test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

If "Removal = raising average quality," the obvious question is- what goes next?

1235

Comments

  • eldarion79eldarion79 Member Posts: 1,679 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    LOL, i wish those were the only complains this year.. you missed like, 50 more.. xD. You must be playing another game than sto..

    I can say he hit it with KDF which would encompass the majority of those complaints.

    However, the OP MVAM Prometheus should be neck and neck with the Excelsior along with the Cryptic Store.
  • saekiithsaekiith Member Posts: 534 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    What most likely get removed next?

    Anything that either stands in the way of monetizing certain parts of the game or cannot be monetized themselves fast enough without much effort.
    Selor Andaram Ephelion Kiith
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    saekiith wrote: »
    What most likely get removed next?

    Anything that either stands in the way of monetizing certain parts of the game or cannot be monetized themselves fast enough without much effort.

    Why the hell is "what's next" even a question? (well apart from the obvious that it allows people to assume an attitude that can most easily try to leverage removing a very crappy piece of content from an MMO for their own personal advantage [as of course the unspoken cry in all this is "appease us!"])

    As far as I can recall this is the first time we've had a noticeable part of the game completely removed without compensation. I know we humans are good at pattern recognition but something happening once under very particular circumstances is NOT a pattern. Its just an event and it would do to appreciate those circumstances behind it as otherwise we're nothing more than a pack of whiny children trying to extort candy from the adults for having to put up with some simple facts of life.

    Look, we've had revamps, we've had things change. But in all of that we've had developers sincerely trying to make their game better. Now where some of you might be going wrong is to define the quality of a game based on what YOU get out of it (your fun, your time, your resources, your needs, you you bloody you) but a game does have a life of its own. It needs to function, it needs to consume (money, time, what have you) in order to survive and sometimes that requires it to do things which aren't entirely suited to YOUR tastes but again the game has its own standards to live by. It needs to prune the deadwood to make room for new growth and only a fool would stand in the way of that because NOT finding ways to monetize and MAINTAINING awful, anachronistic content is self-destructive to all of us.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    saekiith wrote: »
    What most likely get removed next?

    The KDF. Taking qo'nos away would make DL time much much shorter.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • ussinterceptussintercept Member Posts: 627 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    saekiith wrote: »
    What most likely get removed next?

    Anything that either stands in the way of monetizing certain parts of the game or cannot be monetized themselves fast enough without much effort.

    Yes. Damn them for wanting to make money. They should work for free. Spend countless hours toiling over content that will appease you and you alone. To Sto'vokor with anyone else or any content that can drive profit, that will in turn keep their doors open and allow them to continue providing future content. And establishing a cycle of content and profit.

    This game isnt a Subscription Based Game anymore. If you arent continuously putting real money into the game than you really have no basis to complain. Since youre only losing the time youve put into a game. Time you chose to spend on STO. No one made you download it and run it. And even if the missions are driven towards monetization. It in no way forces you to spend real money. If youre a lifer...At some point your investment turns into profit for you.

    The removal of exploration clusters does not spell doom for this game. And more importantly does not immediately point at the game becoming a shell of what it once was. The fact that this game is 4 years old and is profiting and able to bring in the very actors that played parts in the shows and movies we loved tells you its going to be up and running for quite a long time from now.
  • policestate76policestate76 Member Posts: 1,424 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    The KDF. Taking qo'nos away would make DL time much much shorter.

    Its another way to "fix" the limits of the engine. They keep deleting things to make "space" for the new expansion. Its a great tactic, i must say. And as you say, im afraid that the next thing will be the end of the hate for the KDF. Cryptic hates the KDF so much, that they will just evaporate em from the face of the universe. It will be a great "improvement" in the game, since the graphic load (supossedly) will be lower and as you say, the loading times will be reduced a lot. I actually understand how cryptic thinks.. but honestly i dont think this is the right way.. lol. :P

    But i tell you 1 thing, if they remove the KDF, i will stop playing this game. Im sure of it. Dont touch my klingons, specially my ferasans...
  • edited July 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • edited July 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    f2pdrakron wrote: »
    You must have a terrible memory.

    On top of my head ... DS9 Fleet Action, Terradome and Gekli Feeding Grounds.

    Forgive me, you're right. Cryptic does have a history of removing terrible content from their game. Its just that these missions don't stick in the mind apart from being unplayable in one capacity or another. I did spend a little time with the Gekli and it was simply an awful mission. Terradome on the other hand was practically unplayable (never managed to get a team together for it) and what else you mentioned is before my time so I can't comment on it.

    So just what is the problem with this? Are we to hold cryptic down to every terrible idea they have and force them to revamp it until it finally meets with some approval at the expense of the rest of their development pipeline? It's hard enough for the forum population to go along with necessary revamps of early and late game content which serves a definite function even in its original, poorly implemented state. Arguing that they obligate themselves to the accessories is a much harder case to make.

    We don't need that content (which should be self-evident) and even if it was made playable the best it would do is satisfy a niche audience who wasn't totally put of by the first, broken, attempt. There are of course multiple scales of response, aesthetic overhauls (the early FED revamp), total overhauls (the Borg Revamp, CCE, Mirror Invasion, Crafting) depending on what Cryptic is able to accomplish but because that is a limited factor we should also allow them the black option, removal, because not every whim and fancy of ours is within their development capabilities.

    You can gripe with that, but such is merely conflicting personal priorities.

    We may want exploration, possibly we may all want exploration, but think of what shape that system would take in order to 1. Satisfy the new needs of the crafting system (which seems to be the primary issue at the moment and why just keeping it isn't a viable option) and 2. be a substantial improvement over the old system when Crafting and perhaps more also needs to be developed for this release. They could rush it, botch that job too, and force themselves into needing further revamps, or they could hold off, sack what needs to be sacked in the meantime, and possibly come back to the problem when they're in a FAR better position to give us a proper exploration system or something else that satisfies the same niche. It may be less immediately satisfying, but it gives the game far better footing for later development of whatever kind is necessary.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Forgive me, you're right. Cryptic does have a history of removing terrible content from their game.

    DS9 Fleet Action suffered from the same problem the original Borg STFs had ... too many mobs creating swarming issues.

    With a dedicated team though, both were winnable. I defeated the DS9 Fleet Action 6 or 7 times back then. It was more fun than some of the other FAs. With a team at least.

    The Gelki Feeding Grounds was ok too.

    State of Q was removed. It was one of their best story missions ever.

    Cryptic though has a history of removing content that dates back to City of Heroes. And the 5th Column.

    So it's par for the course.

    Also, the new crafting system isn't worth losing ANY content for. It's yet another failed attempt that will be mostly ignored by the players. Heyyyyyy ... that's what got exploration removed right?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • edited July 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2014

    State of Q was removed. It was one of their best story missions ever.

    Meh, I think you can only say that at a conceptual level. In describing the plot of the mission you have something truly good but when you approach how it was actually implemented you certainly had one of the weakest missions in STO, particularly of the later series, and to leave it sitting between the Borg revamp and Dyson sphere missions would have been seriously counterproductive to BOTH of those.
    So it's par for the course.

    Again, so what? They try to make fun **** and if it doesn't work they have to find out what they can do about it. We may want everything to stay and simply get better but such is not always possible. Sometimes it simply needs to go to make room for new developments.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Meh, I think you can only say that at a conceptual level. In describing the plot of the mission you have something good but when you approach how it was actually implemented you certainly had one of the weakest missions in STO, particularly of the later series.

    You've got to be kidding me. Now you're calling State of Q a weak mission?

    It took you back to Wolf 359. On the Saratoga. It pretty much was a lynchpin of Trek lore combining DS9, TNG and the new STO lore all into one fun filled Q-nanza.

    I have no words for this jibba jabba. You're way over the moon if you support the removal of story content like State of Q. You sir, aren't much of a Trek fan. For real.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • rinksterrinkster Member Posts: 3,549 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Removing content to improve the overall quality of the rest makes perfect sense....statistically.

    After all, it mathematically proves itself.

    Problem is, despite what some may think, the actual gaming experience isn't just statistical.



    Have to be fair though, it's not an easy line to draw.

    But, just as knowledge must be tempered with wisdom, so statistics must be tempered with insight.

    I think we've seen too many decisions recently that lack insight, even though the statistical case is sound.
  • edited July 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Statistically speaking ... Fippy Darkpaw is still rushing the Qeynos gates. 16 years later.

    Cryptic has nothing that could even come close to that level of longevity.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    You've got to be kidding me. Now you're calling State of Q a weak mission?

    It took you back to Wolf 359. On the Saratoga. It pretty much was a lynchpin of Trek lore combining DS9, TNG and the new STO lore all into one fun filled Q-nanza.

    I have no words for this jibba jabba. You're way over the moon if you support the removal of story content like State of Q. You sir, aren't much of a Trek fan. For real.

    Weak mission, not a weak story. Remember that we are talking about a game which has other qualities besides where a particular setting rests within the franchise. The Saratoga may be special, Q may be special, involving the two with the player may be very special, but when all that comes down to is a few lines of dialog and a bland romp through fed interior A AFTER having a giant space Q awkwardly (referring to how it was implemented, not the intent) interfere with combat you can't call that a good piece of gameplay.

    It may excite your imagination but that isn't the only quality to consider here. Again, see the whole point of my argument. We may have a particular set of priorities but the game as a functional entity has another set entirely. We may want it to move in one direction but given that disconnect it will at least occasionally move in another. Rather than crying about it, we should simply learn to appreciate what the game needs to do for itself.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • aloishammeraloishammer Member Posts: 3,294 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Why the hell is "what's next" even a question?

    Because of the lame rationalization used to justify a removal, because it's "not up to par" (like most everything that hasn't been remastered), "confused newer players" who apparently can't figure out complex things like square maps, and it "increases the download size" which is a "derp" statement if ever there was one- every byte of data adds to the download size, that's sort of just how such things work.


    Why the hell are the white-knighting sycophants in such a snit about the hypothetical question is of more interest to me.
    rinkster wrote: »
    Problem is, despite what some may think, the actual gaming experience isn't just statistical.

    Problem is, it's Cryptic doing what passes for the thinking, so some numeric counter supercedes all other concerns.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    rinkster wrote: »
    Removing content to improve the overall quality of the rest makes perfect sense....statistically.

    You can find more practical examples in just about every major franchise. The issue though may be obscured because in most cases where the devs change directions on a feature and leave it out completely, they've moved between different sequential releases of the same product (ex. Halo, Assassin's Creed, Elder's Scrolls, Mario, ect.). Here we have the same situation but as it applies to a single game with continuous development rather than staggered releases. We have a lot of content that can be considered an artifact of the game's original release and early lifespan which may no longer function adequately to the present needs of it. This is why we have seen so many revamps: player customization, crafting, traits, missions, its all to deal with the problem of residual BS that we can't simply leave behind via a STO 2. The issue is that while cryptic appears to be able to do quite a bit to improve STO, they can't do everything (as soon as it is absolutely necessary to be revamped) and the question of priorities comes into play.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • kazamiyukarinkazamiyukarin Member Posts: 158 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    State of Q was removed. It was one of their best story missions ever.

    They want to redo State of Q and either get Avery Brooks to record stuff as Sisko, or rip some of his lines directly from "Emissary" and add them to the mission.
    Call me Yuka~
    ~Vice Admiral Saskia - U.S.S. Muenzuka (Dyson Science Destroyer)~
    ~Lieutenant General Kalinka - I.K.S. Kazami (Negh'Var Heavy Battlecruiser)~
    ~Vice Admiral Lorel - R.R.W. Aureus Aquila (Mirror Mogai Heavy Warbird)~
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Because of the lame rationalization used to justify a removal, because it's "not up to par" (like most everything that hasn't been remastered), "confused newer players" who apparently can't figure out complex things like square maps, and it "increases the download size" which is a "derp" statement if ever there was one- every byte of data adds to the download size, that's sort of just how such things work.
    .

    A "derp" statement like "exploration has a function in STO?" Its fine to hold a point of view but if its not any more developed than "taking things away from me is wrong!" there's really not much point joining in discussion. :/

    Exploration quite simply does not work as exploration. It's just a pointless grind through a few com dialogs with substituted names and faces. The only thing that justified its existence in STO (data sample farming) is being moved to other places so now we are only left with the sad fact of its meager existence. A revamp again would be nice but if we aren't going to get that right now I'm not going to cry about it. What I am going to do is rationally point out "keeping exploration is NOT what we need" and hope cryptic has plans to create a REAL exploration system when they have a better opportunity than under a crafting revamp in a 0.5 season.

