PVP:Yes | Distribution:Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Subscription
Desktop Client | System Req:
Star Trek Online Previews: Preview, Part Two
In part two of a three part preview of Star Trek Online, Dana Massey discusses key gameplay elements including the game's Skill System, Character Progression and Bridge Officers.
By Dana Massey on December 28, 2009
In part one of my three part hands-on preview I covered missions, combat and a host of core features in Star Trek Online. However, I also made one mistake, and I'd like to get that corrected up front. It turns out that contrary to my complaints there is in fact auto-attack in Star Trek Online, which should definitely reduce the strain on people's digits and make the game much easier to control. To activate auto-fire of key skills, such as the primary weapon attack on away missions or phasers in space, one simply holds control and clicks the button. So, I offer mea culpa to Cryptic and all those who read part one.
With that out of the way, let's dive into part two of this preview. Today, I'll cover the skill system, character progression, ship customization and bridge officers, grouping/social systems, PvP and items.
Skills System
Star Trek Online uses a hybrid skill/experience system. This is not Ultima Online where using an action improves it, but it is not the World of Warcraft model either. When you kill opponents or complete missions, you gain three pools of points:
)
- Character skill: These points can be used on your character to improve their various skills.
- Bridge Officer Skill Points: These points are in a common pool to improve the skills of any of your bridge officers.
- Starfleet Merit: Merit is used to requisition new bridge officers, promote them to new ranks or requisition new starships.
Unlike an experience based game, you get these points throughout the level. Thus, if you accumulate enough character or bridge officer skill points, you can upgrade your skill of choice immediately. There are no trainers, nowhere you need to go, and no need to wait "to level up," although when you do finally "ding" you get some bonuses.
This system, while very liberating, is at its weakest when it comes to effectively communicating what you should be doing. I'll admit flat out to being entirely lost at times. There is just a list of skills with descriptions and sometimes it's very hard to tell what specifically they do. This is largely a UI issue, which I'll address later, but while I like the system once I got my head around it, they need to do a better job of communicating these things to the player. Frankly, it can be very overwhelming.
The problem is that all of your Lieutenant skills are available from day one and some of them can, at a glance, seem quite similar. With my tactical character for example, one skill is "Tactical Team Lead" and another is "Assault Training." The former improves the performance of your Tactical Bridge Officers, while the latter improves my own performance. It sounds obvious, but it took me a small bank of nearly wasted skill points before I finally figured out the difference.
The early skills also felt a bit hollow since there was no "new toy" phenomenon that normally applies to MMOs. Sure, it's great to have a statistical modifier to phasers that make them stronger, but the game is quite stingy on active abilities. There are some, for example my tactical officer has evasive maneuvers in space (temp buff to speed, turning and defence) and an accuracy self-buff on away missions. However, you do not have a lot of them. On away missions, abilities are tied to the kit you use and in space they tend to come from bridge officers. I'd love to see them be a bit more liberal with the Captain abilities in both areas.
At each rank (10 levels basically) you unlock a new fleet of abilities. Each ability is maxed by investing enough points into it and once maximized there are more abilities that build off of it. This is a tree system. The beauty of this system is, as their website tells us, the ability to continue progressing long after you've "maxed out" your rank. You can continue to go back and work on abilities you skipped the first time over.
The Bridge Officers are much simpler. They have two abilities per rank, one for space and one for avatar form. Your basic Lieutenant can have four officers, which means everyone comes on away missions. This allows you to get one for each space slot and one extra of your choice. I'd like a bit more diversity at the early levels, since I get the distinct impression people will generally stick to their core few and use others to "train" them (you can "consume" a Bridge Officer if you're at the cap by swapping one of their skills out for one skill from an active officer). I was looking forward to having an "away team," and at first took some officers that were great in space, but not what I wanted on the ground. I ended up either discharging them or replacing most of their skills with other officers, which likely wasn't the most efficient means of doing that.
)
Generally, it's a very solid skill system that should create a lot of diversity, but the presentation of it really needs a lot of work. I don't like the sheer quantity of abilities from day one, nor the lack of feedback. It is also sometimes tough to tell when they're talking about space abilities and when they're talking about avatar abilities. This is nicely delineated with Bridge Officers, but not so much for players.
Character Progression
The experience curve for players is one of the hardest things for a company to tune and likely one of the major focuses of Star Trek Online's Beta, so I hesitate to go into too much detail on it as I am sure plenty will change between today and February 2nd, 2010.
The first thing I noticed is that the very structure of the system makes "levels" feel less important and as such you don't really seem to notice. Most experience-driven MMOs have a kind of emotional peak and valley to them. You grind, grind, grind and then get a reward. As STO doles out bridge and character skill points with each and every kill and mission, you're constantly gaining nuggets. It makes the actual ding a far less important experience. Half the time I had no idea what "level" I was and I don't mean that in a bad way.
I hate reading this, for the simple fact that you are making me want to play a Star Trek game. In all Seriousness this is a great insight into STO. Thanks again
So I do not mind the level progression to be somewhat slow. I am sure it is slow for so many because it is still so new and no tested and tested again methods of leveling up the fastest.
Also it seemed to have peaked me interest that PvP is currently the best way to progress through levels. Not sure if this is the best idea since this could be exploited with shared kills all day long.. among other things, but having yet to play the game that could not be the case... still PvP should be a strong point in STO.
Possibly the PvP "Neutral Zone" has bonus EXP in that area. Which would be great more so than leveling by playing matches every 15 minutes on a 5v5 level arena BS or whatever :-p (Ya I hate Arenas being too important)
I heard we new crew members as we progress as well. Then you can merge them so that could help with the male/female ratio. I Just hope I dont end up with the USS Sausage Fest or some sort with all males.
During regular gameplay in space, how many other player characters have you seen on your screen at one time? Game sounds great except I worry that the MMO aspect is not there.
Also, the items you are finding. How do they look? Are they all set stats, or do we have prefix/subfix type names with different qualities(i.e. random loot).
I think I can handle the slower progression as I work and won't have alot of time to play. Cryptic will be getting alot of monies from me so I can see max level. The more I read the more I want to play STO. Can't wait to get into open beta.
Me too. At this point I'm just ready to try it out myself.
I'm actually thrilled that progression is not fast paced. One thing I missed from the days of yore (ala EQ1) is that going up took time, it took effort, and there wasn't this insane rush to level just to get to where the 'fun' is ala WoW (Raiding/pvp). This slower progression to me is a GREAT thing, it means I'll be enjoying the game a long time, each alt means something more than it does on other grind fest games.
I like this a lot. So far I am really glad I've picked up a pre-order of the collectors edition :) Can't wait for open beta so I can play through the various types of characters to get a feel for each to make a final decision on what my federation 'main' will be, even if I primarily am going to play Klingon.
Me too. At this point I'm just ready to try it out myself.
Yeah, it'll be nice to cool things down and get away from the rush to get to level 80/end game. I wonder tho what happens when everyone is a lvl 10 Admiral? Can one get a demotion to captain like Kirk kept doing in the movies?
The rank of 'Admiral' is going to change after launch as they work out a new rank system for it so it makes more sense for high ranking people to be out there and not three hundred admirals making up a fleet. That's the rumor anyways.
Knowing Cryptic I expect there will be a LOT of content and suchlike added after launch. They're pretty good at keeping the game organically evolving, even if sometimes Emmert doesn't really understand what he should be doing, the content itself is usually good.
Very nice reads on these articles.. :) I was actually leaning toward not playing when I saw there would be no PC ship crews but I may give it a shot after all.. Its hard for a semi hard core Trek fan not to and it seems that the game should be entertaining.. :) As for the slow leveling.. I am compleatly OK with that.. I am so sick of hearing "End Game Content" I could puke. I want a game with some longevity and some investment now.. Hopefully this will attract more like minded people on that front.
INCOMING POSITIVE COMMENTS:
I like the gradual point rewards, rather than a big boost at ranking up. It ecourages playing 'just a little longer' to get that mini-ding. If someone wants a big rank up reward, they can just save their skill points until ranking up (assuming skill points can be saved and don't have to be spent immediately). I know, that in WoW, I would often delay making talent point allocations while in the field, as I preferred to to give the matter reasonable consideration. Often times, I would have 2 or 3 talent points to spend when I next decided to upgrade my character.
As for special abilities - well this is a sci-fi game. I wouldn't really want to see a lot of 'magic spells' given to crew members.
As long as there is a good variety in gameplay options at lower levels, I am fine with a slower leveling pace.
I hope there is some system in place to allow players of varying ranks to play together. A 'slow' leveling system tends to divide hardcore and casual players more than usual. This is one of the more serious issues with MMORPGs in general - being split from friends who level at different rates.
rather nice read. I like how they are doing the lvls. With you getting points as you go along instead of havign to wait to lvl it should give a constant lvl of accomplishment instead of havign to wait for a ding to see an improvement in your character. Also the fact you do not have to see trainers is nice. Rather thought it was odd that after swinging a sword hundreds of times till you lvl then havign to see a trainer who would say yes you have swung this sword hundreds of times so now you know how to swing it. :) Remembering the days in EQ when it came out and people were more interested in enjoying the game as they went instead of wanting to rush to max lvl to raid I am hoping this game brings this back
Lookign froward to hearing about pvp and klingons
This is one thing I cannot help much with. Part three has some limited PvP impressions, but my article (which was supposed to be one part originally) was already too long and that would have required an article onto itself... So we made it one. Jon will be following up with a more complete PvP and Klingon preview shortly after part three. Dec 31 is my last day (nothing bad, just a new opportunity... a post on that should appear this week), or I'd have made this a four parter.
Thanks for the information. It was a good read and gave me a bit more insight as to how the game functions. I just have one comment relating to your following quote:
"The experience curve for players is one of the hardest things for a company to tune and likely one of the major focuses of Star Trek Online's Beta, so I hesitate to go into too much detail on it as I am sure plenty will change between today and February 2nd, 2010."
Why, why, why do developers wait until the last month to tweak stuff like this? I don't pretend to know the ins and out of game design, but it seems like the MMOs coming out in the recent past years always wait until the last darn minute to work on this and other major gameplay factors. I mean it's been in development for how long, and a month before release they decide "hey, maybe we should look at this experience thing"? Didn't they learn anything from their Champions Online disaster?
To be honest, because of this an other things that i have read, alarm bells are already ringing in my mind because I see signs of another product released way to friggin early.
Dana, this is one article you did a fine job with. In fact, I can imagine myself thinking the same things about bridge crew and have even suggested the idea of crew-based stories in one or two forums as well. As I understand it, existing missions use your bridge crew as mouthpeices to advance the story so why not bring stories to the player based on who the character is. As you suggested, using race or class but perhaps even individual skills. Say there's a chance to get a mission based on Diplomacy but only if you have an NPC with Diplomacy skill.
Building out from that could really propel the game in interesting, personalized, directions. But ones that could be used by many players who have characters with the same traits. However each collection of traits, leading to specialized adventures, would flesh out that character so much more in your imagination.
I thought it was very astute you pointed out that you didn't miss the overly detailed approach to NPCs as in Dragon Age. Frankly, it would have been impractical in the first place. And though I very much loved DA and the NPCs in it, I agree that they do kind of suck the oxygen out of the room. There's little space to imagine them in any way other than they are. STO's bridge officers sound like they do give a player that imaginative space he needs to take a little narrative ownership of the characters.
Thanks Dana, it's nice to get information from someone who is actually playing from an unbiased perspective. It fixes what little doubts i had about the game.
This is one thing I cannot help much with. Part three has some limited PvP impressions, but my article (which was supposed to be one part originally) was already too long and that would have required an article onto itself... So we made it one. Jon will be following up with a more complete PvP and Klingon preview shortly after part three. Dec 31 is my last day (nothing bad, just a new opportunity... a post on that should appear this week), or I'd have made this a four parter.
ah that is our lost. Wish you well with your future
We will miss you Dana.
Sounds like needs a training room like CoH or Champs to test skills
I totally agree with you and was thinking the exact same thing. I figured maybe there is something about this process I just don't understand, but when I see a couple of games released with good UI, descriptions of abilities, etc...I wonder why this needs to still be fixed in the last month. I am still on the fence about getting this either as a preorder to try beta or even at launch. I get a sense from a couple of previews that between this arcticle, another article I read, and the ground combat...that maybe it is being released a few months premature. I am still waiting to hear what makes this an awesome PVE MMO as oppossed to a single player PVE game for those that don't want to focus on PVP. Even when I feel like playing solo, I like seeing others around, doing emotes at them, and sometimes what they are doing helps me complete something. Knowing me, I will probably try the beta anyway lol.
Indeed. Playing the game at level 1 should be fun enough to keep you playing. Instead, many MMOs have just given up on making their game fun and instead focused on getting you to chase an illusory carrot to keep you playing.
Good to hear Cryptic has that part right. Now if they get rid of microtransactions or make a server for ppl who don't want them, I'll be a much happier camper.
Another fine read, I really like the personal opinions too, they are never over baring to me, or intrusive. You seem to hit things on the nose very well.
I love the Idea of slower progression of rank, but there will always be those looking to power level, just looking for end game, (which I personally hate end game crap)
Look forword to your next part!! =-]
Good article. It's definitely helping to keep my interest at a healthy level.
With respect to the leveling up via PvE being slower or less efficient than the PvP, I'd have to hope in a way that they did not adjust the PvP portion down. Granted, I'd love for all things being equal rates but the Klingons are at a decided disadvantage when it comes to PvE content, especially the episodic content that the Federation side has in abundance.
Now, if Cryptic, in my opinion and that of many others looking at this title, does the right thing and postpones the game a few months and busts their tails getting in Klingon Episodic content and then releasing the game they'd have a far more "well-rounded" game and making such xp adjustments would certainly be in line of fair.
So you can make your ship look anyway you want, colored anyway you want or decalled up the wazoo.
Then why not create a completely original game, with fully customizable ships and avatars that players can make look anyway they want, with gameplay unhindered by an existing IP? Then you wouldn't have to put up with people- such as myself- who drop in periodically and point out the obvious - THIS IS NOT STAR TREK.
Just seems simpler, with so much less noise.
I don't believe this statement is accurate. There are boundaries for sure. Even in the interviews the devs state that players will be able to look at a ship at a glance and tell what class it is. That says to me right there that you can't make it look anyway you want. If it were true than I'd make a Klingon Battlecruiser look like a Bird of Prey.
Dana did not say you could paint it any clor you wanted just that there are color varations which all look metal to use. The "decales" are limited to what fits ie Feds have Fed or Vulcan markings as an example which from what i can tell from the article are still limited to original placement. The ships can be modifed to make them somewhat unigue but still be recognised by class which fits well. Look at today and navies aroudn the world. An Italian DD might be made and built and classified as the same model the U.S, Navy has but it still might have some variations so it is not an exact copy. The same goes for planes. The Brits/germans/italians all design and build one type of fighter but each has their own variation on the basic design
This has been my main objection to the game all along.
The ONLY reason they took the Trek IP was to bait Trek fans into buying the game - not knowing what it really is.
It's nothing new - games and movies have been doing this for a long time. That still doesn't make it rgiht.
IP bait and switch. Pure and simple.
Indeed. Playing the game at level 1 should be fun enough to keep you playing. Instead, many MMOs have just given up on making their game fun and instead focused on getting you to chase an illusory carrot to keep you playing.
Good to hear Cryptic has that part right. Now if they get rid of microtransactions or make a server for ppl who don't want them, I'll be a much happier camper.
One server for the entire game - so no servers with variant rules.
Thanks for a nice read, :) your previews are really getting me stoked up to play this game !
Because the content isn't in place until the last month to actually test it.
No, your making assumptions. A Federation vessel looks like a Federation vessel, regardless of how you customize it.
This has been my main objection to the game all along.
The ONLY reason they took the Trek IP was to bait Trek fans into buying the game - not knowing what it really is.
It's nothing new - games and movies have been doing this for a long time. That still doesn't make it rgiht.
IP bait and switch. Pure and simple.
OK Doubter you just accused Cryptic of a federal crime. Please back that up.
It's a bait and switch alright just not in the fraud sense you attribute to it Wes. Doubter is absolutely right in my opinion. Everything released about the game screams "star trek skinned garbage (Champions Online)."
Accusing someone or a company of a crime is not an opinion. If you actually believe this is a crime please report them. Keep in mind filling a false report is a crime.
3 months tops.....then typical MMO fail. The game seems more and more like a RPG with a subscription fee.
It all sounds incredibly simplistic, there doesnt appear to be the depth I would have expected with many many things 'in-complete'
Of course its exciting to try a new mmo, the new visuals, the sounds... But no MMO recently has been able to keep people interested long after the first month.
The space combat sounds hideously boring and dull as does the planet side avatar stuff, we know startrek is more than just combat! .. fine, but the depth of choices? "kill or Scan" ? cmon.. sounds pathetic.
While this article is well presented and informative, I think the Auther is trying very hard to avoid being negative.
It all sounds exactly the way CO was a month before release. I wish it the best but ive learned my lesson from about 5 new mmo's in the past few years and wont be buying this at release. I will be concentrating on other MMO's that have expanded and improved, I wont be giveing my money away just to act as a tester anymore.
These have been some of the most informative previews I've ever read about a game - a good deal more detail than you see in most.
The game sounds very interesting, to say the least. Between the main character, bridge officers, kits, and ships, it appears that there will be a lot of variety and depth in building your overall "character". The continuous advancement model of the game, instead of more granular level-only based advancement, sounds great.
I also have no problem with slower advancement, as long as the "journey" is fun throughout.
Great write-up!
Amazing reviews. Definitely looking forward to part 3. It would seem that STO will be a totally different gaming experience than what I'm used to. (And I've played a majority of the mainstream MMO's out there.)
There is so much of the wow-clone fantasy garbage out there doing the same thing with regards to leveling and action. I finally get to enjoy a true space & planet based scifi gameplay that includes much of the Star Trek experience. I get to experience a different type of leveling. I get to experience my very own "npc team". I get to customize my ships and characters using proven customization tools (based off of other Cryptic games). I get to explore new star systems, and using the "genesis creator", I might never run out of areas to explore!
The only thing I'm wondering about now is if "guilds" will be able to own a floating starbase? Perhaps not at launch, but it would almost be silly to not have them at some point. And of course I would definitely expect the ability to walk around the player-starbase if such an object existed.
Prepare to be disappointed.
Very nice preview articles. Well done. The slow progression in level but skill points rewarded almost constantly is what Fallen Earth has, and I had exactly the same reaction - I stopped thinking about leveling and found myself immersed in the game world. This, plus the variation between being on away missions and captaining a ship, has definitely piqued my interest.
I have been really enjoying these preview articles. Every thing I read just makes me want to play this game even more. After reading Woods articles on STO i just had to go out and preorder the STO Collectors Edition.
Prepare to be disappointed.
I prefer to be neutral on the matter. I'm sure the genesis hype isn't all I hope it to be, but at least it's a huge step in the right direction.
That said, why should I "prepare to be disappointed"? Surely, you don't have any knowledge whatsoever as to why we should be disappointed about the genesis creator. You're just a puny human subscriber like the rest of us...
Show me some facts to the contrary and then I may consider your words.
Because the content isn't in place until the last month to actually test it.
I don't completely agree with your one sentence answer. Several of the areas of concern that were pointed out not only in the preview, but other article as well are the type of things that have been addressed in other games well more then 1 month in advance of release. In the closed beta of Lord of the Rings Online and WOW, I don't recall not having any idea what the descriptions of skills were when choosing a skill or assigning points. The descriptions had to be tweaked, but not completely missing. Certain things should not be missing/incomplete 1 month in advance of release.
This 2nd part preview really got to the meat and bones. It clarified a lot about bridge officers. Thx, can't wait for the game!! Nice job Cryptic.
I am looking forward to the game, I go in with no expectations what so ever. Not a huge trekky, enjoyed TNG, some DS9, some Voyager, and actually liked Enterprise. Liked most of the movies, loved the new movie. But I cant really tell you much about the lore, and honestly dont care.
Yet still see so many whiners, funny how the haters sound like fanbois, just change a couple of words, but both sides spew the same crap.
Dana wrote: Should players also be able to group inside a single ship? Some argue vehemently yes, and that's their opinion, but in my personal experience I never missed it.
Yeah, I remember back in 2003 when I never missed having a cell phone either. Oh, and back in the 1990s, I never missed having a laptop computer. And when I was 5 years old, I never missed having a car.
Point being, how can you even make such a statement? It has no logical basis since you have nothing to compare your experience to.
On top of that, yet again, a MMORPG staff writer resorts to a strawman arguement to dismiss player crews by invoking the "minutia rationale".
I'm finding it very hard to get excited about this game. Because imo Champions was such a huge disapointment, yes I was cought up in all the hype over how much better then CoX it was going to be. Then it was released and not nearly even a fraction close to what I thought it was gonna be based on the reviews, previews, and forum chats. Then I played Beta and total disapointment. Then I waited and played the trial they now offer and nothing has changed, the graphics are still very laggy and look as horrable as when they were still in beta. The whole game is nothing but a bunch of instances. And just like CoX the game world is so small and repetitave that it starts to feel like the cyber version of cabin fever. Any way what im trying to say is that I dont have much confidence in Cryptic studios anymore. Dont get me wrong they are not as horrible as the game killers SOE. I'm just saying that im not going to spend money on STO until I at least play Beta or a demo. Im not even going to throw down money on ToR till I can play it first. I even played Aion and want to play more but it's not worth more then $20 to shell out for a boxed copy plus a monthly sub. In fact I havnt played an MMO good enough to spend more the $20 dollars for the game client.
Soooo! The pink skin doesn't like Andorians eh?!
Outside of that a good well rounded review.
Thanks Dana for the reviews, both pt 1 and 2 were good read.
One thing I did not see though was crafting, I believe there is none in STO? Can anyone please confirm by pointing to the section of the reviews that I missed, or maybe to some other info?
Even though I love crafting in MMO's, I think I'd be ok with the lack of it in STO, would like to be sure though..
Cheers.
There is crafting in the game, though it's not exactly conventional. There's a pretty informative article at TTH here:
http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/77956
I'm gonna hope you are not an native English speaker, because the phrase "bait and switch" is an expression and not necessarily indicative of criminal activity.
If you are a native English speaker, ffs, what the hell are you smoking?
As more I read in these articles, yet part2, more interested I´m in playing STO.
Good articles that present an interesting game. While its a bit diferent in the progression aspect from other games it suits me perfectly as a Star trek ambient. The ideas of rank in place of directly level is a great idea. Really inspirated in my opinion. And the 3 kinds of exp sounds appealing good. Just wanting to be on feb 2 nd.
Quote: The crafting is quite unique, going where no MMOG has gone before.
Hehe we'll see, looks promising even if it seems a bit lightweight.
Thanks for the info Rohn.
I'm gonna hope you are not an native English speaker, because the phrase "bait and switch" is an expression and not necessarily indicative of criminal activity.
If you are a native English speaker, ffs, what the hell are you smoking?
Google that and then come back.
Just to finnish the discussion. I take no part, but think this is a forum for something else than gramma and lexic lessons. And I´m not a english native speaker.... just forwand to don´t be acussed of anything.
Main Entry: bait and switch
Function: noun
Date: 1967
1 : a sales tactic in which a customer is attracted by the advertisement of a low-priced item but is then encouraged to buy a higher-priced one
2 : the ploy of offering a person something desirable to gain favor (as political support) then thwarting expectations with something less desirable
Not looking forward to this game in general.... but I'll say, I like the concept of what they are doing with advancement and the skill based progression system. I'll give them good marks for that....even if I think some of the other decisions they've made are horrible.
That line is about me never feeling compelled to share my ship with anyone. I didn't think there was so much to do that there would be any added value in it.
Anyway, as hard as this is to believe, some people just don't agree with you. You're entitled to your opinion on player crews, it's a perfectly valid opinion, but not agreeing with you is just as valid of an opinion.
And last time this debate came up, I offered people the chance to write a response article that we'd publish on the website. A fully reasoned editorial on the argument for player crews.
Naturally, no one so much as bothered to email me on the subject. It's one thing to whine on a forum and call us names, but so far I've yet to see one person come up with a well reasoned editorial that explains how this would realistically work and why it would be fun to more than just a few hardcore Trek fans. I even offered to pay for the article. No takers, no surprise.
Unfortunately, real life has intruded to the point where I no longer have the will to devote to such a project.
Sorry folks.
Unfortunately, real life has intruded to the point where I no longer have the will to devote to such a project.
Sorry folks.
Color me shocked.
Color me shocked.
I'd do it but the game's a lost cause and no one would be swayed by the article anyway. Exercise in futility and all that...
Hmmm nice review...but i supose he FORGOT to cover PvP like he wanted to...lolz!
ops!
Maybe there will be part 3?
Excellent article Dana. Very informative. I now know some items I will petition hard for when I get into Open Beta. I would ask this community to get involved if they get into Open Beta as well. Dana has some key points of areas that need some improvement, we need to reinforce those changes and/or improvements already stated by Dana in the article as well as whatever else we wee as issues. Petition, petition, petition. As a long time Beta guy, I see this as unbelievably important for STO so that the IP is as well represented as it can be. I cannot wait for Open Beta and doing my due dilligence as a player and tester to bringing about the improvements that Dana has already pointed out because they are good and valid observations. Come on January!!
Ok, fool me once shame on me, fool me twice shame on you. They have done it AGAIN, and this time there is no excuse Cryptic could not know it better, so I must assume they do it on evil purpose. What I am talking about?
Quote:
"There is just a list of skills with descriptions and sometimes it's very hard to tell what specifically they do. This is largely a UI issue, which I'll address later, but while I like the system once I got my head around it, they need to do a better job of communicating these things to the player. Frankly, it can be very overwhelming.
The problem is that all of your Lieutenant skills are available from day one and some of them can, at a glance, seem quite similar. With my tactical character for example, one skill is "Tactical Team Lead" and another is "Assault Training." The former improves the performance of your Tactical Bridge Officers, while the latter improves my own performance. It sounds obvious, but it took me a small bank of nearly wasted skill points before I finally figured out the difference."
THIS is exactly what they did in Champions, skill texts which are MF riddels! And why? People complained often enough about bad skill descriptions in CO, so if Cryptic does the same in STO it has ONE REASON ALONE: to get our money for expensive respecs in their RMT. THATS WHY.
Damn you, Cryptic, DAMN YOU!
One Simple Reason.
No one would buy it.
People are going to buy this for one reason and one reason only it says "Star Trek" on the box.
Personally I'll pass on this rushed to market attempt at a quick buck. I'm waiting for Star Wars The Old Republic.
I believe the item states quite clearly what happened to the PvP section, as does a post in this thread.
Bottom line: Limited impressions in part 3. However, it was too big of a subject for one article, so a full article on PvP is to follow separately from these previews.
Of course, if you'd prefer to think it's a conspiracy of some kind, please feel free.
Anyway, as hard as this is to believe, some people just don't agree with you. You're entitled to your opinion on player crews, it's a perfectly valid opinion, but not agreeing with you is just as valid of an opinion...
...Naturally, no one so much as bothered to email me on the subject. It's one thing to whine on a forum and call us names, but so far I've yet to see one person come up with a well reasoned editorial that explains how this would realistically work and why it would be fun to more than just a few hardcore Trek fans. I even offered to pay for the article. No takers, no surprise.
Well said!
I think it's hilarious that those posters after your comment claimed that they would do the pro-playercrew review but declined for various reasons. Absolutely LOL!
--------
Dana, I was hoping that you might answer a question for me. I know you haven't had a chance to experience the whole game and all of it's content, but I wanna ask anyway.
One of the mistakes that I believe Cryptic made with Champions Online was a lack of content in the *very* beginning. What is your opinion on the availability of missions and active content in STO? Do you have any feeling that might suggest Cryptic is pushing too fast and not providing enough content at launch?
The longer it takes before the downside is shown, the more pre-orders get sold.
PvP and Klingon coverage was originally promised for part two.
Release gets closer and closer.
People - look at the way Cryptic has handled Champions Online and what they are doing now with STO. They are not being up front and open. Keep that in mind when you make your decision.
People - look at the way Cryptic has handled Champions Online and what they are doing now with STO. They are not being up front and open. Keep that in mind when you make your decision.
That's the first smart thing I've heard you say on these forums. Congratulations I suppose.
I was very disappointed in the lack of content that Champions Online had provided at launch. I also ran into an issue where their servers were dead and they didn't bother even to tell anyone they knew of the issue until 6-8 hours later (followed by a fix a few hours after that). It was my understanding from the community that it wasn't the first time they did that. I found that to be a disgusting customer service issue.
That said, I'm willing to give Cryptic one more chance....but ONLY because it's Star Trek and I'm a big fan of Star Trek. If they burn this game, they will likely go down as a huge failure in the MMO world (Move over SOE?). Imagine being the laughing stock of the largest fanbase, that is trekkies.
Time will tell...
A commonly held theory on Champions Online seemed to be that it was cut short becuase they pulled all their best developers into the STO project. If that is the case (and I read it on these forums so it must be true! ;oP) then setting expectations for STO on how Champions was at release seems a little unfair.
I'm no expert on Cryptic's release history, but I played COH/COV for a couple of years and had a lot of fun... it was solid, had a tonne of new content added at regular intervals. Not suggesting it was the perfect MMO but it was good. If they put the same effort into STO (which given the value of the IP, they'd be daft not to) then it'll be a good, solid, fun game.
My only major gripe with COH was the simillarity of the missions (lets face it, there were only actually about 3 different missions to do, over and over again). Cryptic have focused on making the mission generation at least complex enough to keep us interested longer in STO. Their Genesis system looks well thought out, and yes, after your 500th server generated area things will almost certainly feel a bit samey but I'm not sure you can do much about that. The hidden grind in STO is at least purposefully well hidden, and I hope they'll aim to have updates with more hand scripted missions on a simillar schedule to COH.
...and come on guys, it's more than just a generic idea with a big Star Trek sticker hastily applied to it. That argument just doesn't stand up to inspection when put against the reviews out there by pretty much everyone who's actually got their hands on it. From what I've read they have managed to capture "That Star Trek Feeling" and this only comes from underlying planning and design, not just a Logo and some well known sound effects slapped on something they already had or could do easily. (Yes... do post links to reviews that blow this theory out the water if you have them, I'd like to give them a read).
For me (yes... this is all just my opinion... shocking to find that from someone posting on a forum but just go with it, it'll be OK ;o) I recon it's worth a few quid to find out, and has a very good chance of being a very good game.
Whether it becomes a great game... well only time will tell. No MMO I've played has been "great" at release.
Those who have gotten their hands on it are either under NDA, or have an interest in pleasing Cryptic. So much for an unbiased review.
Next time you lose someone close to you, see how eager you are to write an article for a generally hostile audience.
Anyone else who wants to write the article in question is free to PM me for the notes I compiled in preparation for it.
Sorry to hear that, man. I myself lost my best friend to liver cancer two weeks ago. Kinda tough on everyone.
Next time you lose someone close to you, see how eager you are to write an article for a generally hostile audience.
Anyone else who wants to write the article in question is free to PM me for the notes I compiled in preparation for it.
I'm sorry for your loss. It is said that time heals all wounds. Take as much time as you need. Look forward to your posts whenever you are ready.
Next time you lose someone close to you, see how eager you are to write an article for a generally hostile audience.
Anyone else who wants to write the article in question is free to PM me for the notes I compiled in preparation for it.
Another generic, lame response as to why you don't do the review. Nothing new. Playing the death card just makes you sound that much more desperate. If you don't want to do the review that's fine. There are most likely several easy counters to any argument you could make in support of player crews anyway, so I don't blame you. But your best option would have been to keep quiet instead of saying "I would but I won't". Nobody wants to hear excuses.
I also work in publishing and understand that things can get "mixxed up on the flats." The start of the over view states PvP will be covered and it wasn't, but it really doesn't matter you wrote a desperatly needed indepth review and we are all happy you did.
I supose the PvP in Star Trek Online will be a cornerstone of the games mechanic's and I look forward to your PvP article.
Thanks for the replay Dana,
Nub's
"We want what we want"
I believe the item states quite clearly what happened to the PvP section, as does a post in this thread.
Bottom line: Limited impressions in part 3. However, it was too big of a subject for one article, so a full article on PvP is to follow separately from these previews.
Of course, if you'd prefer to think it's a conspiracy of some kind, please feel free.
I also work in publishing and understand that things can get "mixxed up on the flats." The start of the over view states PvP will be covered and it wasn't, but it really doesn't matter you wrote a desperatly needed indepth review and we are all happy you did.
I supose the PvP in Star Trek Online will be a cornerstone of the games mechanic's and I look forward to your PvP article.
Thanks for the replay Dana,
Nub's
"We want what we want"
Bill Roper said that PvP progression in CO was faster then PvE and that was a lesson learned?
First of all Bill Roper is incompetent regarding MMORPG PvP, and whatever he says about the matter should be ignored. Second of all I was in CO at launch and I can tell you that PvP was not significantly faster then PvE. Rather it was OK. They nerfed it so that PvE became the fastest way to level but I dont see how that is a good thing as both ways should be a viable way to level and in CO PvP became way too slow which forced you to grind moronic AI mobiles just to make some progress.
That wasnt the main issue in that game by far but PvP should be as viable as PvE when it comes to leveling. Why should it not be? People should decide their forms of leveling based on what they enjoy, not based on which is quicker.
Next time you lose someone close to you, see how eager you are to write an article for a generally hostile audience.
Anyone else who wants to write the article in question is free to PM me for the notes I compiled in preparation for it.
No matter the circumstances, I think few people actually thought you'd ever produce an article. You're a critic (in the worst, modern sense of that word), not a creator.
I notice that your circumstances haven't kept you from "doubting" as loudly and as often as you can, though.
Face it - you weren't coming up with anything, at least nothing that would have been clearly better than Cryptic's version of a Star Trek MMO.
Seeying the new amount of doubt-posts he already made his grief was either very short or non-existance....
Good write-up,
I have more faith in this product now. I still stand on that its really Star Trek experiance light but I think I can make those allowances if they continue to improve it.
The question i have yet to see answered relies specifically on an admiral class ship. The Prometheus: Not everyone's going to know about this but if you followed the voyager series you saw that ship in the final season. Given that its leaked that Klingons will get carriers will the full abilites of the prometheus be in the game?
The game looks weak. I say it flops.