Jacob

OMLG, that would be SOOO fantastic if there was a NWN's MMO.

But I echo the sentiments of MANY... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE let it not be Cryptic who develops this MMO. They are by far the worst MMO development studio.

CoX was an OKAY game, but it was made better by the studio which took it over. Champions Online was an utter disaster, and Star Trek Online was probably the biggest joke in all of Star Trek gaming (and a pretty competitive joke in the MMO industry in general).

PLEASSSSSSSSSSSE not Cryptic!!!!!! I would also love it if Atari kept their greedy hands off this title too, or we might see something like a stupid C-store attached to this game.

Someone sue them, and get the rights over to BioWare instead!

Unfortunately Ryan,

The "we're bored" mentality is hardly a major reason why there are eruptions CONSISTENTLY happen.

People have been following STO since the days of Perpetual, and have been active on the game's forums since they opened (like myself). It is a continual string of blunders, forays, blights, fiascos, and hullabaloo that have done well to destroy the confidence of even some of Cryptic's most dedicated fanbois. A select few remain, we people refer to as the CDF (Cryptic Defense Force).

Having been there since near the start, I can with good reason say, that all this hatred toward Cryptic is due to:

- Smearing the name of a beloved franchise with a sub-par game (STO)
- Deceptive Marketing Practices
- Going back on their word
- Mistreatment of prominent community members (I'm talking about blatantly clear mistreatment)
- Constant sugar coating and endless promises made by Cryptic staff
- And the fact that precious resources are being dedicated to the C-Store when the core game itself is obviously and painfully shallow.
- The many spurious fiascos spun by Cryptic's marketing department
- Censorship of reasonably articulate and respectful critics
- Absolutely, bar-none HORRENDOUS customer support (which is now virtually non-existent)

I realize the list is general, but I'm not wanting to write an essay here. If anyone wants the specific low downs, you can write me: jacobflowers7@gmail.com

The sad part is, I went for the lifetime sub. Lesson, learned.

Because its Cryptic, not Turbine.

Cryptic only gives back to their community for marketing stunts and if there is no way of getting out of it. They are a company that holds greed in higher esteem than integrity, and of being producers of quality products.

Ryan, this was a very insightful article which I appreciated greatly. Up until recently, I have been one of the most prominent posters on the STO forums, and one of the things I would contend is that STO would do well as going f2p.

My reasoning was such that, as it stands now, STO does not even match the quality or depth of some f2p games, so how can it viably compete with AAA titles which are subscription based? I was active with the STO community since 2008 shortly after the forums launched, and have followed the game quite extensively. I also work in this industry, so I know a thing or two. HOWEVER, you are very wise to point out the two paths that STO could potentially go down.

Unfortunately, I have to say that your proposition that STO may head down the road of Allods may be correct. The game is still a mere shell of an MMO, and there is no way the development team can crank things out fast enough to bring the game up to par perhaps even within this year. They are going to have to make some drastic changes soon, as the game is painfully and obviously bleeding subs. Log in to the game, and I'm sure you'll know what I mean.

I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, but unfortunately they have some very unethical practices going on with their community management as well as their with their marketing/communications department, the likes of which many people in the STO people already know about. Cryptic is not a trustworthy company. I feel the best thing for STO would be for the license to pass to another developer with more experience in developing quality games (not necessarily MMOs), and with resources to spare.

Not sure if it was intended, but the slight jab at the game insinuating that the only people likely playing the game are because the Star Trek "skin" and not for the quality of the game itself was amusing.

While I loved the series, I unfortunately do not play STO any longer, as it was a torrid misrepresentation of the IP, and a general disservice to the franchise.

Not to mention their unethical business practices (I'm not talking about JUST the C-store), products by Cryptic are best avoided.

STO is not a quality production, and can not even be considered a AAA titled despite the IP it is based on.

