Star Trek Online: Here We Go Again!

[Ghambit]

STO's future failures have little to do with communication.
And no amount of free months will make it better.  This is why I personally care not that they've done this since deep down I know at most you'll get a few week's quality play out of the game and that's it, free months or not.

The design wasnt built for what is needed.  Cryptic likes to pretend that they're going to magically create the content, but let's be real.  It's just marketing talk to retain fools, it's just not possible for them to do.  They have neither staff, nor engine, nor design.  Fuckin lead dev. whines because the community now basically wants "cameras" in Cryptic's office to prove they actually give two shits and are working on making the game better.      Wtf did he expect?

His big written comeback is the usual rhetoric, "our plans for 6 to 12 months down the road"  yada yada.  Fuck this game  
I'd rather play a goddamned Trek-Mush or invite neckbeards over for a round of the pen&paper version.

[WindupAtheist]

I got your back WUA.

Seriously, we let someone get away with "should of" and by April people will think they can get away without proper capitalization. By June we'll be Stratics.

The line must be drawn here! This far, no farther!

[Tannhauser]

I see what you did there.

[Ratman_tf]

While canceling my subscription this morning, I realized that I did not once speak to a single other player in the roughly three weeks I played this game.

Truly, this is the future of MMOs.

This is it. My days of soloing MMOGs is over, and I've got Torchlight, HGL and sooner or later, Diablo III to scratch that kill mobs and gather loot itch.

Piss on this single player online shit.

[Surlyboi]

I'd still rather play multiplayer online and group when I feel like it, than force to be grouped with asshats.

[Tearofsoul]

http://www.atari.com/games/startrek_online

So STO is $10 off until March 3rd, and you get 60 free days instead of 30 to boot.

Not. Bitter. At. All.

I have cancelled my sub. It is cleared that they have ZERO intention of building a long-term relationship with us.

[rk47]

...Amazing. I didn't even know they released it. After 1-2 months of ignoring this thread, I finally clicked it today and it's ...horrible? *Time to read through 50 pages of the topic to find out what made it bad*

[UnSub]

It's fun enough for 30 days.

It also exists in that weird state where it both is and isn't Star Trek enough.

[Shatter]

I'd still rather play multiplayer online and group when I feel like it, than force to be grouped with asshats.

One of the reviews called STO an MMOG, Moderately Multiplayer Online Game which is about right Id say.  I have a hard time playing single player games and prefer playing with other people but playing with retards is about as much fun as riding a bike without a seat

[Malakili]

I'd still rather play multiplayer online and group when I feel like it, than force to be grouped with asshats.

What you've done here, and I see this really often,  is made the jump from "talked to another player" to "forced grouping with asshats."  To me there is really a lot of room in between those, but the fact that a lot of people seem to associate even interacting with other players as "grouping" and any game mechanic which requires you to realize there are other players in the game as "forced grouping" really seem to be pushing this single player MMOG thing ahead.  I really can't think of why I'd want to play an MMOG if it wasn't for the other players, I WANT to be encouraged to interact with them.   Otherwise, like other people have said, I'll just play a single player game to begin with,

[Surlyboi]

I'd still rather play multiplayer online and group when I feel like it, than force to be grouped with asshats.

What you've done here, and I see this really often,  is made the jump from "talked to another player" to "forced grouping with asshats."  To me there is really a lot of room in between those, but the fact that a lot of people seem to associate even interacting with other players as "grouping" and any game mechanic which requires you to realize there are other players in the game as "forced grouping" really seem to be pushing this single player MMOG thing ahead.  I really can't think of why I'd want to play an MMOG if it wasn't for the other players, I WANT to be encouraged to interact with them.   Otherwise, like other people have said, I'll just play a single player game to begin with,

No, what I've done there is said "forced to be grouped with asshats" There is indeed a difference between talking to other people, (which I like to do sometimes) and running through content that requires I have to do it in a big group of douchebags. I have no problems interacting with solid groups of people, but I'm going to do that when and where I choose.

[Malakili]

I'd still rather play multiplayer online and group when I feel like it, than force to be grouped with asshats.

What you've done here, and I see this really often,  is made the jump from "talked to another player" to "forced grouping with asshats."  To me there is really a lot of room in between those, but the fact that a lot of people seem to associate even interacting with other players as "grouping" and any game mechanic which requires you to realize there are other players in the game as "forced grouping" really seem to be pushing this single player MMOG thing ahead.  I really can't think of why I'd want to play an MMOG if it wasn't for the other players, I WANT to be encouraged to interact with them.   Otherwise, like other people have said, I'll just play a single player game to begin with,

Ah ok, I didn't realize I was supposed to take your comment completely our of the context of the discussion that was going on around it.

No, what I've done there is said "forced to be grouped with asshats" There is indeed a difference between talking to other people, (which I like to do sometimes) and running through content that requires I have to do it in a big group of douchebags. I have no problems interacting with solid groups of people, but I'm going to do that when and where I choose.

[koro]

So apparently Atari has now reneged on the "bonus 60 days" deal for the normal and Collector's editions (the $10 off the purchase price remains), and seems to have retroactively voided the 60 day codes for people who've already taken advantage of the deal while simultaneously denying the deal ever existed. At least, that's what I'm gathering from the absolute shitstorm on their forums.  

[statisticalfool]

So apparently Atari has now reneged on the "bonus 60 days" deal for the normal and Collector's editions (the $10 off the purchase price remains), and seems to have retroactively voided the 60 day codes for people who've already taken advantage of the deal while simultaneously denying the deal ever existed. At least, that's what I'm gathering from the absolute shitstorm on their forums.  

That is...inspired. 

[Ghambit]

Quickest I've seen Cryptic react to an issue so far.   

[koro]

So apparently Atari has now reneged on the "bonus 60 days" deal for the normal and Collector's editions (the $10 off the purchase price remains), and seems to have retroactively voided the 60 day codes for people who've already taken advantage of the deal while simultaneously denying the deal ever existed. At least, that's what I'm gathering from the absolute shitstorm on their forums.  

That is...inspired. 

I'm not entirely positive on the voiding of the active 60-day codes, though. I've heard reports of it, but apparently people who post about it on the STO forums get their posts deleted with a quickness.

[Tearofsoul]

I can't stop laughing.

Statement Regarding Atari.com Promotion - Star Trek Online Forums

Hi everyone,
First, we respect the time, energy and passion the community has put into their opinions regarding the promotion that ran this weekend on Atari.com, offering 60-days of free play.

Like many companies, we are actively trying to sell games we are very proud of in an extremely competitive marketplace and we are always testing new ways to get more people using our products. The weekend promotion at Atari.com was one of those experiments. In the case of a game like Star Trek, we believe a larger number of players is a benefit to the entire community.

We will continue to look at the best ways to add new users to our game in a competitive marketplace while keeping our current players happy. Your feedback – good, bad and ugly – is extremely helpful and appreciated.

We won’t always get it right, but we’re always trying to do the right thing by you.

We do apologize and we appreciate your patience as we continue to do our best to make Star Trek Online the best game possible.

Thank you.

Philip Dean
Director of Customer Support

"weekend promotion" (March 3rd,anyone?)
"60-days of free play" (30+60=60!)
"testing" "experiment" "benefit" by screwing up all the pre-order + lifetime subscribers even before their free month run out

*cough* *cough*

[Riggswolfe]

I never looked at the promotion but how do we know it was an additional 60 days instead of not just 60 instead of 30?

[koro]

I personally thought it was just 60 days instead of 30 myself, but most people seem convinced it was 90 days total. The promotion wasn't exactly clear on the matter.

[01101010]

So apparently Atari has now reneged on the "bonus 60 days" deal for the normal and Collector's editions (the $10 off the purchase price remains), and seems to have retroactively voided the 60 day codes for people who've already taken advantage of the deal while simultaneously denying the deal ever existed. At least, that's what I'm gathering from the absolute shitstorm on their forums.  

Oh wow. I mean wow. Isn't there...bah, nevermind. This type of situation is beyond mere words.

[GenVec]

I'd still rather play multiplayer online and group when I feel like it, than force to be grouped with asshats.

What you've done here, and I see this really often,  is made the jump from "talked to another player" to "forced grouping with asshats."  To me there is really a lot of room in between those, but the fact that a lot of people seem to associate even interacting with other players as "grouping" and any game mechanic which requires you to realize there are other players in the game as "forced grouping" really seem to be pushing this single player MMOG thing ahead.  I really can't think of why I'd want to play an MMOG if it wasn't for the other players, I WANT to be encouraged to interact with them.   Otherwise, like other people have said, I'll just play a single player game to begin with,

No, what I've done there is said "forced to be grouped with asshats" There is indeed a difference between talking to other people, (which I like to do sometimes) and running through content that requires I have to do it in a big group of douchebags. I have no problems interacting with solid groups of people, but I'm going to do that when and where I choose.

I think it's a fundamental tenet of MMOs that there should be some sort of incentive structure for players to interact with each other, along with social spaces for them to organize and pool their talents. Between the extreme instancing, 100% soloable content, and virtually meaningless trade, STO really doesn't have any reason to communicate.

I played up to level 20. If the game doesn't have any of those features by then, it might as well not bother to have them at all.

Maybe they'll patch it in next month.

