| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (20)

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 10:09AM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
So basically this means that if you want to play a Klingon you have to play a PVP game? Well that'll be me not bothering with this game then.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 9:51AM Loki1 said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Wow... this is so horrible i could puke.

same old npc collect kills... same old PvP instanced CTF scenarios.

Nice job.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 11:14AM Aquaryon said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Actually excellent written article Kyle, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I am one of the lucy ones to try the game and all I have to say is February can't come fast enough especially after reading this, I can not wait to try the PvP. Tactical thinking in a MMO? Bring it on!

Maybe we will fly side by side in battle one day Kyle. Keep up the great work!

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 1:30PM Tom in VA said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Since I don't care for PvP at all, it sounds as though I will not be playing the Klingon side of things in this game.

I had hoped Cryptic would offer playing a Klingon as a kind of "WoW/Horde equivalent," since I much preferred playing the Horde side in WoW, but I'm OK with what Cryptic is doing in STO.

Us PvE'ers are pretty much left with the Federation, then, I take it. It's disappointing, yes, but I think I can live with this, provided the Federation side has adequate and engaging PvE content.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 4:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They said they'll be adding more factions later too. Cardassian, Romulan, even the Dominion. And I'm sure they won't all be PVP focused.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 2:14PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not sure how Lee and Lok1 came to their conclusions, regardless, the article was a great read as Cyryus said! I didn't get in to closed beta, but I guess I'll have to wait a couple more weeks for open beta to give it a try!

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 2:31PM dudemanjac said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Cryptic, please get those bugs fixed before open beta. The last thing you need is more bad press.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 2:35PM Keen and Graev said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
If we're being completely honest with ourselves, this is essentially a highly instanced version of monster play with PotBS mechanics. And continuing to be completely honest, can you without a doubt say that the Klingons are designed to be played as 100% equally fleshed out faction?

Just the fact that you can't play Klingons until you play a Federation (Straight from the STO website) and that you're limited to being bounced (sorry, warped) around into different PvP instances for the bulk of your 'content', doesn't this completely, in all honesty, contradict the sentiments you're trying to convey that everything is equal and Klingons are wonderful?

What you described was a tutorial and doing Battle Grounds for several hours. Cool, but is there any depth or game there? Perhaps you can expound upon that for me and those wondering if the Klingons can expect to "queue" for PvP the entire time you play or if they actually have something like episodic content and other content on 100% par with the Federation.

Even after reading your experiences, I'm still left with this feeling that the Klingons are second class.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 4:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
If we're being completely honest with ourselves, isn't monster play just a limited version of normal play? And if we're continuing to be completely honest, if we take away the limitations on monster play, won't we end up with regular play? And if we still choose to be honest with ourselves, different gameplay doesn't actually imply unequal gameplay.

Just the fact that they have a fed only tutorial, which they said they did on purpose, probably after learning how quickly people want to skip the tutorial in Champions(to save time not developing two different tutorials), doesn't imply that the actual gameplay for the Klingons isn't fleshed out. In all honesty, being bounced around to different pvp instances doesn't imply limitation, you are doing that for them. I agree that the klingons seem a little less strong, but in all honesty most of what I've seen contradicts the negative sentiments many people are trying to convey.

What you are talking about has already been discussed. The Klingons are Pvp, and battle-ground, house-war, neutral zone, in their style of advancement. Simply because a faction is different, doesn't imply inequality. You're describing (sorry, asking for) a desire for the mirror images of horde/alliance style of factions, which is cool, but you're expecting every game to do the same thing, and follow the same formula exactly. Maybe you can expound upon that for me, and tell me why you are under the assumption that, again, difference implies inequality.

Even after reading the hundred of comments like yours, and having doubts and reservations of my own, I still can't help feeling that people are being overly negative without having much if any information to back it up, even after everyone who has had a chance to be involved with the beta has given positive feedback with regards to the Klingons, even if they are in 'the press'.
Reply

Posted: Dec 30th 2009 12:23PM Keen and Graev said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
In other words, they're second class. It doesn't take a convoluted answer to get that point across.
Reply

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 7:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually, per the MMORPG article with Jack Emmert:
>>
And again, on the theme of player feedback, Emmert hopes that their next step with Klingons comes from the community. Will there be an advanced territory control PvP game with the Federation? Will they have full “episodes” of PvE content? He wants the players to tell them once they’ve tried the game.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 6:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Can't wait to try out my Klingon!

S'a-Ku'ra Pa'ak!

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 6:48PM J Brad Hicks said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
OK, I'm just not "getting" why people keep comparing this to monster play in LotRO. In LotRO, you're not creating your own character and getting to keep it, right?

I will say that this is one of those areas where it's going to be impossible to judge it until the game's been out for at least 3 or 4 months. That's true of all MMOs, but in this case, it's this specific part of the game that's going to be impossible to judge until then. We know now that the game is shipping with almost no Klingon PvE content, that the Klingon PvE content will be delivered later. That's either fine, or disastrous, depending entirely on how long it takes them, how much gets delivered, and whether it's as good as the Federation PvE content. Let's tell the truth here about the whole MMO industry: every game that has ever shipped has treated adding content as if it requires an act of Congress to get done. If we find out it's going to be three years before the Klingons have as much content as the Federation, that's a crippling problem. If it's going to be four to eight months, that's less of a problem.