It would be perfectly acceptable if STO went F2P. As it stands certain f2p titles already surpass STO in terms of quality, gameplay, and fun value. If STO went F2p, I may consider picking it up as a casual side distraction, and then it wouldn't be such a disservice to the franchise.

" Considering how well Star Trek Online's Season One update was received across the community, the STO team has a lot of work to do to meet and exceed that standard with the upcoming Season Two."

This is bad journalism. How on earth did the author come to the conclusion that the "season One was well received across the community". On the contrary, Season one was lackluster, underwhelming, and buggy... and MOST of the community thinks this. I've been an active part of the STO community since 2008 and have seen its ebb and flow through all its intricacies and intimacies.

As it is, people "across the community" are telling each other "not to get their hopes up too high" for season 2, as there is a probable chance that it may serve to disappoint even more so than Season 1.

Hey Brendan -

I have one simple request:

That you do an article focusing on the most popular or widely recognized roleplaying corps/alliances.

We all know about CVA and Aegis Milita (well some may not), but what about Gallente and Caldari RP corps/alliances?

I've never been typically a roleplayer, but having been involved in a small corp that did it a year ago, I was shocked at how much it added to the flavor of gameplay in EVE. Unscripted, emergent gameplay. Wow.

And for simplicity's sake:

http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=136929

Quote:
Massively: Player response to patches and updates has been mixed. What have you learned from the past and what are you taking into the future?

Bill: That was a big thing we learned, that players were fine with getting smaller things more quickly. We followed the more traditional model with Champions, which was making the next "big thing." Players would have been a lot happier if we would have said, "Here's a cool thing that's an hour of gameplay that's really themed and really fun, and you'll be getting something like that every three weeks" instead of waiting for the waterfall to happen

Response:
Bill, here I totally disagree with you. I do not want a bunch of small updates QUICKLY... but due to the games you created, you have forced me into a position of needing them in order to stay interested in your products. Perhaps you didn't have the luxury of being able to go into more depth while answering that question... but the result of what players were wanting are a direct result of poor design choices on the part of the studio for both STO and CO.

Let me explain. Typically players would not be so interested or ravenous for small updates so quickly, however there is a reason this is so for your games.

Take a look at WoW, EVE, and LoTRO... arguably the most successful AAA MMO titles out there currently. There expansions come out once in a blue moon, while smaller patches come out with months of time between them. Why isn't this the case with CO and STO?

Why Players React to CO and STO wanting content more quickly
It is because you released games that were sub par. You released games with a) barely enough content, or in some cases unacceptable content gaps b) they were too simplistic in their gameplay and c) the time to level cap was generally ridiculously fast even for monkeys.

I don't know who made the decisions, but someone made a choice that both STO and CO should be released as BARE BONES MMO's. So what you have in the end are lvl 50 superheroes with nothing to do but repeatable cookie cutter missions, and Rear Admirals who get to sit around all day waiting in PvP queues. What do you expect? OF COURSE your player base are going to want more content, more quickly... BECAUSE THEY ARE STARVING FOR IT. Is this the mark of a quality game development studio? Sure we do not understand all the underlying facts, and restrictions you may have had placed on you from Atari and CBS... but all we as players can see are the end result. So you have to forgive us, and at least show some sort of understanding.

You make us sound like whiny babies, when really... many of us have valid reasons for being disappointed. Some are sensational, I get this. But what about the rest of us who are just disappointed and with reason?

This should not be. Especially for a game with the Star Trek IP.

The End Result
Tossing players bones here and there will only result in having you guys work harder. Instead of STO having a lot of grand features to it, it will have a lot of little things here and there all because you released a game in a beta state that was not ready to compete with the market. Now what we have to look forward are a bunch of small things, rather than being able to ENJOY A GAME for a long period of time (such as with most other MMOs) and look forward to something grand and big on the horizon. No... you have chosen the less epic route.

