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

Reader Comments (91)

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 10:30AM Seraphina Brennan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Henrik,

Don't worry, we're not going to stop coverage of a game just like that. Our Captain's Log series is going to continue on strongly and so will the rest of our STO coverage.

We try to get around to all MMOs as much as possible, so just because I may not like something doesn't mean we're stopping it or it doesn't mean we're not going to go get more exclusives. We want to offer the best MMO coverage there is, so we work with all of the games.
Reply

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 5:40AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I cancelled my Champions Online subscription after 1 month because Cryptic released a patch that made the game unplayable for me (due to increased lag and latency).

As I'm a bit of a Trek fan, I was mortified when I realised that Cryptic were also developing Star Trek Online. However I decided to give them a chance so I pre-ordered STO.

I've been playing in the Open Beta but I'm not going to subscribe - there is no joy in STO. It's so mindless and boring that I can only play for 1 hour at a time. Some of the graphics are nice but honeslty - it's hard to see what they've been spendign time doing - especially considering that most of STO was ported from Champions Online.

I might check STO again next year but it's so fundamentally flawed that I don't have much hope. And Cryptic's design/development is also flawed. They're doing it wrong.

Now I will never buy anything else that Cryptic (or Bill Roper) have been involved with. Sorry!

Oh well maybe there will be a worthy Star Trek game some day.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 6:37AM Ringu said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I always felt that CO was going to be a poor man's CoH; especially when all the power sets I heard about turned out to be CoH copies, it really felt to me that Cryptic were pining for the superhero MMO they'd effectively lost when the NCSoft stuff happened.

I played CO in beta but really, I was still bored having done the superhero thing already, so didn't bother with the lifetime and indeed, didn't play after launch. I can imagine how angry I would be at Cryptic changing the gameplay substantially then, just as I was angry when they gutted my Invulnerable Tank in CoH years before.

I don't agree that this behaviour is duplicitous or deceptive though: "never blame on malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity" seems appropriate to me here. Cryptic have always, always been lousy at communicating anything, but I think that's where the failure lies, rather than them planning to hoodwink customers. Really, why would they do that? Why would you take something that worked and players liked, and actively break it if you didn't genuinely believe you were making it better or fixing it? They may be wrong (and plenty of times I've seen them admit they were wrong after forum users had demonstrated their wrongness) but they believe it's right.

As for the "game has just come out" defence, all the cries of "it's only closed beta" and "it's only open beta" ring through my ears. We know that Cryptic had a $20million bonus from Atari if they launched on time, so whatever their plans are now, we can be reasonably sure that the game they launched was made to be launched on time. I can't imagine any company, not even Blizzard, turning down that opportunity because the game just wasn't finished enough. Given the update is a good thing mentality that we all have, it seems reasonable enough to me.

I actually, genuinely, like the game as it stands. I have fun. I'm very much looking forward to all the improvements, but as we have all said before, there *must* be a substantial amount of free content added, if we're expected to pay for expansions or for things like the extra playable races.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 6:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Personally I'm not to bothered about the MTs or the monthly sub running hand in hand. What I have a problem with is the fact that these two races are clearly ready for launch and should have been shipped out with the rest of the game people bought.

Its like when you buy DLC only to learn that the code was on the disk all this time. It just feels like your being robbed. Like the people behind the scenes are sniggering 'suckers' as they watch their bank balance.

DLC, paid expansions and added extras should come months after release, not the saem week - or in this case the head freaking start! I just feel like all I did was buy the environment and the story, but I literally have to pay extra for the character I want. Its just not good enough.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 6:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Perception eventually becomes reality when it comes to the market of public opinion on the Internet.

And you guys have published an awful lot of articles about Cryptic products/promotions/announcements/etc, down to trivial minutia (in my opinion). I think Massively's reputation is deserved.

Don't misunderstand me - I realize that your coverage is broad - but at the same time, this is the only gaming journalism outlet (print or digital) I read* that will 100% of the time, whether I'm perusing the front page or pulling up the RSS feed, will have a story related to Cryptic.