[Shatter]

 

[Ratman_tf]

I think it's a fundamental tenet of MMOs that there should be some sort of incentive structure for players to interact with each other, along with social spaces for them to organize and pool their talents. Between the extreme instancing, 100% soloable content, and virtually meaningless trade, STO really doesn't have any reason to communicate.

I played up to level 20. If the game doesn't have any of those features by then, it might as well not bother to have them at all.

Maybe they'll patch it in next month.

Exactly so. STO doesn't punish the solo player, but also doesn't encourage the multiplayer. Aside from the times in beta where they threw players together willy-nilly when entering zones, which probably defeats the 'encourage' part.

[tazelbain]

Massively Singleplayer Online Game.

[fuser]

Was there any miracle patch today as the 30days are almost up?

[koro]

Was there any miracle patch today as the 30days are almost up?

No, the "miracle patch" is supposed to hit on Day 45, which is 16 days too late. Plus with the trouble Cryptic's having getting a single 5-man "raid" into the game (the Borg "special task force" is at least two weeks late by now), I'd be stunned if that patch actually hit on Day 45.

[Valmorian]

STO doesn't punish the solo player, but also doesn't encourage the multiplayer.

The only things that MMO's REALLY should do to encourage multiplayer groups:
1. Instant ability to get everyone in a group to the same location.
2. Painless and automatic sharing of quest objectives for group members.
3. Ability to "scale" other players to the same difficulty level.

Make it so I can play with my friends instantly, painlessly, and regardless of our "level".

[Draegan]

Dude, you can't have instant travel, that makes the the world smaller and travel needs to having meaning!

[GenVec]

Dude, you can't have instant travel, that makes the the world smaller and travel needs to having meaning!

Assuming this is not sarcastic, I agree with it completely. Your world is only as big as the time it takes you to get from one side of it to another. Even if you've created a  massive playing space, if I can hop on a horse or a griffin and cross it in ten minutes, that's exactly how large it's going to feel.

It's enough to make me miss EQ.

[Nebu]

It's enough to make me miss EQ.

You should have played the first telling of ATitD.  I can remember doing nothing but running for hours just to make a trade with another player.  The Body tests were constant reminders of just how massive the world was.  Some days it really did feel like walking across the entirety of Egypt. 

[Ratman_tf]

Depends on the game. Travel times in WoW are meaningless, since the only thing that matters is how long it takes you to get to the raid. Travel in Eve is important because it creates trade routes. And travel in Planetside is important because it creates choke points for reinforcements. (BRIDGE FIGHT!)
If travel serves a purpose beyond just consuming time to get somewhere, then instantaneous travel can remove fun. Otherwise, it's just a cockblock.

And multiplayer can mean more than just "Get in a group and beat on foozles for lewtz!"

[Valmorian]

Assuming this is not sarcastic, I agree with it completely.

Of course, there's a difference between "Instant travel" and "Instant travel to your friends". 

In any case, I'll ask you the same thing I ask everyone who tells me that they hate "griffons" ala WoW:

Assuming you play WoW, do you use the griffons?

Because if you do, you're a damned hypocrite.

[GenVec]

I'm just nostalgic for the days when I had to pay a druid a bag of gold to take me to Faydwer.

Speaking of which, there's some forced socialization at work for you. Those druids could be real hard-asses when it came to bartering.

And no, I don't play WoW. Among one of the many reasons I quit was because (you guessed it) the world didn't feel particularly large. Quiting seemed a more reasonable action than taking the shoeleather express while everyone streaks by overhead. Your argument, by the way, imagines that the players will not devolve immediately to the lowest common denominator (or path of least resistance) despite the fact that  other options might be more fun or entertaining. If you let people just push a button to get their fat lewts, they'd do it, even if it would totally defeat the purpose of playing the game.

Sometimes you have to *make* people have a good time.

addendum: I recall having this exact same debate around the time that Elder Scrolls: Oblivion was released, in protest over their fast-travel system. I don't think anyone's going to argue that Oblivion's "click to travel" crap was superior to Morrowind, which forced you to pick your way carefully through the countryside and offered a highly more atmospheric experience.

[Ingmar]

. I don't think anyone's going to argue that Oblivion's "click to travel" crap was superior to Morrowind, which forced you to pick your way carefully through the countryside and offered a highly more atmospheric experience.

I'll happily argue it. I would never have finished Oblivion without it, personally.

[GenVec]

. I don't think anyone's going to argue that Oblivion's "click to travel" crap was superior to Morrowind, which forced you to pick your way carefully through the countryside and offered a highly more atmospheric experience.

I'll happily argue it. I would never have finished Oblivion without it, personally.

Now I'm starting to think about Daggerfall, and fast travel doesn't seem so bad any more.