    I doubt the loss is going to be felt by any reasonable fraction of the game's population AND sometime in the future we might just have a far better attempt at exploration than ever would be possible NOW.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • xiaoping88xiaoping88 Member Posts: 1,493 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    They want to redo State of Q and either get Avery Brooks to record stuff as Sisko, or rip some of his lines directly from "Emissary" and add them to the mission.

    I believe it when I see it.
    Reality is an illusion.
    The universe is a hologram.
    latest?cb=20130715204749
    Buy gold!
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    It's just a pointless grind through a few com dialogs with substituted names and faces.

    You just described the entirety of STO's content. Seriously, what engaging gameplay is there? You've had a field day tearing into the exploration content, but I haven't seen you offer up anything in STO that's really any different.

    Foundry? Click through dialog boxes and shoot at stuff.
    Rep grind? Click through boxes, move sliders, shoot at stuff.
    PvP? It's almost as dead as exploration.
    At this point the most engaging activity in STO is gaming the exchange market. That requires more thought and less button mashing.

    AND sometime in the future we might just have a far better attempt at exploration than ever would be possible NOW.

    You have no real basis for this. They haven't made any commentary other than what's in Dev Blog 29, which is just that it's being tied into foundry doors and left to rot. In fact the statements made in that blog suggest that is all they're planning to do since that is, in their words, the original intention of exploration.

    There is no super secret exploration revamp coming.

    This is the company that created the Hamidon raid. They don't have a great track record making quality MMO gameplay systems.

    So I'm not sure why you have faith in them ever returning to exploration once they've slapped it into the foundry.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    xiaoping88 wrote: »
    I believe it when I see it.

    Avery Brooks is a bit of a wildcard, so I'm with you on that. I don't see him returning to the character, going off what he's said at cons.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • ussdelphin2ussdelphin2 Member Posts: 525 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    To be honest, they should not remove anything from the game unless they have something to instantly replace it with. Removing old content does not raise the overall quality of the game in my opinion... it just gives you less things to do. And if they did remove all of the lower quality content from the game... well it would not be much of a game.
    How I picture a lot of the forumites :P
  • sheldonlcoopersheldonlcooper Member Posts: 4,042 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Avery Brooks is a bit of a wildcard, so I'm with you on that. I don't see him returning to the character, going off what he's said at cons.

    I agree with you on this. I think we'll see Brent sooner than Avery, and that won't be very soon.

    I do think they might cut and paste his voice from the episode.
    Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."

    "With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

  • kazamiyukarinkazamiyukarin Member Posts: 158 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    I agree with you on this. I think we'll see Brent sooner than Avery, and that won't be very soon.

    I do think they might cut and paste his voice from the episode.

    I agree as well that Avery Brooks is a wildcard.

    Not that he's the most reliable, but I know that Geko has said on several occasions (including from before they pulled the mission) that they really want to rework it and add the dialogue. So the DS9 fan in me is being overly optimistic XD.
    Call me Yuka~
    ~Vice Admiral Saskia - U.S.S. Muenzuka (Dyson Science Destroyer)~
    ~Lieutenant General Kalinka - I.K.S. Kazami (Negh'Var Heavy Battlecruiser)~
    ~Vice Admiral Lorel - R.R.W. Aureus Aquila (Mirror Mogai Heavy Warbird)~
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    You just described the entirety of STO's content. Seriously, what engaging gameplay is there? You've had a field day tearing into the exploration content, but I haven't seen you offer up anything in STO that's really any different.

    Foundry? Click through dialog boxes and shoot at stuff.
    Rep grind? Click through boxes, move sliders, shoot at stuff.
    PvP? It's almost as dead as exploration.
    At this point the most engaging activity in STO is gaming the exchange market. That requires more thought and less button mashing.

    Then Cryptics devs have finally archieved that playing like a ferengi (which are more or less the antithesis of federation) is the only way to have a bit fun in STO. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • jrwithjrwith Member Posts: 154 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    how about those stupid spammers that still get in despite them being blocked?
  • edited July 2014
    This content has been removed.
Sign In or Register to comment.