*: I also have 1up, Penny Arcade, and Kotaku bookmarked, and have a subscription to Game Informer

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 7:05AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with most everyone else I doubt Sera or anyone else at Massively is in bed with cryptic, and that people go to some unnecessary extremes to make it appear that is the case. But also, Cryptic in mine and many other peoples eyes are just a terrible company. Trying to defend them, or make them appear in a positive light is going to bring heaps of hate upon you, not saying rightfully so...but that is just the way it is.

I think most people do vote with their wallets, and I think the outrage that take place from commentators on a lot of forums boils down to two things. First being some people just love drama and conflict so they will jump into anything that feeds their need for drama.

Secondly, like myself, I rant on Cryptic not because I think what I say will change them...or even that it will make players avoid them. But in the hopes that people from other companies read these forums as well and will see that Cryptic's whole business plan was fail. I mean damn even those rabid fanboy's of CO when it launched have given up all hope....And we all know just how bad things have to get before you lose a hardcore fanboy.

Like it or not apathy and letting the little things go will only lead to a bigger problem down the line with all games. Yes companies are out to make money, most of them out to make as much as possible. We as consumers need to let it be known AHEAD of time that stunts like the ones cryptic pulls will not lead to more revenue, but only a ruined name. Companies want to make more money, then make a game that will attract more people.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 7:54AM Wensbane said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Secondly, like myself, I rant on Cryptic not because I think what I
say will change them...or even that it will make players avoid them.
But in the hopes that people from other companies read these forums
as well and will see that Cryptic's whole business plan was fail."

That's exactly why I do it, as well. This type of business - that
basically forces you to pay for core elements of a game - must not be
allowed to stand.

I'm sorry if I sound overly dramatic sometimes, but the situation
demands it. This has been my favorite genre for more than a decade.
And now, because of companies like Cryptic, I actually fear for it's
future.
Reply

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 9:33AM Lilpwny said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Cryptic is on it's last legs.. if Star Trek fails (all signs point to it doing just that) Cryptic will die as a company. As a former subscriber to CO and a current subscriber to STO, I lol all the time thinking of how much lifetime subscribers are going to feel ripped off in six months when Bill Roper runs this studio into the ground.

As a gaming community, we can only hope that Cryptic is never given a licensing opportunity like CO and STO.. because once they (it's a certainty) go belly up, we're going to lose out on two great IP's, and with the way they have failed consistently, it's fair to say they would only fail again.

A little advice to Cryptic... find a way to get rid of Bill "the Douchebag" Roper, it's no coincidence that he was a part of the Hellgate fiasco, the CoH forum incident shows the character of this a$$hole, and the complete and utter disregard of his subscriber base shows he's in this ONLY for the money.

Lastly-- Atari. Above all other parties, the failed launches are your fault. Do everyone a favor and fade back into obscurity like those shitty little consoles you used to make. So far you are 0-2 and your influence on the MMO community has led to more harm than good. It was your decision to rush both Cryptic games to market ("the Douchebag" agreed... because he's a greedy piece of garbage, masquerading as a game dev) rather than let them release when games when they are ready.

I am like many in the Cryptic subscriber pool... this is the last game I buy from them, and they will be very lucky if many of us continue playing past this month.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 9:34AM pcgneurotic said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What was the CoH forum incident? Sounds intriguing...
Reply

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 9:22AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Slightly on topic:

Eurogamer have released their review of STO
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/star-trek-online-review

"[Star Trek Online] has warped in unprepared, jury-rigged, piecemeal and scatterbrained. It's a jumble of broken-up content, inconsistent rules and half-finished systems that does a great job of throwing players together but a terrible job of keeping them together.."

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 9:31AM lizardbones said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Makes me a little sad that I bought Star Trek now, if they continue with the same sort of shenanigans. Hopefully with STO they'll have a more non-linear progression path for each faction. There is a limit to this really, even WoW with 5 years of content is pretty linear for the first 60 levels after 3 characters.

I think for me it's seeing such potential in games that aren't reach. Most of the time the potential just isn't there (Allods and most F2P games), but when a game has potential, and just doesn't reach that potential, it's very disappointing.

I would like to see more transparency in terms of overall goals, where the game is headed, etc. I'd rather have slow, clearly communicated progress over quick progress that constantly takes me by surprise and comes with its own set of bugs.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 9:41AM Lilpwny said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He tried to steal players from CoH for the closed beta, using the forums. It was a classless maneuver by a classless piece of garbage

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 10:23AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah see I'm sorry but there shouldn't be anything available via MTA that effects gameplay in a subbed MMO, not respecs, not xp bonuses. Hell for the most part Blizzard does the right thing but their recruit a friend bonus is overstepping the line if anything its actually more sinister as its not asking you for more cash but its still rewarding you for increasing their revenue with your friends cash.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 10:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
good article, i bet ALOT of people wish they had read that instead of those fluff pieces BEFORE they bought their game =D

just a idea but when a game is this controversial maybe find another writer and do a "duet" piece with one person pretending to be the "average gamer", and the other person the "company" talk about why it should/potentialy be good but also why its not up to par with current games and what aspect may be better. VALUE is important to us, i would pay to play all the MMO's out, if i had unlimited money, but i do not so i must justify my purchases and i dont enjoy beeing "tricked" into buying bad products, so if someone was comparing the value it might keeps companies honest.
the one part of article though, "Not the end of the world"---- i dont have a good MMO to play today. if this trend picks up, we may see the end of MMO as we know them =(

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 10:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I did not know they were charging for Klingons! That is awful! I am playing STO right now and finding it fun. If I have to start paying for content or for items in need with real money I am gone. I don't mind microtransactions for services (name change, server move) but for content when I already pay 15 smackers a month. No!

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 10:56AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think the reason they charging for federation klingons and for ferengi are a way to make them more rare from a lore standpoint.

federation is at war with klingons; warf had a hard enough time when there was a lasting peace with the federation the likely hood of there being alot of klingons starfleet admirals should be low.

so i think its smart from a lore stand point to charge for them and to charge more for them than ferengi because i am pretty sure ferenganar isnt part of the federation they are a neutral planet. its more profitable not to take sides. by the end of Ds9 there was exactly 1 ferengi in starfleet. so again i think its a great decision to charge for these races and i hope they woudl be rarer than the normal races of the federation.

you can complain all day about paying for these races but can you tell me a better solution for making these races rare and klingons more rare than ferengi?

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 1:26PM Tizmah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Dude, charging money is not the way to make something rare for Lore's sake. That's like saying LOTRO should have charged money for a mage like class because magic was uncommon and wanted to keep it rare.
Reply

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 11:37AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nice article on Cryptic.

I think something they should also work on is their communication with their local publishers, particularly in the EU sphere. If you don't get your base line of sales process right, it's almost irrelevant what you do with microtransactions.

Especially in the UK, Champions Online beta program (Atari) and Star Trek Online stock issues (Namco / Bandai / Atari) have been a right mess.

Whatever Cryptic's weaknesses as a studio, it is compounding these through a bad communication channel - whether the publisher or Cryptic is to blame is another story.

UK's launch of Star Trek Online has been fraught with problems. Firstly, Cryptic posted the pre-order incentives by retailer to the official Star Trek site - without themselves or Namco Bandai telling any of the retailers which pre-order incentives they'd been allocated! Not good when the first thing you hear is a customer asking why a developer is advertising that you're running an offer...

Finally, UK was short-shipped stock on the Gold Edition. How people couldn't forecast that Star Trek Online was going to see high demand I have no idea. Many retailers have probably taken orders more than supply, and there must be a lot of disappointed customers out there.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 11:29AM Victor Stillwater said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well said. It doesn't really make Cryptic seem like a good guy in my eyes if they're doing all of this to their subscriber base.

Posted: Feb 5th 2010 11:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hey Sera?

*hug*

That's it.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW