong crowd' catergory is absurd...i know many PvE only players that are mature, fun to be around and more importantaly know how to enjoy themselves in-game.

I think a real in-depth review of Darkfall after Beta is going to be a long time coming,  don't get me wrong i'm not trying to bash it as i am waiting myself.

Usually i don't deal with Beta reviews, i'm sure that the Beta review is well written and hits on a few points, but a Beta review is like a un-toasted Pop-Tart, it may be good and it might fill you up but it's not really done.

For now i'm sitting back, reading up on what's going on and the problems and fun others are having, i don't see much of an alternative at this point.

Very good post, the Star Trek to Red October switch made be lol irl

Originally posted by Froface

I have a hard time believing the investors are livid right now.  Most probably don't know too much about online games and are not concerned with reading forums.  The investors are probably just happy that the game has "launched", aventurine has the potential to get money, thus they will have a return on their investment.

 They trusted Tasos up to this point so if they call him, and he says "don't worry we'll get it all fixed and we will get more people playing" then they have no reason not to believe him now.  However, in 2-3 (maybe even 6) months if the game does poorly then the investors will be livid at that point.

I'm sorry, but no.

Investors watch what they've invested in very closely, i can't say if they are livid but to say they don't know what they've invested would be wrong or foolish on the side of the investors and i have a hard time buying that, these invrestors know full well the money that is to be made in online gaming....it's the reason they invested in the first place.

i think it's logical to assume that investors aren't to pleased to see a project they invested in stutter at the starting gate regardless of how big or small the company is or how much or little they've invested.

No.

I came from an online game that despite our faithfulness and pleading was still shut down, i sometimes miss those folks and i would never wish the same thing on a game players want.

A company is only as good as the product it produces, if the product is hampered in some way or is difficult to obtain customers begin to look toward other companies who produce a similar product.

I could probably design and create a extremely comfortable footstool, but if i have problems with billing, more customers than actual product, and more than a few explanations that my customers see as excuses then my company will lose support and former customers will warn potiental consumers away from my business.

This is how it works.

I have no problems supporting an indie company, which i believe is where you were going with your post OP, but as i've said in other posts the problems this game is currently having isn't good especially in a saturated market the online gaming world is, they needed their A-game on this from the word 'go' and it wasn't there....they may recover, they may not but my one voice won't make much of a difference, ask anybody who supported D&L from the start or the one dragged out of Earth and Beyond or Tabula Rasa.

Just because a company is small doesn't mean they're immune to mistakes nor should they not be held accountable for those mistakes.

It's not an issue, but some want to make it into one without thinking about the long term aspect of it.

I don't miss the waiting for a group to get done with some boss before it's my turn, and i sure don't miss that group that can't handle it, start running away while pulling everything that's around them while making a bee-line to the exit...which is usually where your group is, then having to wait until the dungeon dies down and so on.

Then we get to the spawn campers, they're always fun...sometimes if your very lucky they'll move aside to let you grab the monster without any fuss, but mostly it's just a new hassle with a group, a hassle i don't miss.

Then we have bots, i know they still exist reguardless, but i would much rather have a fishing or mining bot than a group of bots waiting for my quest monster to spawn, this still happens but at least with instancing we get some protection.

Then we get the people who talk about how adding instancing make the game less realistic, to that i say when they can tell me how it makes it less realistic when i'm running around as a five foot human with a ten foot boradsword cutting a bloody swath through a group of garter snakes because 'townsfolk A' needs skins then i'll be more than happy to listen to them.

Originally posted by winter  

 Point being He's suggesting others should do it when he's not willing to do it hemself.

 This.

OP this is a gaming forum and it's really no different than any other, it's a place where one can and will discuss, give opinion and flat out rant and rave about the small things to major problems and your topic will not convince the majority to your way of thinking, this type of "hey! shut up about the subject" is just as old as trolling and i'm sorry to say accomplishes  just as much to discussions and they do.

If you dislike the way people are talking about Darkfall, the trolls, the baiting, the multiple  posting then do something beyond preaching...or find a forum in which these issues that annoy you so much don't exist....good luck with that.

If you have a problem with a thread, report it....if you have a problem with trolling then report them, just like somebody did to you and your title topic, i remember your title well, it was "shut the fuck up and wait", the new title isn't much better because it's not a suggestion, it's a demand....you want people to do as you say, the short answer to that being "when hell freezes over"you are in no position to demand anything from anyone here, sir.

Good luck with your crusade, meanwhile the threads will continue, the trolls will continue trolling, and this thread will be buried under them..lost in forum limbo....it's time for you to learn how to ignore it and move on, the population won't and shouldn't change over because you have a bug up your butt about the way things are done.