My two cents: The game doesn't feel like an MMO to me either. It is in no way Massive; there may be a ton of players but you don't see them and there is certainly not a massive amount of content. The amount and type of content is much more comparable to a single player action-RPG than a MMORPG.
Where the game really fails for me is multiplayer, and by extension the combined term "massively multiplayer". The problem is not the fact that you can solo to max level; other games have that and work just fine. The problem is that there is no real reason to group. Teamwork is neither encouraged nor rewarded by the game. The classes and ships are not diverse enough to generate real opportunities to combine abilities and skills such that the sum of a team is greater than the sum of the parts, and the content is not difficult enough to make such teamwork beneficial.
I know people dislike comparisons to WoW, but it makes a good point of reference because more people have played it than any other game out there so I'll go ahead and use it. From vanilla WoW had content that was group only, which happened to be the only instanced content in the game. You didn't have to go there; you could solo to max level. If you got a group and went you were rewarded with a classic dungeon crawl that required diverse skills and teamwork unless you were well beyond the appropriate level for it. The loot was better and there were scripted encounters and bosses with unusual abilities, properties, and artwork. Sure it was a pain in the butt getting a group together; that's what made guilds important. Guilds served a function of helping members get together to take on multiplayer content; in STO they are really just social because you don't need the help.
Lastly (I know I'm getting wordy, but I read the whole thread before responding) on quests: It is true that in any RPG all quests can be boiled down to a few basic sentences like "Kill X" "Collect Y" "Deliver X" "Speak to Y," and the crafting on a code level is no more complicated than what we have in STO. The difference is presentation. When you go into a new zone in other MMOs the scenery changes, the mobs change, and the action changes. It may be small changes, but if done well its enough to keep the experience fresh and keep you from mentally dwelling on the fact that you're still killing X and collecting Y, because X this time is enough different from X last time that you have variety, maybe a hike in difficulty or some playstyle adjustment to make. The new Y isn't in the same place as the old one, you have to go out and find it. By going into new zones and taking on new challenges you get to explore a diverse and interesting world. This to me is what defines exploration in an MMO; the fact that once I'm bored with the forest I can climb the mountains and have a look around. Space may be the final frontier but in STO it's pretty much all the same.
I'm not ready to say the game has failed. It is still in its infancy of a game.
I have just started playing it and will give it the 30 day burn in to see if it is worthwhile spending subscription fee on it.
I want it to be successful because I like Start Trek.
I know right off the start there was a series of quests that annoyed me a bit. I forgot which system it was but you have to explore unknown space and then once there you get a quest to scan abandoned ships or scan minerals or energy on a planet.
Fine - I don't mind soloing. But my problem with it is that there should be mobs to hamper you. All it was was me going back and forth in space or on the planet looking for whatever I needed to scan. Very boring and time consuming. To find the last thing I needed to scan in both the space and planet environments it took me a good 15-20 minutes of going back and forth. irritating.
At least if there were mobs attacking me it would have made it a bit more exciting and challenging. At least give me a chance to get my Red Shirt security guy killed. It doesn't feel like Star Trek until someone in a red shirt gets killed. :-)
Also, with both, you can open map and scan. Good - your crew tells you there are X number of unusual anomalies. But this is advanced space travel. If you scan your crew should be able to tell at least the general direction of the next objective and also the anomalous readings. Instead the crew just sits there "uh yeah Captain there are strange things here but don't ask me where".
Couple thoughts come to mind.
I played EQ, a little EQ2, SWG, DAoC, COH, and a couple random games along the way. went a couple years between online games because i got burned out on them.
Here are my thoughts on some topics in this and other threads
Lumping a couple things together.... the game being Not Trek and No need to group and be multiplayer.
From a player perspective. I love the casual gamer friendly feel of STO. I grew to hate EQ because, especially at higher levels, you pretty much had to group. There were times you maybe had an hour or two to play and it might take most of that time to get a group together.
also, and this plays slightly into the Immersion discussion
TOS, TNG... how often did the Enterprise take part in Multi-ship activities? the bulk of the shows were the ship on its mission alone. Rarely if ever did you see task forces or fleets. The star ship is a self reliant vessel. With the exception of fleet engagements... kind of like you have in the game. For your missions, you are alone yet there are fleet action instances for fleet engagements.
however you still can take other people on your missions so the option to group is there if you want it, but it is not mandatory.
Crafting.
I realized once when i was playing SWG and i spent the first hour of my night checking harvesters that i was paying a company for the privilege of doing busy work and maintenance... and i thought... i get paid to do this at work, why am i paying someone else for me to do it.
I personally think crafting is over rated. yes its nice to make something. but i don't like coming home from one job to log in and do another. i like to play the game and explore the content.
Now i know some people like crafting and that's fine... and i admit that memory alpha made me not even think about crafting in this game and i skipped it all together. so i agree it could use some revamping.
Ultimately this game, as with anything, you get out of it what you put into it. You like PVP? then there is PVP, you like to solo? you are perfectly able to. You prefer to group? You are perfectly able to.
I like to solo, and occasionally group. I like to RP and I take the time to read every mission, yes some of it is monotonous, and to be sure the game has some work that needs to be done to it, but no other game gives me quantum torpedoes to fire at people so i am fairly happy with STO
How did the game fail?
Are there stats to indicate this game failed?
Who told you the game failed?
What professional article I can read about STO failing?
Did Cryptic post STO failed?
Um, Sarcasm I think was a major underlying tone if his comment.
Lastly (I know I'm getting wordy, but I read the whole thread before responding) on quests: It is true that in any RPG all quests can be boiled down to a few basic sentences like "Kill X" "Collect Y" "Deliver X" "Speak to Y," and the crafting on a code level is no more complicated than what we have in STO. The difference is presentation. When you go into a new zone in other MMOs the scenery changes, the mobs change, and the action changes. It may be small changes, but if done well its enough to keep the experience fresh and keep you from mentally dwelling on the fact that you're still killing X and collecting Y, because X this time is enough different from X last time that you have variety, maybe a hike in difficulty or some playstyle adjustment to make. The new Y isn't in the same place as the old one, you have to go out and find it. By going into new zones and taking on new challenges you get to explore a diverse and interesting world. This to me is what defines exploration in an MMO; the fact that once I'm bored with the forest I can climb the mountains and have a look around. Space may be the final frontier but in STO it's pretty much all the same.
I played EQ2 for about two years 06-08, and there are at least 4 different places you can start a character and like you said, many of the quests are similar/same. Though the look of the character, the immediate environment. The abilities, the NPCs etc all have a different look and go a long way to giving you the impression that you are not the same character with not the same abilities. Yes once you get to the more common areas because of quest progression and leveling then it can become more mundane but still you have at least two different paths to take.
Currently with the Klingon's its PVP, Grind Kahless, PVP, Grind another area, PVP etc. It feels empty to me. With Fed side, different class/race/traits - same exact missions. It doesn't even try to give you a different mind set.
I personally would have wanted to see the "Episodes" as Cryptic calls it even remotely resemble the duration and variety scene in many Episodes of the show.
The game is failing because Cryptic rushed it, and was lazy about giving us a feel that we are in the future, that we are earning the right to become Star Fleet or Klingon Captains.
For the Klingon side I don't get the impression that I am supposed to be of a Warrior Culture where there is great honor to be earned from Combat, and I should guide my actions with NPCs and other players through fear, honor, intimidation and treachery. The sense of I could be out capturing enemy vessels and material. Challenging the enemy. Dialogue with NPCs that really set the mood/environment. It just feels cheap.
I don't get the impression that I am an honorable Federation Star Fleet Officer with a sense of duty. That I should be out trying to save life, being diplomatic even in a time of war. Offering surrender? Capturing enemy materials of war (Ships, etc)
Are we going to have to pay for the ability to be other Faction/Races? Why not give us the ability to be Romulan, Cardassian, Ferengi etc etc. Oh wait that is so they can charge us for it later. (Klingon Fed and Ferengi Fed)
Yes this may come later. But at the very least of they offered it @ launch it might help in giving the illusion that there was/is more content.
I realize the game can/might/should mature. Though I really feel like Cryptic did the bare minimum from the start with out any really want/intent on building quality into the game.
Wait this game failed? When? I was just on and there was a bunch of people flying about.
Oh I see those were all AI bots put into the game so Cryptic can give the illusion to the few people who are playing that the game is doing well right?
If the games servers are still running its not a failure.
Wait this game failed? When? I was just on and there was a bunch of people flying about.
Oh I see those were all AI bots put into the game so Cryptic can give the illusion to the few people who are playing that the game is doing well right?
If the games servers are still running its not a failure.
I have some prime ocean front property to sell you in Nevada, it is really cheap. I mean it you not actually see the waves lapping @ your feet, till California falls off the map but hey, it could still be Ocean front property.
Here s something easy. If you dont liek it, dont play. Get off the boards and do something else. But sitting here screaming fail over and ove ris getting old.
the only fail I see is the crybabies sitting here telling us how bad a fail it is.Nut up or shut up I believe someone posted.
Honestly I cannot think of anything more to add, the OP pretty much summed it all up. I think though as time goes on I am sure there will be more diversity and will get somewhat better, but for a released game it is par for the course.
Well, considering that the thread title is "Why This Game Failed" the OP could add something that actually supports that hypothesis.
For all those people who ask for proof, or some sort of written document of the servers closing... really? That's the best type of response you can come up with? Other people caught on, don't see why some of you others couldn't.
I'll make it a bit more simple for the simple minded people. "Why This Game Failed" isn't about them closing the servers and halting all production on it. It failed because of how it was rushed into going live, and failed to deliver an actual mmo. It fails as a game. It fails as enjoyment. It fails as replay value. It fails at a lot of things. But go ahead, be cute, take it literally. Fail some more.
For all those people who ask for proof, or some sort of written document of the servers closing... really? That's the best type of response you can come up with? Other people caught on, don't see why some of you others couldn't.
I'll make it a bit more simple for the simple minded people. "Why This Game Failed" isn't about them closing the servers and halting all production on it. It failed because of how it was rushed into going live, and failed to deliver an actual mmo. It fails as a game. It fails as enjoyment. It fails as replay value. It fails at a lot of things. But go ahead, be cute, take it literally. Fail some more.
but if thats all true and it was that bad why would the servers stay open ? all would stop playing no? what your admitting to is that its your OPINION not fact , you know what they say "OPINION are like A$$ holes everyone has one"
but if thats all true and it was that bad why would the servers stay open ? all would stop playing no? what your admitting to is that its your OPINION.
Ding ding ding! Get this man a cookie. Your reply started off bad, but you changed it around and got it right. Good job.
but it fails for you... not everyone and thats the glory of the gaming world, there are people who enjoy games others don't.
Rather than you spend your time moaning telling us it's failed and expecting that we should all agree with you and quit , why don't you just let us come to our own decisions, while you scuttle off to the next MMO launch, play it for 2 weeks and declare it a FAIL.
For all those people who ask for proof, or some sort of written document of the servers closing... really? That's the best type of response you can come up with? Other people caught on, don't see why some of you others couldn't.
I'll make it a bit more simple for the simple minded people. "Why This Game Failed" isn't about them closing the servers and halting all production on it. It failed because of how it was rushed into going live, and failed to deliver an actual mmo. It fails as a game. It fails as enjoyment. It fails as replay value. It fails at a lot of things. But go ahead, be cute, take it literally. Fail some more.
It's ok just like when the titanic hit the iceberg and they said it could not be sunk as it was sinking there were still many in disbelief, the same thing is happening in STO, there are many who think because they enjoy the repetitive gameplay and because it looks like star trek it means that its a successful game. Well when the numbers come out and a we get a few more interviews to the public as to how many sub's they lost (if they tell the truth) it will be known. This game has and is losing sub's left and right and it does not matter why they are losing sub's just the fact that they are losing so many so quickly is enough proof that this game failed.
If anyone played Warhammer we all know it to well, Mark Jacobs co-founder and lead designer lied on many interviews as to how many copies were actually sold it was not till he was fired within year one and the truth came out about how many copies sold and how many sub's were lost. Yes that game is still currently running and some would say it was successful but as many magazines published they had lost 80% of the player base wthin first 8 months of release. I don't know about you but that does not spell success in my book and I see similar things happening to STO. In a matter of weeks they will lost a considerable amount of sub's in months it will be an extreme amount of sub's and while this game may live on through the extreme casual trekkie fan gamers in the end when they have lost over half the sub's who could possibly say it was not fail.
I just want to say that the lack of social interaction in the game makes it boring. As far as the quests being monotonous, that is how all quests are in almost any MMO ever made. That is just how things are, and the Devs have said that there is endgame content coming.
It isn't "build it and they will come" anymore, it's "build it and they will come for the first 30 days and then god help you if you aren't up to scratch"
Many don't heed the above warning. They attempt to launch with a severely malnourished product in the hope that the subs will feed it to full health.
I'm beginning to feel that the future of the MMO industry lies in the hands of those companies who have already made enough of the necessary capital to make a good job of an MMO's launch. That is, the creators of the big name single player games.
Blizzard showed that although they had never made an MMO before, prior to 2005 they had been quietly watching the market, gathering their forces and taking notes. Maybe, just maybe, the likes of Bioware are doing the same. We won't know until next year. One thing is for certain, MMO companies just don't seem to either have the capital or the resources to create a polished MMO.
but it fails for you... not everyone and thats the glory of the gaming world, there are people who enjoy games others don't.
Rather than you spend your time moaning telling us it's failed and expecting that we should all agree with you and quit , why don't you just let us come to our own decisions, while you scuttle off to the next MMO launch, play it for 2 weeks and declare it a FAIL.
Hypocrite much? This forum is in place for opinions, feedback and suggestions. I gave my opinion on why it failed. So rather than spend your time moaning, telling me why it hasn't failed for you, and expecting that I should agree with you and quit, why don't you just let me come up with my own decisions.
It's ok just like when the titanic hit the iceberg and they said it could not be sunk as it was sinking there were still many in disbelief, the same thing is happening in STO, there are many who think because they enjoy the repetitive gameplay and because it looks like star trek it means that its a
Lots of words snipped....
AOC and WAR both went the way you say, so do most MMOS, a lot of people buy the new MMO expecting te world, they soon find it does not fit what they want and they do not subscribe. This is a natual wastege that most publishers expect, it happens in virtually every launch on anything. This does not make the game a fail, actually its ow it survives this stage defines if it will fail or not.
STO as its bugs, and isnt WOW it isnt everyones cup of tea, but it as not failed yet, and it will continue not to fail while the publishers earn revenue from it.
AOC and WAR bot went the way you say, so do most MMOS, a lot of people buy the new MMO expecting te world, they soon find it does not fit what they want and they do not subscribe. This is a natual wastege that most publishers expect, it happens in virtually every launch on anything. This does not make the game a fail, actually its ow it survives this stage defines if it will fail or not.
STO as its bugs, and isnt WOW it isnt everyones cup of tea, but it as not failed yet, and it will continue not to fail while the publishers earn revenue from it.
Most publishers expect a 80% decrease in subs? I don't buy that for one minute.
An 80% drop is hardly what you could call "natural wastage" or even a "tolerance factor".
Besides, there is a difference between what the general public considers a "success" and a "fail" and what the publishers / devs consider as a financial "success" or "fail".
The difference is that people call popular games a "success", and thus prefer to be playing such an MMO. And MMOs generate more revenue, which means that the life expectancy of the product, and subsequently the players time they have invested in their avatar, is more secure.
People don't like investing time, effort and money into something that they consider will be ultimately wasted. Investors don't either.
Hypocrite much? This forum is in place for opinions, feedback and suggestions. I gave my opinion on why it failed. So rather than spend your time moaning, telling me why it hasn't failed for you, and expecting that I should agree with you and quit, why don't you just let me come up with my own decisions.
Psychologists have shown us that when we go away for a holiday, we do not really want the perfect holiday where nothing goes wrong. What we want is a good holiday, but with something to complain about. The baggage getting lost, the aircraft delayed or the weather being poor. That way when we return home we can enjoy moaning about our experiences to everyone that listens.
Some people though like the positive side to life, thats why we dont see this mmo as a failure yet
Most publishers expect a 80% decrease in subs? I don't buy that for one minute.
An 80% drop is hardly what you could call "natural wastage" or even a "tolerance factor".
Besides, there is a difference between what the general public considers a "success" and a "fail" and what the publishers / devs consider as a financial "success" or "fail". The difference is that people prefer to be playing a popular game. And popular games generate more revenue. And more revenue means that the life expectancy of the product (and thus the players time they have invested in their avatar) is more secure.
People don't like investing into something that ultimately wastes their time and money in the long run. Investors don't either.
Were do you get te figures 80% decrease, agreed such a drop is catastrophic, but all IT is now run by accountants and if it earns money it remains.
Were do you get te figures 80% decrease, agreed such a drop is catastrophic, but all IT is now run by accountants and if it earns money it remains.
AOC allegedly sold around 800000 copies (or there abouts). There is no way that theres any more than about 50k - 100k subs. WAR is going the same way. Kneecappers post also suggests this.
Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that a lot of businesses are all about money at the end of the day. But, many businesses that fail to meet standards because of short-cuts, tight purse strings etc often don't have a good long term future when they've only got one product to rely on for income.
Comments
Ahh, you mean those who don't march lock-step in the "The Game Sucks! OMG!" parade.
Except I dont recall having to pay a sub for those.
Where the game really fails for me is multiplayer, and by extension the combined term "massively multiplayer". The problem is not the fact that you can solo to max level; other games have that and work just fine. The problem is that there is no real reason to group. Teamwork is neither encouraged nor rewarded by the game. The classes and ships are not diverse enough to generate real opportunities to combine abilities and skills such that the sum of a team is greater than the sum of the parts, and the content is not difficult enough to make such teamwork beneficial.
I know people dislike comparisons to WoW, but it makes a good point of reference because more people have played it than any other game out there so I'll go ahead and use it. From vanilla WoW had content that was group only, which happened to be the only instanced content in the game. You didn't have to go there; you could solo to max level. If you got a group and went you were rewarded with a classic dungeon crawl that required diverse skills and teamwork unless you were well beyond the appropriate level for it. The loot was better and there were scripted encounters and bosses with unusual abilities, properties, and artwork. Sure it was a pain in the butt getting a group together; that's what made guilds important. Guilds served a function of helping members get together to take on multiplayer content; in STO they are really just social because you don't need the help.
Lastly (I know I'm getting wordy, but I read the whole thread before responding) on quests: It is true that in any RPG all quests can be boiled down to a few basic sentences like "Kill X" "Collect Y" "Deliver X" "Speak to Y," and the crafting on a code level is no more complicated than what we have in STO. The difference is presentation. When you go into a new zone in other MMOs the scenery changes, the mobs change, and the action changes. It may be small changes, but if done well its enough to keep the experience fresh and keep you from mentally dwelling on the fact that you're still killing X and collecting Y, because X this time is enough different from X last time that you have variety, maybe a hike in difficulty or some playstyle adjustment to make. The new Y isn't in the same place as the old one, you have to go out and find it. By going into new zones and taking on new challenges you get to explore a diverse and interesting world. This to me is what defines exploration in an MMO; the fact that once I'm bored with the forest I can climb the mountains and have a look around. Space may be the final frontier but in STO it's pretty much all the same.
It's a bit too soon to be saying such things. And a bit dramatic.
In a month or two if they haven't made it into an actual you know....MMO game...then maybe...
Don't you think that's a little more realistic?
I have just started playing it and will give it the 30 day burn in to see if it is worthwhile spending subscription fee on it.
I want it to be successful because I like Start Trek.
I know right off the start there was a series of quests that annoyed me a bit. I forgot which system it was but you have to explore unknown space and then once there you get a quest to scan abandoned ships or scan minerals or energy on a planet.
Fine - I don't mind soloing. But my problem with it is that there should be mobs to hamper you. All it was was me going back and forth in space or on the planet looking for whatever I needed to scan. Very boring and time consuming. To find the last thing I needed to scan in both the space and planet environments it took me a good 15-20 minutes of going back and forth. irritating.
At least if there were mobs attacking me it would have made it a bit more exciting and challenging. At least give me a chance to get my Red Shirt security guy killed. It doesn't feel like Star Trek until someone in a red shirt gets killed. :-)
Also, with both, you can open map and scan. Good - your crew tells you there are X number of unusual anomalies. But this is advanced space travel. If you scan your crew should be able to tell at least the general direction of the next objective and also the anomalous readings. Instead the crew just sits there "uh yeah Captain there are strange things here but don't ask me where".
Anyways, still poking around with the game.
Have fun.
How did the game fail?
Are there stats to indicate this game failed?
Who told you the game failed?
What professional article I can read about STO failing?
Did Cryptic post STO failed?
I played EQ, a little EQ2, SWG, DAoC, COH, and a couple random games along the way. went a couple years between online games because i got burned out on them.
Here are my thoughts on some topics in this and other threads
Lumping a couple things together.... the game being Not Trek and No need to group and be multiplayer.
From a player perspective. I love the casual gamer friendly feel of STO. I grew to hate EQ because, especially at higher levels, you pretty much had to group. There were times you maybe had an hour or two to play and it might take most of that time to get a group together.
also, and this plays slightly into the Immersion discussion
TOS, TNG... how often did the Enterprise take part in Multi-ship activities? the bulk of the shows were the ship on its mission alone. Rarely if ever did you see task forces or fleets. The star ship is a self reliant vessel. With the exception of fleet engagements... kind of like you have in the game. For your missions, you are alone yet there are fleet action instances for fleet engagements.
however you still can take other people on your missions so the option to group is there if you want it, but it is not mandatory.
Crafting.
I realized once when i was playing SWG and i spent the first hour of my night checking harvesters that i was paying a company for the privilege of doing busy work and maintenance... and i thought... i get paid to do this at work, why am i paying someone else for me to do it.
I personally think crafting is over rated. yes its nice to make something. but i don't like coming home from one job to log in and do another. i like to play the game and explore the content.
Now i know some people like crafting and that's fine... and i admit that memory alpha made me not even think about crafting in this game and i skipped it all together. so i agree it could use some revamping.
Ultimately this game, as with anything, you get out of it what you put into it. You like PVP? then there is PVP, you like to solo? you are perfectly able to. You prefer to group? You are perfectly able to.
I like to solo, and occasionally group. I like to RP and I take the time to read every mission, yes some of it is monotonous, and to be sure the game has some work that needs to be done to it, but no other game gives me quantum torpedoes to fire at people so i am fairly happy with STO
/signed
Hasn't failed (yet). You may no longer like it, and have listed areas the game needs to improve - that is about it yes?
Appealing to the intellectual level higher then an 8 year old.
Um, Sarcasm I think was a major underlying tone if his comment.
I played EQ2 for about two years 06-08, and there are at least 4 different places you can start a character and like you said, many of the quests are similar/same. Though the look of the character, the immediate environment. The abilities, the NPCs etc all have a different look and go a long way to giving you the impression that you are not the same character with not the same abilities. Yes once you get to the more common areas because of quest progression and leveling then it can become more mundane but still you have at least two different paths to take.
Currently with the Klingon's its PVP, Grind Kahless, PVP, Grind another area, PVP etc. It feels empty to me. With Fed side, different class/race/traits - same exact missions. It doesn't even try to give you a different mind set.
I personally would have wanted to see the "Episodes" as Cryptic calls it even remotely resemble the duration and variety scene in many Episodes of the show.
The game is failing because Cryptic rushed it, and was lazy about giving us a feel that we are in the future, that we are earning the right to become Star Fleet or Klingon Captains.
For the Klingon side I don't get the impression that I am supposed to be of a Warrior Culture where there is great honor to be earned from Combat, and I should guide my actions with NPCs and other players through fear, honor, intimidation and treachery. The sense of I could be out capturing enemy vessels and material. Challenging the enemy. Dialogue with NPCs that really set the mood/environment. It just feels cheap.
I don't get the impression that I am an honorable Federation Star Fleet Officer with a sense of duty. That I should be out trying to save life, being diplomatic even in a time of war. Offering surrender? Capturing enemy materials of war (Ships, etc)
Are we going to have to pay for the ability to be other Faction/Races? Why not give us the ability to be Romulan, Cardassian, Ferengi etc etc. Oh wait that is so they can charge us for it later. (Klingon Fed and Ferengi Fed)
Yes this may come later. But at the very least of they offered it @ launch it might help in giving the illusion that there was/is more content.
I realize the game can/might/should mature. Though I really feel like Cryptic did the bare minimum from the start with out any really want/intent on building quality into the game.
Oh I see those were all AI bots put into the game so Cryptic can give the illusion to the few people who are playing that the game is doing well right?
If the games servers are still running its not a failure.
I have some prime ocean front property to sell you in Nevada, it is really cheap. I mean it you not actually see the waves lapping @ your feet, till California falls off the map but hey, it could still be Ocean front property.
the only fail I see is the crybabies sitting here telling us how bad a fail it is.Nut up or shut up I believe someone posted.
Well, considering that the thread title is "Why This Game Failed" the OP could add something that actually supports that hypothesis.
I'll make it a bit more simple for the simple minded people. "Why This Game Failed" isn't about them closing the servers and halting all production on it. It failed because of how it was rushed into going live, and failed to deliver an actual mmo. It fails as a game. It fails as enjoyment. It fails as replay value. It fails at a lot of things. But go ahead, be cute, take it literally. Fail some more.
but if thats all true and it was that bad why would the servers stay open ? all would stop playing no? what your admitting to is that its your OPINION not fact , you know what they say "OPINION are like A$$ holes everyone has one"
Ding ding ding! Get this man a cookie. Your reply started off bad, but you changed it around and got it right. Good job.
Rather than you spend your time moaning telling us it's failed and expecting that we should all agree with you and quit , why don't you just let us come to our own decisions, while you scuttle off to the next MMO launch, play it for 2 weeks and declare it a FAIL.
It's ok just like when the titanic hit the iceberg and they said it could not be sunk as it was sinking there were still many in disbelief, the same thing is happening in STO, there are many who think because they enjoy the repetitive gameplay and because it looks like star trek it means that its a successful game. Well when the numbers come out and a we get a few more interviews to the public as to how many sub's they lost (if they tell the truth) it will be known. This game has and is losing sub's left and right and it does not matter why they are losing sub's just the fact that they are losing so many so quickly is enough proof that this game failed.
If anyone played Warhammer we all know it to well, Mark Jacobs co-founder and lead designer lied on many interviews as to how many copies were actually sold it was not till he was fired within year one and the truth came out about how many copies sold and how many sub's were lost. Yes that game is still currently running and some would say it was successful but as many magazines published they had lost 80% of the player base wthin first 8 months of release. I don't know about you but that does not spell success in my book and I see similar things happening to STO. In a matter of weeks they will lost a considerable amount of sub's in months it will be an extreme amount of sub's and while this game may live on through the extreme casual trekkie fan gamers in the end when they have lost over half the sub's who could possibly say it was not fail.
Many don't heed the above warning. They attempt to launch with a severely malnourished product in the hope that the subs will feed it to full health.
I'm beginning to feel that the future of the MMO industry lies in the hands of those companies who have already made enough of the necessary capital to make a good job of an MMO's launch. That is, the creators of the big name single player games.
Blizzard showed that although they had never made an MMO before, prior to 2005 they had been quietly watching the market, gathering their forces and taking notes. Maybe, just maybe, the likes of Bioware are doing the same. We won't know until next year. One thing is for certain, MMO companies just don't seem to either have the capital or the resources to create a polished MMO.
Hypocrite much? This forum is in place for opinions, feedback and suggestions. I gave my opinion on why it failed. So rather than spend your time moaning, telling me why it hasn't failed for you, and expecting that I should agree with you and quit, why don't you just let me come up with my own decisions.
AOC and WAR both went the way you say, so do most MMOS, a lot of people buy the new MMO expecting te world, they soon find it does not fit what they want and they do not subscribe. This is a natual wastege that most publishers expect, it happens in virtually every launch on anything. This does not make the game a fail, actually its ow it survives this stage defines if it will fail or not.
STO as its bugs, and isnt WOW it isnt everyones cup of tea, but it as not failed yet, and it will continue not to fail while the publishers earn revenue from it.
Most publishers expect a 80% decrease in subs? I don't buy that for one minute.
An 80% drop is hardly what you could call "natural wastage" or even a "tolerance factor".
Besides, there is a difference between what the general public considers a "success" and a "fail" and what the publishers / devs consider as a financial "success" or "fail".
The difference is that people call popular games a "success", and thus prefer to be playing such an MMO. And MMOs generate more revenue, which means that the life expectancy of the product, and subsequently the players time they have invested in their avatar, is more secure.
People don't like investing time, effort and money into something that they consider will be ultimately wasted. Investors don't either.
Psychologists have shown us that when we go away for a holiday, we do not really want the perfect holiday where nothing goes wrong. What we want is a good holiday, but with something to complain about. The baggage getting lost, the aircraft delayed or the weather being poor. That way when we return home we can enjoy moaning about our experiences to everyone that listens.
Some people though like the positive side to life, thats why we dont see this mmo as a failure yet
Were do you get te figures 80% decrease, agreed such a drop is catastrophic, but all IT is now run by accountants and if it earns money it remains.
AOC allegedly sold around 800000 copies (or there abouts). There is no way that theres any more than about 50k - 100k subs. WAR is going the same way. Kneecappers post also suggests this.
Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that a lot of businesses are all about money at the end of the day. But, many businesses that fail to meet standards because of short-cuts, tight purse strings etc often don't have a good long term future when they've only got one product to rely on for income.