test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

KDF/RR Community Fundraiser - Would it be allowed?

2»

Comments

  • silverlobes#2676 silverlobes Member Posts: 1,953 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    I think it's less about money, and more about available manpower/man hours.
    What they need to have is a KDF recruitment event, get people making and leveling KDF toons, get people interested in their back catalog of KDF c-store ships.

    Demand leads to supply, supply doesn't create demand.

    ^ These two pretty much sum this up. A KDF recruitment event with decent rewards and unlocks will get people to play. No need for kickstarter campaigns.

    This topic ought to be added to the F.C.T. as it has been brought up a number of times over the years and the answer is always no from the Devs.

    Oh I'm totally down for a KDF recruitment event, but when you say unlocks, do you mean the ships players can choose levelling up? The options at the moment could do to be expanded a little, and if Cryptic's reason for not allocating the work to dev's schedules due to a lack of resources, then giving them the resources to make the allocations/new hires, would solve the issue.

    I didn't know a kickstarter had been suggested before, my bad.

    periodically, someone in the kdf community suggests a Kickstarter as a means to get budget and revenue to pay for expansions, so far, Cryptic's never bitten on the idea *(proving that NO, they aren't just in it for the monies, but instead they actually have some professional standards, ethics, and pride)

    I'd be down to drop monies in to see this happen, but there's a whole administrative nightmare on the Cryptic side of the house when you start talking about those kind of efforts, and there's lawsuit risks and such as well that make it less appealing than us outsiders might think at first blush.

    I think they could really use a few hours talking to Steve Jackson about how to run that kind of campaign, what the pitfalls are, etc. since he's the sort of 'pioneer' of it with the OGRE re-release kickstarter campaign.

    (IOW-talk to people who've done it SUCCESSFULLY).

    to be honest, I think the biggest hurdle to a Kickstarter or similar campaign, isn't company management or staffer bias, but is instead talking to the hawt&Juicy Lawyers. not just Cryptic's lawyers, or PWE's lawyers, but also CBS' lawyers..
    This is the thing, I don't understand why it would be a legal issue. Alec Peters nearly got sued into the poorhouse because he was raising monies and making profit, on an IP which wasn't his. I can't defend the guy on that, and don't intend to. He got what he had coming to him, and in the process, well and truly **** things up for everyone else who was playing by the rules. But Cryptic, while they may not own the Trek IP, they are licensed users of it, and they are allowed to make profit through their work.

    I'm a stocks and shares kind of guy, profit and loss, not rules and regulations, so perhaps I'm missing something, but given how you worked out the costs for new ship the other day, then turned round and said Cryptic didn't have the resources to do it (which I agree, they clearly don't) I just don't see how Cryptic being given (let's say a million bucks) from an outside source, and that source saying 'Please can we have some more KDF/RR stuffz?', I can't see why that would be an issue from a legal perspective.

    I wasn't actually thinking about Peters and Axanar when I wrote that, I was thinking about several efforts I've seen hit Lawyer walls in other gaming properties instead-unlike Axanar, Cryptic's already got permission to make a profit on Star Trek.

    The bigger issues legally are in the statement of work, standards of work, and timing of work vs. what's promised, and what legal obligations are giong to be levelled. The other big one, is getting permissions from CBS-because they obviously have intentions wrt things like the Setting, and remember, STO is advertising for the product that CBS owns-which translates out to Cryptic not having full creative control of the game product. whatever your hypothetical Kickstarter turns out, can't clash with what CBS is planning or intending on a product that is in production (at least, they're saying it's in production, t hey've hired actors and directors and writers and made sets and CGI...)

    It's different from the Axanar situation in a lot of ways-what Peters was doing he might've even gotten away with, if the property had been, in fact, abandoned in all but name by CBS/paramount (but it wasn't). That situation's not even an issue, what's at issue, is that a Kickstarter that fails to deliver an acceptable product, could do damage to CBS' brand, if it is acceptable, but straitjackets t heir own product, this too does damage to the brand, if it's outstanding and not in line with current or established future plans, again, damage to the brand.

    and people have been sued, and lost their asses, from those situations.

    so yeah, lawyerly vetting of the campaign, establishing the bill of work to be filled, and solid planning are kinda critical here, inclduing making damn sure the legal is ironclad.

    The bill of work is also an issue-it has to be something that Cryptic can achieve within the Kickstarter's timeline goals, without taking a hit to their established production and production schedule-and keep in mind they just opened yet another new line that demands developers and project leads, so the 'veteran' staff is even yet thinner on the ground-so at b est you're looking at a less experienced 'sub crew' (assumign the campaign generates enough money to hire the needed bodies they're already short of, with the necessary skillsets.)

    I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm saying that there's a lot of challenges involved that have to be worked through before the project is viable-and a lot of them that would have to be worked through before the kickstarter page even went up.
    The reason I mention Alec Peters and Axanar, is that it sets precedent for the kind of funds which a Star Trek project can raise from fans.

    I'm not understanding the resistance. You're the one who's always saying that Cryptic are understaffed, and under-funded to do more than they're currently doing. Yes? So giving them enough money, would bypass that problem. You worked out how much ships cost in terms of man-hours, etc, we can work out team-size and a salary from that, and then set that as the KickStarter goal.

    Timeline also isn't an issue, because it would be discussed with Cryptic, they say how long it will take to accomplish, and so that gets specified in the KickStarter, that some perks, and the completed project, may take 8 months from commencement of the project.

    All these things, are things which Cryptic should be able and willing to discuss with a potential investor.

    I understand that there may be some licensing issues to be worked with, which is again, why Cryptic would have to be involved in the discussions, so it's known exactly what they can and can't do, and that would then be streamlined into the perks. It might be that no one gets to insist on their custom design of a BoP, no matter how much money they pay, because that might conflict with the guidelines and constraints Cryptic's design process have to adhere to, so it would all need negotiation and discussion, but I simply don't see why that's not possible.
    "I fight for the Users!" - Tron

    "I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
  • ambassadorkael#6946 ambassadorkael Member, Administrator Posts: 2,674 Community Manager
    This is not something we would likely ever do, for a multitude of reasons both legal and practical. While I can't speak to the legal reasons, I can speak to the practical to a certain extent:

    1) Have you ever seen one of those lists floating around the internet about all the gaming projects that fail on Kickstarter? Or are massively funded and still come up with something that isn't what the fans believed they were getting? That's because game development is a weird, wonderful, difficult and expensive world that you can't simply solve by throwing money at a problem. For example: Say we get X amount of money, which is enough to hire 2 designers to work on a New Thing. When that money runs out, those people are out of a job. It's unlikely that we'll attract any talent who only want to come and work on a game temporarily when there are so many opportunities in this area for full time work.

    2) What would we make? Even in this thread, there's at least ten different ideas of what people would want us to do with their money. We'd have to pick one idea to throw into this hypothetical kickstarter, and it wouldn't please everybody, or possibly anybody. Even the ideas that regularly come up on these forums that seem to be the most popular have their massive detractors.

    3) I, personally, am deeply uncomfortable with the idea of a game that already has a revenue stream coming to the players and asking for an additional revenue stream. Players already have a way to support our game and allow us to fund projects within it, and that's buying things within the game. To turn around and say, "Well, hey, give us even more money to make a thing" seems...not right.

    The team is constantly working on new content for you guys, and I'm really excited for you to see what's coming down the pipe. There's some really cool stuff in the future. They also take as much time as they can to provide bug fixes and quality of life improvements that you request, because everybody here deeply cares about making sure this game is great. While we appreciate the enthusiasm, we're not likely to ever do crowdfunding.
  • silverlobes#2676 silverlobes Member Posts: 1,953 Arc User
    This is not something we would likely ever do, for a multitude of reasons both legal and practical. While I can't speak to the legal reasons, I can speak to the practical to a certain extent:

    1) Have you ever seen one of those lists floating around the internet about all the gaming projects that fail on Kickstarter? Or are massively funded and still come up with something that isn't what the fans believed they were getting? That's because game development is a weird, wonderful, difficult and expensive world that you can't simply solve by throwing money at a problem. For example: Say we get X amount of money, which is enough to hire 2 designers to work on a New Thing. When that money runs out, those people are out of a job. It's unlikely that we'll attract any talent who only want to come and work on a game temporarily when there are so many opportunities in this area for full time work.

    2) What would we make? Even in this thread, there's at least ten different ideas of what people would want us to do with their money. We'd have to pick one idea to throw into this hypothetical kickstarter, and it wouldn't please everybody, or possibly anybody. Even the ideas that regularly come up on these forums that seem to be the most popular have their massive detractors.

    3) I, personally, am deeply uncomfortable with the idea of a game that already has a revenue stream coming to the players and asking for an additional revenue stream. Players already have a way to support our game and allow us to fund projects within it, and that's buying things within the game. To turn around and say, "Well, hey, give us even more money to make a thing" seems...not right.

    The team is constantly working on new content for you guys, and I'm really excited for you to see what's coming down the pipe. There's some really cool stuff in the future. They also take as much time as they can to provide bug fixes and quality of life improvements that you request, because everybody here deeply cares about making sure this game is great. While we appreciate the enthusiasm, we're not likely to ever do crowdfunding.
    That's fair enough, thank you for the reply and the feedback :)
    "I fight for the Users!" - Tron

    "I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
  • silverlobes#2676 silverlobes Member Posts: 1,953 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    valoreah wrote: »
    I think it's less about money, and more about available manpower/man hours.
    What they need to have is a KDF recruitment event, get people making and leveling KDF toons, get people interested in their back catalog of KDF c-store ships.

    Demand leads to supply, supply doesn't create demand.

    ^ These two pretty much sum this up. A KDF recruitment event with decent rewards and unlocks will get people to play. No need for kickstarter campaigns.

    This topic ought to be added to the F.C.T. as it has been brought up a number of times over the years and the answer is always no from the Devs.

    Oh I'm totally down for a KDF recruitment event, but when you say unlocks, do you mean the ships players can choose levelling up? The options at the moment could do to be expanded a little, and if Cryptic's reason for not allocating the work to dev's schedules due to a lack of resources, then giving them the resources to make the allocations/new hires, would solve the issue.

    I didn't know a kickstarter had been suggested before, my bad.

    periodically, someone in the kdf community suggests a Kickstarter as a means to get budget and revenue to pay for expansions, so far, Cryptic's never bitten on the idea *(proving that NO, they aren't just in it for the monies, but instead they actually have some professional standards, ethics, and pride)

    I'd be down to drop monies in to see this happen, but there's a whole administrative nightmare on the Cryptic side of the house when you start talking about those kind of efforts, and there's lawsuit risks and such as well that make it less appealing than us outsiders might think at first blush.

    I think they could really use a few hours talking to Steve Jackson about how to run that kind of campaign, what the pitfalls are, etc. since he's the sort of 'pioneer' of it with the OGRE re-release kickstarter campaign.

    (IOW-talk to people who've done it SUCCESSFULLY).

    to be honest, I think the biggest hurdle to a Kickstarter or similar campaign, isn't company management or staffer bias, but is instead talking to the hawt&Juicy Lawyers. not just Cryptic's lawyers, or PWE's lawyers, but also CBS' lawyers..
    This is the thing, I don't understand why it would be a legal issue. Alec Peters nearly got sued into the poorhouse because he was raising monies and making profit, on an IP which wasn't his. I can't defend the guy on that, and don't intend to. He got what he had coming to him, and in the process, well and truly **** things up for everyone else who was playing by the rules. But Cryptic, while they may not own the Trek IP, they are licensed users of it, and they are allowed to make profit through their work.

    I'm a stocks and shares kind of guy, profit and loss, not rules and regulations, so perhaps I'm missing something, but given how you worked out the costs for new ship the other day, then turned round and said Cryptic didn't have the resources to do it (which I agree, they clearly don't) I just don't see how Cryptic being given (let's say a million bucks) from an outside source, and that source saying 'Please can we have some more KDF/RR stuffz?', I can't see why that would be an issue from a legal perspective.

    I wasn't actually thinking about Peters and Axanar when I wrote that, I was thinking about several efforts I've seen hit Lawyer walls in other gaming properties instead-unlike Axanar, Cryptic's already got permission to make a profit on Star Trek.

    The bigger issues legally are in the statement of work, standards of work, and timing of work vs. what's promised, and what legal obligations are giong to be levelled. The other big one, is getting permissions from CBS-because they obviously have intentions wrt things like the Setting, and remember, STO is advertising for the product that CBS owns-which translates out to Cryptic not having full creative control of the game product. whatever your hypothetical Kickstarter turns out, can't clash with what CBS is planning or intending on a product that is in production (at least, they're saying it's in production, t hey've hired actors and directors and writers and made sets and CGI...)

    It's different from the Axanar situation in a lot of ways-what Peters was doing he might've even gotten away with, if the property had been, in fact, abandoned in all but name by CBS/paramount (but it wasn't). That situation's not even an issue, what's at issue, is that a Kickstarter that fails to deliver an acceptable product, could do damage to CBS' brand, if it is acceptable, but straitjackets t heir own product, this too does damage to the brand, if it's outstanding and not in line with current or established future plans, again, damage to the brand.

    and people have been sued, and lost their asses, from those situations.

    so yeah, lawyerly vetting of the campaign, establishing the bill of work to be filled, and solid planning are kinda critical here, inclduing making damn sure the legal is ironclad.

    The bill of work is also an issue-it has to be something that Cryptic can achieve within the Kickstarter's timeline goals, without taking a hit to their established production and production schedule-and keep in mind they just opened yet another new line that demands developers and project leads, so the 'veteran' staff is even yet thinner on the ground-so at b est you're looking at a less experienced 'sub crew' (assumign the campaign generates enough money to hire the needed bodies they're already short of, with the necessary skillsets.)

    I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm saying that there's a lot of challenges involved that have to be worked through before the project is viable-and a lot of them that would have to be worked through before the kickstarter page even went up.
    The reason I mention Alec Peters and Axanar, is that it sets precedent for the kind of funds which a Star Trek project can raise from fans.

    I'm not understanding the resistance. You're the one who's always saying that Cryptic are understaffed, and under-funded to do more than they're currently doing. Yes? So giving them enough money, would bypass that problem. You worked out how much ships cost in terms of man-hours, etc, we can work out team-size and a salary from that, and then set that as the KickStarter goal.

    Timeline also isn't an issue, because it would be discussed with Cryptic, they say how long it will take to accomplish, and so that gets specified in the KickStarter, that some perks, and the completed project, may take 8 months from commencement of the project.

    All these things, are things which Cryptic should be able and willing to discuss with a potential investor.

    I understand that there may be some licensing issues to be worked with, which is again, why Cryptic would have to be involved in the discussions, so it's known exactly what they can and can't do, and that would then be streamlined into the perks. It might be that no one gets to insist on their custom design of a BoP, no matter how much money they pay, because that might conflict with the guidelines and constraints Cryptic's design process have to adhere to, so it would all need negotiation and discussion, but I simply don't see why that's not possible.

    Silverlobes, it's not that I'm against it-I'm not, I'm looking at it now from the "okay, so what needs to be done to make this not only happen, but work."

    IOW, what I'm getting at, is, "alright, what do we actually need to do to make this happen?"

    I'm interested in seeing what it takes to get from the hypothetical to the theoretical to the PRACTICAL.

    putting idea into practice, diggit?

    I'm up for contributing, but it's gotta be more than just "let's do this" without a plan to actually do it.

    So here's what I'm saying:

    Alright, we have a proposal, so now, let's figure out a plan of action, get the permissions, and do it.

    and the permission part, well...

    good luck with that, The idea's been replied to, and the answer is 'no'..
    Well, putting it into practice, is just a case of speaking to the right person, getting the right meeting, and bashing out the details, pretty basic business, really, but yeah, Kael's response makes that a kinda moot point really :D Oh well, can't say I didn't try :)

    "I fight for the Users!" - Tron

    "I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,214 Arc User
    Note that the pledge idea has none of the problems associated with kickstarter type funding.
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,214 Arc User
    edited June 2017
    patrickngo wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    Note that the pledge idea has none of the problems associated with kickstarter type funding.

    it has other problems instead. *(anyone who's worked a Pledge drive can tell you about them-like how not everyone who pledges actually writes the cheque).

    nope, the only way I could see it,is for someone to win a powerball lotto, drive down to Cryptic, and offer them t he money right then-and-there for something specific...which isn't exactly going to work, since they'd have to be in a mood to TAKE the money.


    I know. I had trouble convincing pledgers I had actually run all 10k of a charity fundraiser. But in this case half the money will already have been spent, and if the player does not buy the offering he will spend that money on something else in the C-store.
  • bernatkbernatk Member Posts: 1,089 Bug Hunter
    A profound cause. Here's my take on it.

    Buy KDF ships. As for me, I only buy ships in bundle that has KDF and Rom ships.

    Spend on KDF ships! And Cryptic will get it.
    Tck7dQ2.jpg
    Dahar Master Mary Sue                                               Fleet Admiral Bloody Mary
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 12,587 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ... which isn't exactly going to work, since they'd have to be in a mood to TAKE the money.

    That mood has never failed them before. :P
    3lsZz0w.jpg
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 12,587 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    meimeitoo wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ... which isn't exactly going to work, since they'd have to be in a mood to TAKE the money.

    That mood has never failed them before. :P

    um, Meimei, I'm fair certain that the devs have both professional standahds and pride, and such an offer wold be at best a crass bribe, and could even be taken as an insult or slur on their professionalism.

    not saying it would, but it's possible.


    I don't think approaching a company, asking them to make something, and offering them money for it, could ever be construed as a 'bribe.' :)

    They'd probably run into opposition from PWE, though, as they likely have to keep certain business schedules.
    3lsZz0w.jpg
  • ambassadorkael#6946 ambassadorkael Member, Administrator Posts: 2,674 Community Manager
    valoreah wrote: »
    @ambassadorkael#6946 Can this get added to the F.C.T.? It's a topic that has come up quite a few times over the years and your answer here sums things up rather nicely.

    Totally. I'm actually working on adding a bunch of stuff to the FCT, just need to get answers on some of them from the devs. :)
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    bernatk wrote: »
    A profound cause. Here's my take on it.

    Buy KDF ships. As for me, I only buy ships in bundle that has KDF and Rom ships.

    Spend on KDF ships! And Cryptic will get it.
    Yes, the metrics of ship [purchases tell Cryptic more than posting does. Let your voice be heard where it really counts!
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • gaevsmangaevsman Member Posts: 3,190 Arc User
    > @markhawkman said:
    > bernatk wrote: »
    >
    > A profound cause. Here's my take on it.
    >
    > Buy KDF ships. As for me, I only buy ships in bundle that has KDF and Rom ships.
    >
    > Spend on KDF ships! And Cryptic will get it.
    >
    >
    >
    > Yes, the metrics of ship [purchases tell Cryptic more than posting does. Let your voice be heard where it really counts!

    True!, Im buying every Klingon and Romulan ship i can, because i like them, and also i want them to do more! (Real money not dil-zen, thats indirect money)
    The forces of darkness are upon us!
  • silverlobes#2676 silverlobes Member Posts: 1,953 Arc User
    Iron Wind Metals, who makes miniatures for Battletech kinda does this. Players have been funding the model sculpts for years now cause the company doesn't seem to make enough money on it's own to afford to do good ones.
    That sounds like a cool idea :) Kind of like a Collectors Club where the collectors choose the collectable, rather than just the Offer of the Month?

    I have not read the entire thread yet, so this may have been addressed...

    One of the reasons we had the C-store in the beginning was so we could be able to fund the development of things that might otherwise not have been developed as part of the normal process. But back then, we did not have a free-to-play option, so they had guaranteed revenue based on the number of unique active accounts. Now that it is not required to subscribe, every single cent they must expect to make is based on some purchasable option they give us.

    THAT, my friends, is why there is so much neglect. They know that the CORE point of view in Star Trek has always been federation-centric. That is why that the UFP was the only 100% viable faction at launch. It is also why the UFP always will receive the majority of content. Even though they KNOW there will be people playing as Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, or whatever other factions that may ever one day exist, they also KNOW that the majority will always play as Federation characters. And because just playing the game does not guarantee revenue they must prioritize what they KNOW will be pulling in the most money. And that is federation content...

    This is one of the reasons why I advocated mission content being something we needed to buy. I recognized that if fluff was the only thing we paid for, then that would be the chief money maker and therefore would be what got prioritized. And that is what happened. Cause right now, we get less stuff to actually DO, and more ways to look different while doing the same old stuff over and over again...

    The biggest mistake they ever made was downplaying the importance of subscriptions. It should have ALWAYS been their goal with the free to PLAY approach to convert free-players into paying subscribers. And their price point for everything that could be purchased piecemeal when they originally went F2P, if totaled up was on par with a lifetime subscription.

    Everything beyond that should have been monetized. Including and Especially mission content. If everything is set up to make money, then everything becomes important enough to justify allocating resources to. Until that happens, the status quo will not go.

    But that is built upon two faulty premises:
    -That Fed players will always want to play Fed content.
    -That active players will want to subscribe.

    I can only speak for myself, but if there was more options for Klingon ships for levelling up, I would play as a Klingon more often, and spend more money on the KDF. The devs are misinterpreting the metrics by thinking that people are just spending money Fed-side because that's what they want to do. They should be considering that players are only spending money Fed-side, because that's where the best stuff gets released. They need to step out of their metrics-driven circular-logic.

    I'm happy to spend $$ on the game (typically, 50% of my disposable) to do my part and pay my way. But given the bugs which occur throughout the game, which rarely get fixed, and which are always being added to, given the way in which the devs TRIBBLE up things like the queue UI, and simply lack the humility to accept that they made the wrong call, and put things back the way they were, I can promise you that I Will NEVER pay a subscription of any form to this game. Ever.

    There is no way I am willing to squander my resources on a subscription to something where, as spielman pointed out, the devs don't care enough about their product to actually Get It Right in the first place, or have the humility to fix bugs when reported. How many months was the MVAM console broken for? Totally unacceptable for something which people are paying money for. Oh, but LTS gets a 500Z monthly stipend? Whoop-de-TRIBBLE-do, :D I've bought four times that (at the least, often even more) on a weekly basis in the past :D I don't need some sub-level handout. Android crew member? I'm happy with the away teams I have, I don't particularly want an android. So what does an LTS or gold subscription actually offer me? Zip. Nada.

    Having money periodically taken by a subscription, rather than consciously given, to a company which can't even be bothered to fix cut-scene glitches, is not my idea of happy spending. It's not going to happen.

    I'm not a moocher, I pay for what I use, and what I want, and am happy to do so. I'm happy to pay to help keep the lights on, rather than the folks like Cryptic's Head Cheerleader on fb, who just grind everything, and who by their own admission, has never spent a penny on the game. I'm not happy, however, to give anything other than what I choose to spend, on a regular basis, when I can see that the resources aren't being used to fix or improve the issues in the game which have been reported.

    If they want to convert players to payers, they need to start taking care of those little things, because it's the little things, which add up and make the difference. 500z? Might as well be 30 pieces of silver, AFAIC.
    "I fight for the Users!" - Tron

    "I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
  • silverlobes#2676 silverlobes Member Posts: 1,953 Arc User
    Iron Wind Metals, who makes miniatures for Battletech kinda does this. Players have been funding the model sculpts for years now cause the company doesn't seem to make enough money on it's own to afford to do good ones.
    That sounds like a cool idea :) Kind of like a Collectors Club where the collectors choose the collectable, rather than just the Offer of the Month?

    I have not read the entire thread yet, so this may have been addressed...

    One of the reasons we had the C-store in the beginning was so we could be able to fund the development of things that might otherwise not have been developed as part of the normal process. But back then, we did not have a free-to-play option, so they had guaranteed revenue based on the number of unique active accounts. Now that it is not required to subscribe, every single cent they must expect to make is based on some purchasable option they give us.

    THAT, my friends, is why there is so much neglect. They know that the CORE point of view in Star Trek has always been federation-centric. That is why that the UFP was the only 100% viable faction at launch. It is also why the UFP always will receive the majority of content. Even though they KNOW there will be people playing as Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, or whatever other factions that may ever one day exist, they also KNOW that the majority will always play as Federation characters. And because just playing the game does not guarantee revenue they must prioritize what they KNOW will be pulling in the most money. And that is federation content...

    This is one of the reasons why I advocated mission content being something we needed to buy. I recognized that if fluff was the only thing we paid for, then that would be the chief money maker and therefore would be what got prioritized. And that is what happened. Cause right now, we get less stuff to actually DO, and more ways to look different while doing the same old stuff over and over again...

    The biggest mistake they ever made was downplaying the importance of subscriptions. It should have ALWAYS been their goal with the free to PLAY approach to convert free-players into paying subscribers. And their price point for everything that could be purchased piecemeal when they originally went F2P, if totaled up was on par with a lifetime subscription.

    Everything beyond that should have been monetized. Including and Especially mission content. If everything is set up to make money, then everything becomes important enough to justify allocating resources to. Until that happens, the status quo will not go.

    But that is built upon two faulty premises:
    -That Fed players will always want to play Fed content.
    -That active players will want to subscribe.

    They are not faulty premises.
    -It's safe to say that some fed players would ALSO play KDF or NRR content if both factions were fully on par with the UFP. It is also possible that some UFP players would ABANDON the UFP gameplay if the other two factions were 100% equal with UFP. That is why I maintain that STO needs to have all elements treated equally important, so regardless of what we the players decide to do, the game itself remains profitable. In fact, if word were to get out that all factions were finally being given equal treatment, the news may actually attract new players who may have given the game a pass because the non-UFP faction they wanted to play wasn't worth playing to them before.
    I believe it is a faulty premise, because they keep telling themselves that people keep playing Fed because it's Star Trek. I acknowledge that for many that is the case, but it's certainly not the case for all, and indeed, it is safe to say that if the other content was there, there are others who would also play it. Or even play it exclusively. If the KDF and RR content was equal to that of the Feds, it wouldn't matter if a player was to abandon the Feds, because they'd still be paying in the same amount of investment, for that other faction :)
    -Of course not all active players would want to subscribe. That cannot be controlled. This is why everything, including mission content should be monetized. Of those who may not want to subscribe, a cross-section of them would fork over the cash to get additional content. these are those who are not against spending money, but simply prefer to be in control of when and how much they spend. To entice a cross-section of this group into subscribing, you make everything, and I mean EVERYTHING obtaibable viz subscribed gameplay... OH... and it means absolutely NOTHING unless new content is released as often as a subscriber's credit card is chartged. In other words... MONTHLY content releases for all factions. Oh... And that stipend of Zen subscribers get... It needs to be 1500 per month. If they have decided on a 1:1 ratio of real cash to Zen, then what we spend on the game NEEDS to accurately reflect that.
    I think the issue with monetizing everything, is it's then no longer F2P, and they lose one of their main enticements. It would then also put Cryptic in the tricky situation of having to actually make good on that, and keep releasing quality content. Given current performance, I'm not entirely convinced that they could do that. Certainly not enough to bet the farm on, by putting everything behind pay-walls.
    Oh, I agree with you. But the issue is one of quality rather than quantity. As it stands, and it is more applicable to the NRR fraction than the KDF, though it was an issue for them as well for a time, There is not enough NRR-specific mission content paying out enough XP to level a NRR character from 1-max. If you already have a max-level character in the UFP or KDF factions, then when your NRR character reaches the UFP/KDF decision gate, you're really just repeating what you've already done with a different character/ship appearance. If you are a new player, you don't know any better, so it is a non-issue, unless you roll a UFP or KDF toon and realize you just did that content as a NRR character...

    If there really is some big technical reason why the NRR cannot be its own independent faction, short of completely overhauling the game to make it work, then I am fine with the UFP/KDF decision gate. But I do not see any real reason why the gate cannot be pushed to at least Level 50 with enough NRR-specific mission content to carry a player through, so when they emerge into the Alliance at end-game, they would be fully viable in ROMULAN ships and gear to adequately contribute.
    Initially, I thought it was a massive cop out for the faction storylines to lead into the main Fed storyline, but once I saw someone describe the factions as different Origin points, that made sense. I agree, that the point should be L50, as some of the missons, simply wouldn't truly be relevant to the non-Fed factions, but I can live with that :)
    This falls in with my position that all of STO needs to be treated with equal importance. Not all players want to queue up to play together. Not all players want to do PvP. Heck, some players level their characters to max with ONLY the Doff system, and they don't even bother playing the rest of the game much. A player's personal choices of how they wish to play are irrelevant. That they ARE playing is. So if the focus were about eliminating bugs and providing content ACROSS THE BOARD, then these things would be less significant in terms of issues. It seems to me like the SUITS involved think of the players as enemies, or at the very least annoyances, rather than the real reason they make ANY money at all. And until that changes, more and more people will share your position and keep their wallets closed. Oh, they will PLAY, but they won't be making PWE any money. I happen to be one of those. Last thing I bought was the Jupiter uniform, and even then I bought my Zen with Dilithium, so they didn't really make any money off of me... Now if they start charging for mission content, and they release it often enough as if it is at least as important than the fluff they sell, my wallet will be open. But they aren't, so it isn't.
    I think the thing which the suits forget, is that we are the ones paying their salaries... Now as far as subscriptions go, they would have to seriously up their bug-fixing game, and kick out some major (player selectable) perks for me to consider taking a subscription. I'm happy to pay for the things I want like boffs, costumes and ships, but anything beyond that, I would want to actually see my money going somewhere and doing something regards maintenance
    The DEVs, if given a chance and the resources to do so, would probably fall right in line with the way we've been talking. It is the SUITS who sign their paychecks that decide which resources, human and monetary, are allocated to what. At worst, the lead dev probably has to submit a recommendation for this based on the criteria that the suits dictate. He knows what the suits aren't going to want to approve and what they are most likely to approve, if an approval for anything beyond business as usual is even needed at all. Remember, STO is just one massive status quo. And that is clearly a BUSINESS decision which the devs, and we the players, are all subject to.
    I'd like to believe that they would, but frankly, I don't. As for the suits, again, don't forget that we are the ones paying their salaries ;) If it wasn't for those of us who subscribe and make cash purchases, they'd just be another bunch of unemployed hipsters ;) They've all forgotten that ;)
    Indeed. Which is why a mindset change is needed on the part of the suits making the decisions. Which is why none of this will ever happen, because they have demonstrated time and time again that they are unwilling to change their minds.

    >Snip<

    Again... It is all about the suits regarding ALL of STO as being equally important. Which I fear will never happen.
    And that, I fear will be their eventual undoing. When the game dies, I believe it will be from death by a thousand cuts. It'll be the straw which breaks the camel's back which will flip a player's love for Trek, into unwillingness to allow that love of Trek to be exploited on a sub-par product, rather than any massive blunder. It'll be people like LTS holders gradually giving up when the glitches and bugs get too much to ignore.
    "I fight for the Users!" - Tron

    "I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 10,247 Community Moderator
    edited June 2017
    This question has now been answered and the topic added to the FCT.

    t3VfNaE.png
    GrWzQke.png
    Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
    Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
    Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
    ----> Contact Customer Support <----
    Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
    Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
    Want the latest information on Star Trek Online?
    Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
This discussion has been closed.