Can you blame certain people for thinking you guys are cheap? (I personally don't know what to think, because you SEEM sincere, but the business decisions coming out of Cryptic give me pause).

Do you understand?

>>>Quote:
Massively: A lot of commenters on this site are very harsh on Cryptic. What are some of the things you wish people could see that you guys are doing in your studio that would make people change their minds about Cryptic?

Bill: You have to develop a thicker skin when you go on the forums. A lot of people who post are like, "I'm going to be totally vocal and outrageous!" Instead of going "I wish you guys would do that," they go, "I can't believe they're slaughtering babies and eating them there because they're all evil!" I think the thing that disappoints me is this perception that we sit around and purposefully try to come up with something to screw our players.

Response:
Sure Bill, there are definitely sensationalist people who are just ridiculous. But I sincerely hope you are not automatically discounting anyone who has something less than positive about the game. Perhaps people tend to feel the need to be vocal and outrageous because even though you claim to listen to us... it sometimes seems like very little gets done.

* The constant mistakes you made with the plethora of nerf bomb patches you made with CO during its first few months.
* The community resoundingly agreeing on NOT wanting the Admiralty in at launch
* The thread upon thread upon thread of people wanting full 360* navigational control over their ships
* The HUGE community outcry of wanting the Klingon faction to be a fully developed faction and not wanting it to JUST be PvP based.
* The massive amounts of people all saying they did not want heavy instancing with STO well before the game's launch.

You say you listen. But many of us feel like we are not being heard. Therefore it leads to the unfortunate slight of some people loosing their heads. But... there will always be the immature douche who does this in game to game, but I daresay that perhaps Cryptic has a fair share more than other MMO's. By all means correct me if I am wrong, I am merely speaking out of personal experience with STO&CO and the other MMO's I've played.

>>>Quote:
Bill: We have bets when news goes up, how many posts in it'll be before someone says "slap in the face" or "throw under the bus" or "from Day One."
You bet on us?

Response:
Thanks for letting us know you care. I'm not really sure that was the best thing for you to mention.


Quote:
Bill: When we sit around, we're literally saying, "What's going to make the game a better experience? What are we going to try to address that players want?" We're just trying to make the best game we can make.
Bill, it is SO hard to believe that considering the state both CO and STO launched in, what with bugs, the huge untested launch day nerf patch bomb (CO), server instability, limited and repetitive game play, underwhelming mechanics, and huge issues with a lack of content for both games. Understand us please. Your game releases have been markedly underwhelming compared to say the launches of LotRO and WOW.

>>>Quote:
Craig: ...And any sort of vision where we're these evil business people trying to milk the last penny, when in fact, maybe we're crappy business people, but we just really love doing what we're doing. That's the thing we wish we could get out more. Every once in a while we make mistakes, but it would be worse if we were those evil business people who didn't care. Because when we make that mistake, we feel bad about it, it goes through the dev team: "What were we doing?"

Response:
I applaud you for making that humble admission Craig. If you guys are indeed crappy business people... then you need to either fire someone, or hire someone (or both). Either way, this problem needs to be fixed (and should have been sooner).

In terms of us thinking you are money grabbers, lets take a looksie:

* CO LIfetime Membership/STO Beta FIASCO
* Fileplanet Beta Fiasco
* Launching a product marketed as a 2 faction game when really one of them is sorely under developed.
* Vibora Bay
* The fact that you guys are purportedly working on another MMO, potentially bleeding resources desperately needed for two bare bones products.
* Insane In-game Respec prices forcing people to dish out moolah
* 3 Character slots for STO? Come on.
* 3 weeks after launch, discount the game and give 90 days.
* Ferengi and Klingon races in the C-Store (sorry, but you lead us to believe that we would have a huge swath of choices at launch. Now you're making us pay for them).
* 4 weeks after launch, STO discounted by 44 freaking percent. (it may be lame Amazon decision, but it still feels like people who bought merely a few weeks prior are getting screwed over).
* Launching STO in a supremely underwhelming state and banking on its IP. People are then lead to believe you're just banking on the IP's popularity to move it off the shelves.

What else am I missing? Dear Bill and Craig. What are we supposed to think?

And Bill, I KNOW you don't want to hear this... but you have unfortunately developed a reputation after what happened at Flagship. What with people buying lifetime subs to Hellgate and the game closing so early on. Sure, you got in under your head, I understand that. But do you understand us? Look at the above.

What are we supposed to think?

>>>Quote:
Bill: It is something that's so close to us. One time when we were working on something for Revelation, someone had posted something in our forums that said, "You haven't posted on this thread for five days! You're probably on a beach somewhere, rolling around in money!" People are almost fatalistic, they expect the worst -- "You must've done this for a reason!" Making games is really hard to make and maintain, and you're dealing with a vastly disparate playerbase. On every issue, you have people come down on both sides of it.

Apparently I have a lot of [money], because my favorite new moniker I've gotten on the forums is "Dollar Bill" because all I do is sit around and figure out how to milk cash from our players. I used to wear pants made of money and burned them every night.

Response:
In a lot of your interviews, you talk about how people badger and disparage you. At first you had my sympathy. You still do to a degree, but Bill... CO was your responsibility, and its launch was a royal mess.

Had you put out a quality game product that had depth, was well tested, had enough content, and was genuinely ready to compete with the market... do you honestly think people would still think these things about you? Sure, it is inappropriate for them to get down on a personal level, but the fact remains... you are responsible for your product, being the most public figure for it.

I'd recommend not mentioning this again in the future, else people might start to think all your doing is blubbering in the public eye. Instead of talking about it, give them nothing to talk about by making a quality product. (no offense intended)

>>>Quote:
Bill: If a game comes out and it's not what the players believed it was going to be, what they think they deserve, what they were promised -- the amount of rage associated with that is kind of frightening, to be honest. I love the passion for the game, but it's gotten kind of crazy. The fact that it's not just, like, "Man, I really hated that game, I think it sucked!" It's gone past that point: "That guy who made that game, or that team that made the game, they're evil!"

Response:
I'd like to address my response to Craig.

Craig... you know VERY WELL... that what we were told about STO got MANY people excited and enthusiastic about this game. However as time went on, less and less of the original vision was being implemented. You can expect a response from the star trek community because... Star Trek comes naturally with a certain set of expectations of standards.

If you are not sure, I could dig up all the interviews and previous Ask Cryptics, but it has been said enough times on these forums that I'm sure you know. I don't feel rage against you or anyone else at Cryptic. But I do feel let down. ANd I do feel disappointed. ANd in some cases, I think that might be worse... since you guys have been so in love with this project and enthusiastic about it from the beginning.

Can you blame us for feeling "meh" about it, when we were really hoping to be Amazed. Don't say its not possible, because it was definitely do-able to make a creative, outside the box MMO that a lot of people would have felt satisfied with. Sure, it wouldn't have pleased everyone... but it was possible to make a Star Trek MMO that even all of the reviewers could have agreed was an outstanding product. You guys didn't deliver. Care to tell us why? Its not necessary. Just do better in the future, thats all I ask.

Conclusions:
If you don't want to be seen as money grabbers
Then take steps that actively show that you have the paying customer's best interests at heart. Vibora Bay was a monumental "idiot moment" for you guys. Try giving back to the community.

*Start filling up the C-Store, and regularly give items away to people either in contests, random draws, or for special events.
*When the new (Romulan) faction for STO comes out. Give all of us a FREE character slot (because 3 character slots, BEGS the image of Scrooge. Come on).
*Any future updates for STO and CO should be impeccable and outstanding. Outstanding in the true sense of the word... go for noteworthy... not bare minimum.

All in all, I wish you guys the best, but more so I would hope you would take the time to think thoroughly and carefully about the ramifications your decisions make.