| 290 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/24/12 1:48:49 PM
I think the first post about it was here. IIRC there was a follow up via the patch notes after this where the phantom/non-winner name spamming was "fixed". It would be very simple to spam fake names. All they need is some code to generate random names to flash across the screen as winners. Follow all the threads about this. The ship win spam was so frequent, it equated to thousands upon thousands of "winners" per week. If this were really true, every player would have one by now. |
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/23/12 8:08:39 AM
Originally posted by lizardbones Remember, Cryptic did get caught "inflating" the drop rate via blasting account names as "winners" across the screen that were no longer playing the game, did not exist or never won a ship. Of course they are mucking with numbers. |
|
Originally posted by Cacaphony STOked has been less and less in la la land since they shed Jeremy's massive girth. I do not fault Chris for trying to remain positive. He may not focus on negativity as much as others do, but he does get the point across. Players are fed up with the state of the game, lack of content, excuses, lockboxes, the list goes on.
More and more I am inclined to side with the folks who have said PWE is putting STO in stasis and just milk the IP for what they can. |
|
Originally posted by Kiljaedenas Sorry. It should be correct now. |
|
|
Link to STOked 124 "Perfect World Disappoints" Chris and the folks over at STOked hit the nail on the head IMO with regard to the state of STO. Great feedback in this episode, although I would not lay all the blame on PWE here. As has been said a few times, the only constant in STO's problems is Cryptic Studios. I found this blurb from Chris most telling in the comments;
In other words, do not be getting your hopes up about a bright future for STO. Edit: |
|
Originally posted by Torvaldr Lockboxes in STO have no guarantee on anything, such as the rare or desirable card. A gold lockbox could yield a common battery. |
|
Originally posted by Darth_Osor Cryptic/PWE will claim that "technically" you do not have to pay real money. A player can grind dilithium in STO to convert to C-Store points to buy keys OR single keys can be purchased on the exchange for EC. The amount of time needed to do all this grinding is overly prohibitive of course, so players plunk down the real cash instead for the instant gratification. |
|
Originally posted by udon I wonder if companies would be allowed to keep the T ESRB rating if these are ruled to be gambling? |
|
Gah, sorry. Bad editing on my part. I meant to include this quote from the article there.
Sorry for that. |
|
|
Original article on Massively.
|
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/18/12 3:36:46 PM
Originally posted by lizardbones
|
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/18/12 1:24:08 PM
Originally posted by Tyrranosaur LOL! If yes, do I win a prize?
I would agree Cryptic has gotten (much) worse since the purchase by PWE. IMO Cryptic went downhill when NC Soft bought out their half of the City of Heroes IP. The real talented folk Cryptic had at the time (wisely) left to form what is today Paragon Studios. Cryptic has been a joke ever since.
|
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/18/12 9:52:39 AM
Originally posted by eyeswideopen This cracked me up! LOL! |
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/18/12 9:01:14 AM
Originally posted by apocoluster If my memory is right, Prime Minister Chamberlain said something similar about Germany invading Poland in 1933. "It was only a "little" invasion... "
Conjecture aside, complacency over the "little" things is what can lead to the whole MMO market getting polluted with junk like these lockboxes. Just my 2 cents. |
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/18/12 8:56:24 AM
Originally posted by lizardbones It is possible that the EU law would apply here as well. Cryptic would have to block access to any country in the European Union, which I would imagine is a significant chunk of income for them. Is that worth it?
Cryptic knew full well what they were doing with the lockboxes. They are a scam. |
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/17/12 8:33:05 AM
Originally posted by apocoluster Not at all. Read the linked articles as well as the various other threads regarding the topic of Lockboxes. |
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/17/12 8:24:23 AM
You can buy keys in the C-Store yes. You can also buy some on the in-game exchange.
I will try to find the posts/threads about it again (although I believe they have since been removed) where it was proven that the on-screen announcements when someone opened a box and received a ship were naming players that never won a ship. In some cases, the accounts were for people who no longer played the game.
These lockboxes are a scam, plain and simple. |
|
|
Cryptic unconcerned with losing global playability for the sake of lock boxes
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/17/12 7:57:10 AM
Thread on the STO forums is here.
|
|
|
Different Approach to make money for PWE/CS
General Discussion « Star Trek Online 5/14/12 7:38:06 AM
Originally posted by ShadowMajere I understand it completely. It is a much easier and faster cash grab than investing the time and effort into creating new factions for the game so you could actually play a Ferengi Trader or Uridian or whatever. |
|
Originally posted by AG-Vuk I agree completely. |
|