Rude people have existed in online games since Neverwinter Nights, they were in EQ, DAoC,AO and so on the only change is the genre itself, to lump an entire gaming populous into the 'suck' catergory is unfair and i take mild offence to that as will others, i am a seasoned vet of many games and i treat people with the respect they deserve....the community doesn't suck, but certain people within it do.

When games like Neverwinter Nights and EQ were new online gaming was for nerds or geeks, i can't begin to tell you how many times i've heard those two words assoicated with online gaming back in the day...then online gaming started becoming more mainstream, more and more people were coming in and now you have what we have now, an oversaturated online market with gamers who at one time called others geeks for playing are now working on their third character themselves.

You run into more rude people because more people are playing online games, it's like that small town person moving to New York...more people, more conflict, more problems...that's life and yes sometime it sucks, it's how you deal with it that matters.

The genre won't fail because it's roots are too firmly dug in but we are going to see a 'thinning-out' on online gaming over the course of this year,  it is my opinion that Sony will start shutting off some online games that simply don't have the population to keep them running and will instead start focusing on two or three games, again just my opinion.

Gameplay is all in the perception of the gamer, to call it 'tedious' and 'unintresting' is your opinion and you're most certanaly entitled to it, i'm certain i have a game here on my shelf that you think is the most boring game ever and vice-versa, it's just a different tastes.

Over-analyzation of the genre has existed since the birth of online gaming, i think it's pretty safe to assume that the higher-up at Sony weren't playing tiddly-winks when EQ was quietly humming away in the background, no...they were making advertizing spots, trying to get more and more people into the game, adding new content to draw in more and bring back vets...it's the nature of the beast and it won't change, gamers do it as well...that too will not change.

Is it good or bad? i can't say.

Online gaming hasn't evolved, it's changed this is true...but there is a difference between change and evolving, by reading many, many post of these forums it suggests that quite a few seeing the genre as de-evolving into a dumbed-down version on what they know...i too believe that it is going downhill because the online gaming world is noe surrounded by this safety-net that makes certain that all gamers are secure no matter what happens, little risk, little reward, little point.

We cannot go back, the days of EQ being fresh and new are over...maybe a developer will try to bring back the gaming of the 90's but i very much doubt it, instead this machine will push on they way it always has.

It's premature to say what Darkfall is going to do one way or the other, there have been online games that were hailed by fans as the "best game ever" only to watch them close up shop, on the other hand there have been online games that have been plagued with "this game will fail" and are still up.

What is fact is that Darkfall had a VERY rough two days that every staff member didn't want to happen all the way down to the janitor and for whatever reason they released way too early, maybe they needed too..that is possible, maybe they thought it was ready...really though the only people that can answer that is the devs.

These problems is like a choice, well-cooked prime rib with mashed potatoes dripping with gravy and a ice cold beer to wash it down, trolls/skeptics are going to jump on it with the ravenous appetite of somebody who hasn't eaten in days, my suggestion for the true Darkfall fans out there is to learn to roll with the punches because if Darkfall is a success then the trolling will subside slowly, and if the game fails you probably won't be posting here anymore which will stop the trolling as well.

I cannot take the OP seriously because the topic isn't a discussion, it's troll-baiting at it's worst and his response to everybody with a different view breaks down to "quiet troll", people here who have given polite (with a touch of abrasive/sarcasm in some) replies that touch on the problem that are going on now is met with the same.

Baiting a subject then proceeding to troll the trollers makes you a troll as well OP, and no you're not fighting some good fight but instead are eager and willing to show exactly how far you're willing to stoop to somebody else's level to prove some type of point.

This was a bad way to start up a new online game in an industry that is saturated with them as it is, this is a fact and that's all that needs to be said.

While i'm not taking any sides in this matter, the problems going on in-game are going to happen, i must admit not being up-to-date on everything that has happened to Darkfall but it seems that they simply moved too fast for whatever reason and found themselves lacking.

problems with syncing, logging in, massive lag issues,disconnection is bound to happen.

very well done, smart and very funny.

Nice post Mr. Hand

First, "hardcore" is one of the three most overused words in gaming, everywhere you look now something is 'hardcore', makes you miss the early days of gaming when you didn't need that word at all. (the other two are troll and fanboi btw) not trying to be insulting or anything but i truly hope that word  falls out of gaming circles eventually...although it'll be replaced by "epic" which is just as bad.

I agree with your thoughts on EQ but not so much on Burning Crusade, while i do believe Blizzard was trying to make it a bit tougher i also believe that Blizzard will always be afraid of grabbing that "utterly difficult" torch that other MMO's seem afraid to touch as well.

Personally i think if online gaming is to become like it was in the past we must go backwards, EQ rules, 2nd edition D&D type of stuff, i don't mind a bit of hand holding in online gaming but when it starts to become the standard thats when things get a bit old.

Off Topic: I see you read Terry Brooks, in case you didn't know, Shannara was made into a fantastic Adventure title by Legend Entertainment (Infocom staff) back in the mid to late 90's (?) just thought i'd mention it in case you haven't played it.

I'm certain this has been said on this discussion already but i will say it as well:

Buyer Beware.

It's prudent to give online games a bit of time before rushing off to a pre-order or to the local gaming store to snatch up a copy and with games like Darkfall that have has some problems and bumps in the road it's better to be extra cautious.

The PC gaming community has been plagued with the "ship now and fix later" mentality that some developers posess in abundance, as consumers we have to take what these developers say about the state of their games with a grain of salt.

I'm not trying to point any fingers or trying to slam Darkfall or it's staff, that's not my style and i have been suckered in myself on the "must have it NOW!" purchase and, like you, have been disappointed...so now i follow this simple rule:

People will buy no matter what, let them...in the meantime sit back, relax and watch..when the time is right and the bugs fixed and the patches start coming...buy.

Shard i don't understand your beef with a game that hasn't been released but you're intitled to hate whatever you wish, since you seem so keen on making perdictions on this product allow me to do the same but first:

1: Cryptic Studios has been around since 2000 and has survived on nothing but online gaming, to call Cryptic a 'nothing/nobody company' is absurd and foolish.

2: Calling it VaorpTrek is just a tad premature at this point.

Now on to the crystal-ball gazing:

Star Trek Online will consist of a small but dedicated fanbase very much like CoH/CoV has done over the years, this is to be expected as Star Trek is still very much deeply entreched in geek culture and is not going to appeal to casual gamers or hardcore online gamers who, by the time this game is released, will be engrossed in a new game or still working on the one they have.

There is no reason why bridge interiors can't be added later on, EvE is adding the Ambulatory system which will give characters avatars when in space stations. not having this hardly made a ripple in the EvE community, people still play it....and Star Trek online will be played as well.

And..done.

There are plenty of good Star Trek games in which you never see the interior of your starship(s) and nobody talked about it then, this game will have pretty much the same basic concept only in a massive online mode and people are up in arms about it now, whatever.

Starfleet Command III is a game in which you do not see the inside of your ship, you can play online against others on the Dynaverse servers which are run by the SCIII community and still being updated reguardless of you not being able to strut around the bridge while three Warbirds are trying to turn your ship (which you can build from scratch) into swiss cheese.

I agree with Zantax, very well put.

The bottom line folks is that not everybody likes the same thing and they're intitled to dislike or even hate it if they choose too, that's the way the industry is,it's been going on back when Atari and Commodore were the big boys on the block and Nintendo was still a sticker/playing card company...it's not going to change,

I'm totally certain that there are people on this earth who cannot stand The Godfather for any number of reasons, too long, to gritty, bad acting, whatever and that's their choice, let them dislike whatever they want and like whatever you want...life moves around alot easier that way.

Don't understand the hate? hell i do, it's the nature of the beast...simple.

Originally posted by Z3R01

Originally posted by TheGrue

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/208-Eve-Online

Nuff said.

You may now begin with the "omfg troll!!!eleventyones" 

 

LOL gimme a break that dude is a comedian (a very funny guy actually).

If you take anything he says about videogames seriously I really don't know what to tell you.

  I do when he talks about EvE

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/208-Eve-Online

Nuff said.

You may now begin with the "omfg troll!!!eleventyones" 

I think it's safe to assume that some EQ2 players, and probably heavy PvP'ers, will at the very least check out Darkfall...if it is what they say it's going to be it sounds like a PvP'ers dream MMO.

Some will stay, some won't.

I don't post here but one thing did catch my eye, not baiting or trolling just asking an honest question, why is Funcom not the issue?

I purchased AoC on release and after a few weeks of playing i found it to not be up to the standards that i am used to in a Funcom game, i have been a long time supporter of Funcom products mostly with AO but with games such as Dreamfall (and if you like adventure games i recommend it).

Maybe it's me and i simply cannot get into AoC, this is very possible, i dislike many titles others enjoy greatly but i believe that Funcom missed out on the 'RPG' factor of AoC, it's massive and it's online but the content, in my opinion, is boring as hell.

I want to dive into my character and be part of this online world, AoC seemed to be the logical venue to finally be able to take a massive story and turn it into this experience one normally wouldn't get unless they're sitting around the table with some friends and a DM who knows how to write in a good, old-fashioned PnP game, this was not the case and instead Funcom falls back on the tried and true "everybody is a hero" and the "go kill 'x' amount of 'y' for a trinket you'll outgrow in one level"

In my opinion Funcom has given the online gaming community a very generic game with little to offer except crisp, shiny graphics wrapped up in repetive gameplay and ho-hum run of the mill questing in a world in which neither should be present, it should be different but it isn't and leaves one wondering why they left whatever game and the friends they made on it.

I think Funcom is very much the issue, but this is only my two cents on the matter.

Originally posted by Starbuck1771

Originally posted by ktanner3

 

 

By the way, comparing SOE to Cryptic only makes you look ignorant. 

i disagree IMO City of Heroes / City of Villains is just as crappy a game as Matrix Online.
 

Sony didn't make Matrix Online, WB/Monolith/Sega did, SoE is largely responsible for Matrix Online still being up and running...but you're right, it's not the best online game out there.

Back on topic:

To be honest i wasn't expecting interiors, i was expecting to be very much like EVE Online in terms of ships.

Originally posted by DuraheLL

I really wonder when you guys think this whole deal with fanboys and haters ever gets old. Seriously, what the hell is some of you here's problems? There is neither a reason to defend OR flame this ... game? Yet, since it's not released, and nobody has spent any cash on it yet! Well some which are stupid and bought pre-orders, but that's another story.

This forum war is starting to bore me out now. But like I said, I'm just amazed at how some of the users here can go on and on and on. And on.

 I don't post here but i'll respond to this, the simple answer id that it'll never get old...not until the game either is released and implodes on itself or is released and is amazing...then it'll die down.

 This type of 'fan vs. critic' has been going on since the days of Atari vs. Commodore, it never changes, the arguments are always the same and in the end all that's left is people who instead of having logical, informed discussions and respecting eachother as fellow gamers will instead get into petty squabbling matches because they don't think the same way.

Severe death penalty in Star Trek Online should be an absolute, but it's more than likely not going to happen.

I can't say what gamers do or do not want in PvP/PvE combat because it's a matter of choice and it's always been a debatable topic but going with Cryptic's online games from the start to present i would say is a pretty good indication that death in Star Trek Online will be rather tame.

It's my assumption that you will lose your ship but will have the option to escape by means of an escape pod or shuttlecraft, kinda like eve, and honestaly the only way somebody gets podded in eve is if they're severly outnumbered or they're slow on the draw.

Even if you do get podded the penalty isn't very severe unless said character is sporting expensive implants, and uusually by this time the player can handle themselves pretty well...mostly.

There are questions abount about how it's going to be in Star Trek, what about the Borg for example or Species 8472? there should be more here than a simple death....in my opinion once your are asslimated you should be able to, for lack of a better word, work for said enemies...in fact it should be the only way.

Well i've been following this game pretty close (sice Perpetual) and i was always under the impression that it'll either play like EVE (behind the ship view with options to move the camera to pretty much any point) or like the older Star Trek games like Armada (rear camera, fixed)

If i had to take a guess i would say that the avatar will be much like EVE as well, your character pick will be displayed but it's mostly your ship until you go down to a planet, in which case you will be able to see your character and your crew and play in probably a turn-based style of combat.

Note that this is all speculation on my end, while information is leaking out bit by bit it's still pretty hard to really tell how they're going to go, but your questions are valid and many are wondering the same.

I was reading through a few posts here as I've been looking forward to this game since Perpetual had it, and the topic seems to keep coming up about everybody being a captain, usually followed closely by "well lots of people would want to be captain" or some such.

 So i figured we would do a little roll call and see how many of us would like to be Captain if we had the choice.

 I for one wouldn't want it, it's Chief Medical Officer for me, reason:

 McCoy got his fair share of alien goodness, granted they sometimes tried to kill him or other nasty things...but it's a small price to pay.

 Being able to string "Dammit, I'm a doctor not a <insert random string of words here> in random sentences.

No matter what the doctors are exposed too, they always survive.

I can say "He's dead Jim" and get away with it.

Nobody is sassy with the Doctor except the Captain

I can whine about going into transporters and nobody minds.

Witty one-liners are included in my /emotes by default.

I can smuggle in illegal hooch and nobody cares.

I get to make fun of Vulcan's anytime i want.

The Captain gives only the doctor the cool nickname.

Nobody ever tells the doctor to "Make it so"

I can get promoted and not worry about all the crap that comes with it.

I agree with the topic poster, Star Trek Online should have older designs as well as newer models, to not have the Consitution/Miranda/Excelsior class would be a crime against the series.

Now for ships, i would go for the Nebula-Class:

Failing that, this baby right here:

The Heart Of Gold.

I'll meet you froods at Milliways, the Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster's are on me!