And if, in the meantime, the only way to level your Klingon character is via PvP, then how fun, balanced, and non-repetitive that PvP content turns out to be is going to be really, really important. This article brings up balance issues early on: right now, between players of equal levels of equipment and experience, you're telling us that the Klingons are winning nearly all the fights. They can't leave it that way, or else no Federation players will show up for the Klingons to fight, and Klingon-on-Klingon PvP will get old, fast. So how will Klingon players react to the first ham-fisted nerf? And will that nerf come before the game goes live? Or a month after it ships? Three months after it ships?

Warhammer Online taught me, the hard way, the importance of having referees in a PvP game. If it turns out that there are exploit game mechanics in PvP that will take Crytpic weeks or months to fix, what is Atari going to do about it? Let people get away with it? Make lots of threatening noises about banning cheaters while looking the other way until the exploit gets fixed, like Electronic Arts did? Or will they actually hire and staff enough game masters to catch and punish exploiters, even if Star Trek Online doesn't have a couple of million subscribers (or however many they've budgeted around it having) by the end of the second month?

I'm really, really excited about Star Trek Online. The subject matter is interesting to me and the game design seems innovative and cool. But it is entirely within Cryptic's power and within Atari's power to mismanage this one into oblivion, and I don't see any way to predict in advance whether or not they'll do so.

Posted: Dec 30th 2009 1:26PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
First of all, I am really impressed with most of the opinions stated here. Second of all, let me just say now that I am hugely excited for this game to go live ( or even Pre-Start ), so of course everything I say is skewed by lack of solid first hand experience. There. Disclaimer out of the way.

If I've read if correctly, Klingons will have a small amount of PvE content; large part of the pie graph will go to PvP. If I may get the soapbox out here for a moment ....
Klingons are made for war. Not killing sprites. Not for taking out some AI mindless horde of Federation NPC ships. Why would you even want to bother? How could it be fun? Klingons ( not just the race, but the mentality) are Warriors and as such, there are only two things to hunt. Thinking prey, and Targ. Since Targ aren't readily available on-line (but maybe on Chronus?), thinking prey is the default choice. How could completing a boss mission in say, WoW ( which none of you would believe, I have never done) compete to uncloaking and firing on a unsuspecting fleet of Federation Miranda's ( you can hear 'Khaa-aan' screaming in the background) crewed by humans.
If I have to continue this arguement, I won't be able to convince you. Everyone has preconceived notions of how this game should be and no words on the screen are going to change a mind. But I believe that PvP for Klingons is the very thing that defines Klingons. Battle against live opponents, where (yes I'll say it) the glory of defeating your enemy outweighs smashing some unliving unthinking thing.

Posted: Dec 28th 2009 9:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This sounds like it will be great two ways to play the game and never get dull.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 2:05AM AirEgo said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Something that I hear quite often is how games need to stray away from the standard "cookie cutter" MMO design. Yet, as far as I understand it, most folks appear to be upset that the game is not more familiar. This game, like many MMO's has an uphill battle to fight. PVP players will always be put off by the PVE content, and as Aion has proven, PVE players will also be put off by the PVP content. There is never a solid balance, but I applaud Cryptic's attempt to try.

Posted: Dec 29th 2009 12:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not a big PvP guy (at least in mmos where pvp is rarely about much more than zerg & gear) but I would suggest to other PvE fans not to judge this without experiencing. A little bird tells me as it is now it is a soft sort of pvp with little penalty for loss, more like a fun game of tag with explosions.

Add in tons of maladjusted adolescents (some of whom are old) who want to play the 'rad' leet pvp Klingons and talk incessant racist/homophobic trash talk while they spawn camp and I might change my mind.

Posted: Dec 29th 2009 1:13PM Eryxx said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Why do so many people diss on a game for not being what THEY want it to be, and instead judge it for what it is?

Is this the STO I had hoped for since P-petual first announced it several years ago? Not quite, not even that close, really. But, I will not trash a game, especially one I haven't even had a chance to PLAY yet, just because it's not what I want/expect in a game.

Anyhow, if I set aside my preconceived notions and personal desires, STO still looks like it could be a LOT of fun! Take the game for what it is, not what you wish it to be, and we all might just have a good time together.

Speaking of good times, any word on what to expect on Risa?

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 12:47PM Snichy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I am hoping that the devs are spending most of their time developing the Federation PvE aspect of the game whilst laying the foundation for a future expansion where Klingons are a fully fledged faction with equal content to Federation. It would make sense to have the klingons in the game at release but maybe they dont have the time or opportunity to give them as much gametime as the federation but will expand them in a later patch or expansion. Something is better than nothing...!

Posted: Jan 5th 2010 10:27AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
For all those who have complained about features of STO notbeing like alliance vs horde or some other crap from WoW please read the article below.

http://www.massively.com/category/anti-aliased

Now you have read that you will understand how its your very attitude which has tarnished the gaming community. Wow was good but its not the only way.

firstly they have already explained that more content for klingons will be added and that what content is added all depends on us. this is good no? finally after 5 years of blizzard ignoring its customers a company actually understands who pays their wages.

The gentlemen above is spot on when he says that klingons are true warriors. For someone to play them but only want to grind AI...... OMG.... you dishonour our race....

thanks for your time. i look forward to seeing you all in the Alpha Quadrant.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW