Like I said, Kaz, if the whole concept offends you so much, don't enter the drawing. Do you demand an equal chance to win the lottery, even if you don't want to buy a ticket? For that matter, as I asked before, do you hear me whinging because I can't even try to win the giveaways during livestreams? No, you do not.
Quit pretending that you're somehow morally superior to everyone else just because you don't use that filthy social media. What next, proclaiming intellectual superiority because you don't watch TV? Demanding we all look up to the high-caste folk who only read Literature and nonfiction, instead of genre?
Here's the thing, I don't like Arc, and even more, I really dislike this new Arc themed website for STO.
Since the forced move over here, I have quit posting, and reading most forum posts by community members, as well as general posts by Cryptic. When I do navigate the site, it is only by direct link from the STO launcher. In fact, this is my first post, since the move. I find this site very clumsy compared to the previous STO site. I have retreated away from Arc, like the plague, and continue to only play STO via the STO launcher, disengaging from previous community forum post reading and submitting, as I find it too cumbersome now.
this is a great compo but I just had one thought, as liking arc is open to all perfect world game players what happens if you select a person to win a prize who plays one of the other PW games but doesn't play sto?
in theory I guess you can give them a prize of equal value related to the game they do play but then I notice that this compo only seems to be tied to sto.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
this is a great compo but I just had one thought, as liking arc is open to all perfect world game players what happens if you select a person to win a prize who plays one of the other PW games but doesn't play sto?
They'll probably still give them the pack. Winning a $160 pack is a fantastic way to bring in a new player.
I read a lot of replies about not having/wanting facebook or twitter. Well..... :eek:Why not? I mean, facebook has become one of the fastest mediums of information, it's only logical that you utilize it. Also, you dont need to put ANY personal information on a facebook account, make it up. Jeebus. Use it to only "like" pages that you want to recieve news from (strictly games in this case) and leave it at that.:D
I read a lot of replies about not having/wanting facebook or twitter. Well..... :eek:Why not? I mean, facebook has become one of the fastest mediums of information, it's only logical that you utilize it. Also, you dont need to put ANY personal information on a facebook account, make it up. Jeebus. Use it to only "like" pages that you want to recieve news from (strictly games in this case) and leave it at that.:D
For one thing, I used to have an account with Rolling Stone (the magazine), through which I could log in and post feedback in the comments section. Then one day, I went to log in and this little "Log in with Facebook" TRIBBLE appeared in front of me, and I felt this massive "NO!" welling up inside me. Despite my best efforts to find a way to log in without using Facebook, I could find none. I raged (although only my cats heard it, alas). I had noticed this trend already, multiple sites requiring you to have Facebook in order to log in, and I found the very idea to be foolhardy. I had also believed that it would never happen to Rolling Stone. I was obviously mistaken. It didn"t last long, however; Rolling Stone now apparently allows people to log in by other methods (including, I've been told, Rolling Stone accounts again, although whether or not that means that I could use an old account which may have been deleted entirely when they took the inane step to require Facebook in order to log in and use the site, I do not know). I do not want a one-stop log in to everything (the reasons should be obvious to anyone with any awareness of, or clue about, internet security), nor a one-size-fits-all approach to my internet usage. I also prefer to shop at places OTHER than Walmart (because of my opposition to a one-size-fits-all approach, and many, many other reasons).
For another thing, Twitter has contributed to the deterioration of attention spans, correct spelling, and correct grammar (as if these things had not already become bad enough). I cannot abide it. There used to be a site called "Woofer" which had a minimum character/word count; if I were going to use something of that nature, I would of course choose Woofer.
Finally, Google+ has been, at least at times (such as a time prior to Google's decision to push Google+ on YouTube users), the second most popular social media site, behind Facebook, yet game publishers like PWE seem to have overlooked it entirely. It's time for some greater awareness on the part of game publishers; some people specifically chose to use Google+ in protest against Facebook and Twitter and MySpace, and the game publishers are missing out on an audience of potential customers by not including Google+ in promotions of this sort.
For one thing, I used to have an account with Rolling Stone (the magazine), through which I could log in and post feedback in the comments section. Then one day, I went to log in and this little "Log in with Facebook" TRIBBLE appeared in front of me, and I felt this massive "NO!" welling up inside me. Despite my best efforts to find a way to log in without using Facebook, I could find none. I raged (although only my cats heard it, alas). I had noticed this trend already, multiple sites requiring you to have Facebook in order to log in, and I found the very idea to be foolhardy. I had also believed that it would never happen to Rolling Stone. I was obviously mistaken. It didn"t last long, however; Rolling Stone now apparently allows people to log in by other methods (including, I've been told, Rolling Stone accounts again, although whether or not that means that I could use an old account which may have been deleted entirely when they took the inane step to require Facebook in order to log in and use the site, I do not know). I do not want a one-stop log in to everything (the reasons should be obvious to anyone with any awareness of, or clue about, internet security), nor a one-size-fits-all approach to my internet usage. I also prefer to shop at places OTHER than Walmart (because of my opposition to a one-size-fits-all approach, and many, many other reasons).
For another thing, Twitter has contributed to the deterioration of attention spans, correct spelling, and correct grammar (as if these things had not already become bad enough). I cannot abide it. There used to be a site called "Woofer" which had a minimum character/word count; if I were going to use something of that nature, I would of course choose Woofer.
Finally, Google+ has been, at least at times (such as a time prior to Google's decision to push Google+ on YouTube users), the second most popular social media site, behind Facebook, yet game publishers like PWE seem to have overlooked it entirely. It's time for some greater awareness on the part of game publishers; some people specifically chose to use Google+ in protest against Facebook and Twitter and MySpace, and the game publishers are missing out on an audience of potential customers by not including Google+ in promotions of this sort.
That habit of forced Facebook account is annoying and tbh disturbing.
But if anything just make a no-name account just for log ins.... no need to post or add friends there.
As for Google +.... when has this ever been used by anyone but google employees?
There is no point I know of when that had even remote significance.
That habit of forced Facebook account is annoying and tbh disturbing.
But if anything just make a no-name account just for log ins.... no need to post or add friends there.
No. I refuse to support Facebook in any way; signing up for an account, even a "fake" one, allows them to promote themselves as having gained another account. They can go play in the freeway.
As for Google +.... when has this ever been used by anyone but google employees?
There is no point I know of when that had even remote significance.
I'm not a Google employee nor are any of the people I know on Google Plus. Forbes, International Business Times, Business Insider, ZD Net, ... these are only a few sources which have reported this in 2013 (over a period of several months, from January to October). Whether or not this trend has continued, I don't know. Below is a collection of such reports:
As i did with previous "giveaways" and "promotions" about Arc... NO. :mad:
I don't want to use Arc, I don't want to install Arc, I don't see any use for Arc, I don't see any improvements by using Arc, I don't like Arc at all... and i'll stop playing the game at the exact moment i'm forced to use Arc to play. Is it clear?
I've been having a hard time lately finding a reason to log into Star Grind Online, i just keep checking the news to see if there's something that would actually push me to do it. All i see are Arc promotion "bribes" and event "daily grinds" for stuff i don't want.
I've also decided since i'm almost not playing the game recently and not having fun at all when i do it... i'm not spending money on this game anymore. Not until some huge changes are made to the game, starting with account bound reputation or the removal of reputation passives (so we are not forced to complete reps to be competitive even if we don't want any of the stuff)
STO is becoming another asian MMO where "fun equals grind", where the player's skill is unrelevant and the only thing that matters is how much time/money you throw at the grind. Thanks, but no, i want a Star Trek Game. I don't want a sci fi PWE MMO with a ST skin on top. And certainly i don't want a "pay and grind" game like the last annyversary event pointed to.
I remember when I was young, there were people who objected to some companies' mail order giveaways because they required you to give a home address, not a PO Box.
Nobody stopped doing their giveaways because of this. Those giveaways still generated lots of commerce. Nobody went out of business due to the protests.
If you don't like their giveaway, don't participate in it. It's not for you; it's for a tremendously large bunch of other people. Not everything has to be for you.
Former moderator of these forums. Lifetime sub since before launch. Been here since before public betas. Foundry author of "Franklin Drake Must Die".
I'm also trying to figure out where all this shock and surprise about Arc is coming from. I mean, Cryptic and PW have only been announcing for what, about a year now?, that Arc was coming. They want a unified launcher, just like the big boys. They've been encouraging us to download and try out the launchers so they can make sure it works with as many systems as possible. Yet to hear some folks carrying on, they never even heard of Arc until about a week ago (and they seem to think the entire system will be enforced in its current form sometime late tomorrow afternoon, but that's a whole 'nother rant).
Look, they've been up front about it, folks. They're adding the Arc overlay. If you don't like it, you can still use the Steam overlay, thanks in large part to the existing Steam users who raised a massive stink when PWE threatened to take that away during the original planning phase. Acting all surprised about it now doesn't make any sense. It's not like the plans were on display at the local planning department around Alpha Centauri or anything - they've been right here the whole time.
It's not for you; it's for a tremendously large bunch of other people. Not everything has to be for you.
But, dude. We're their customers, too. Discriminating against people who actually play the game instead of spending their lives on Twitbook is not only unfair, it's counterintuitive.
And, seriously? "Tremendously large?" Last I checked (see page 16) there were a maximum of maybe 17 thousand people signed up. Out of a game with a player base of something like 800 thousand, assuming 4 characters per account. See here.
So claiming that the people who are willing to sell their dignity to ARC are a "tremendously large" bunch of people is only true if you're comparing them to a Sherpa village in Bhutan.
I'm also trying to figure out where all this shock and surprise about Arc is coming from. I mean, Cryptic and PW have only been announcing for what, about a year now?, that Arc was coming. They want a unified launcher, just like the big boys. They've been encouraging us to download and try out the launchers so they can make sure it works with as many systems as possible. Yet to hear some folks carrying on, they never even heard of Arc until about a week ago (and they seem to think the entire system will be enforced in its current form sometime late tomorrow afternoon, but that's a whole 'nother rant).
Look, they've been up front about it, folks. They're adding the Arc overlay. If you don't like it, you can still use the Steam overlay, thanks in large part to the existing Steam users who raised a massive stink when PWE threatened to take that away during the original planning phase. Acting all surprised about it now doesn't make any sense. It's not like the plans were on display at the local planning department around Alpha Centauri or anything - they've been right here the whole time.
I wasn't surprised by ARC. I just hate it.
I know that the "big boys" have unified launchers, but...why follow a formulaic business model when the current one has been doing so well? STO has the best F2P model in the industry; you CAN play it free without too much frustration, but the pay-to-use shinies are attractive enough that people will splurge on them.
The main problem that I have with ARC is that it is poorly-designed, ugly, and unnecessary. STO is something of a niche game, and the guys who play STO and enjoy space PVP probably don't want to have to click through a launcher full of pictures of animated cleavage and ads for ground fantasy games to get to their STO. I myself found the ARC client to be a massive, ugly resource hog.
I appreciate that PWE is being open about the fact that they are bribing us to try ARC, but...look, guys, we're mostly Trekkies here. We are smart. Many of us know computers. We know how much things are worth in-game and have a fairly steady in-game and on-forum grapevine to point out which shinies are worth how much. Bribing us with revealing uniforms, 20 lobi, and a weaksauce shuttle is not going to do it. Bribing us to like ARC on Twitbook with Legacy packs just seems...wrong.
"Liking" something on Twitbook is different from trying it out. I tried ARC (before the Khan promotion and stuff, which I'm a little pissed about but not very), and I gave my honest feedback (in a word, it sucks), but there is no way that I will publicly endorse a position that I disagree vehemently with on a platform that I have issues with already.
So that's my 2 cents on this whole affair.
Also, I CAN be bribed. I think that all of us can be bribed to grudgingly accept ARC.
It will cost a bugship, 1000 lobi, and 10k ZEN for me to use ARC. Anything less than that, and I will go play something else when ARC becomes mandatory.
Again, I can be bribed, but I do have some standards for price and such.
I remember when I was young, there were people who objected to some companies' mail order giveaways because they required you to give a home address, not a PO Box.
Nobody stopped doing their giveaways because of this. Those giveaways still generated lots of commerce. Nobody went out of business due to the protests.
If you don't like their giveaway, don't participate in it. It's not for you; it's for a tremendously large bunch of other people. Not everything has to be for you.
I remember when text competitions started to appear using mobile phones. Customers complained because they didn't have a mobile to text in the promotional code. These companies listened and added a postal and website option. Thus allowing more of their customers to take part. The only exceptions I have seen so far are the ones for the hourly draws.
Nothing can be done about it now, but they should listen for the next one.
How do you know there is a tremendously large group of people that can take part?
And, seriously? "Tremendously large?" Last I checked (see page 16) there were a maximum of maybe 17 thousand people signed up. Out of a game with a player base of something like 800 thousand, assuming 4 characters per account. See here.
However, the number of people using Facebook and Twitter is almost exponentially larger than that. And if someone looks at your Facebook feed, or follows you on Twitter and wants to see who you follow, the Arc thing comes up, which is advertising, which is good. (Heck, I was made aware of CO, and by extension STO, by a Facebook ad.)
Remember, MMOs don't live by keeping long-term customers - they live by churn. It's assumed that a certain number of players will drop out over time as they grow bored with the game, and it is essential therefore to attract as many new players as possible. This giveaway is aimed primarily at putting the names of STO, PWE, and Arc in front of as many people as possible, in the hopes that it will stick with some of them.
If it were intended as a "loyalty reward", after all, it would be dropped right into your inbox in-game, with none of this "enter here to win" nonsense.
However, the number of people using Facebook and Twitter is almost exponentially larger than that. And if someone looks at your Facebook feed, or follows you on Twitter and wants to see who you follow, the Arc thing comes up, which is advertising, which is good. (Heck, I was made aware of CO, and by extension STO, by a Facebook ad.)
Remember, MMOs don't live by keeping long-term customers - they live by churn. It's assumed that a certain number of players will drop out over time as they grow bored with the game, and it is essential therefore to attract as many new players as possible. This giveaway is aimed primarily at putting the names of STO, PWE, and Arc in front of as many people as possible, in the hopes that it will stick with some of them.
If it were intended as a "loyalty reward", after all, it would be dropped right into your inbox in-game, with none of this "enter here to win" nonsense.
You are right, and that fact makes me depressed.
I long for the days when quality was smart business, rather than Chinese shiny churn&burn.
Maybe when the Chinese economy collapses because the Africans resent the fact that China now needs to go to Africa for food and resources, things will change. Until then, I'm going to drown my sorrows by shooting Terran ships with my Scimitar.
I long for the days when quality was smart business, rather than Chinese shiny churn&burn.
Churn is a feature of any online site, particularly games. From the highest quality to the lowest. No matter how good a game is, there's always new games coming out, pulling people away, so for an MMO there has to be a constant push of advertising and promotions to bring new people in and/or lure people to have another look.
Churn is a feature of any online site, particularly games. From the highest quality to the lowest. No matter how good a game is, there's always new games coming out, pulling people away, so for an MMO there has to be a constant push of advertising and promotions to bring new people in and/or lure people to have another look.
Churn is an inevitable a force as gravity.
Yes, but I can remember when KEEPING customers was the smart business model.
Brand loyalty used to be something holy. Now it's all about getting more new guys and clearing out the old.
Not just in gaming, either. In every industry I can think of.
For the record, the only objection I have to Arc is that it's not Steam. I mean that both literally and figuratively -- that is, I've already got Steam, and I would prefer to use it (so much for the literal meaning), and Steam has excellent features (such as the ability to upload screen shots taken in-game immediately upon finishing the gaming session and the instant messenger feature) which Arc lacks (and there's the figurative meaning).
My objection to this promotion isn't really an objection due to being left out; things like that happen because companies market to specific audiences with different promotions. My objection is more about the fact that I dislike both Facebook and Twitter immensely, and there are alternative social media sites which are competitive (Google Plus has more users than Twitter, for example) but were left out. Now, I have Google Plus, so I'm obviously not pointing out the relevance of Google+ with an entirely selfless attitude (nor would I pretend to be doing so), but I also think PWE would do well to take note of the untapped market to which they could appeal if they included Google Plus in future promotions that are aimed at social media sites (with attention to the links I posted in my most recent post in this thread, a page ago).
(Google Plus has more users than Twitter, for example)
If ever there was a sterling example of artificially inflated user numbers, it's Google Plus. At least with Twitter and Facebook, you know that someone has actually taken the effort, however trivial, to deliberately create a social media account, as opposed to having it created automagically as an unwanted, suspicious growth off of the side of the services they actually want to use.
Not that I wouldn't mind including it in a promotion, since I've had plenty of Google+ accounts forcibly created for me, but in terms of usage as opposed to users, Google+ doesn't even rate. It's understandable for companies to focus on products people seem to actually be using.
If ever there was a sterling example of artificially inflated user numbers, it's Google Plus. At least with Twitter and Facebook, you know that someone has actually taken the effort, however trivial, to deliberately create a social media account, as opposed to having it created automagically as an unwanted, suspicious growth off of the side of the services they actually want to use.
Not that I wouldn't mind including it in a promotion, since I've had plenty of Google+ accounts forcibly created for me, but in terms of usage as opposed to users, Google+ doesn't even rate. It's understandable for companies to focus on products people seem to actually be using.
I believe the "automagical" and "unwanted, suspicious growth off of the side of the services they actually want to use" (YouTube) first occurred in September of 2013; the first news article to report that Google Plus had surpassed Twitter was published in January of 2013. I started my Google+ page prior to January of 2013, and certainly before Google+ was "forced" on YouTube users in September of 2013.
No. I refuse to support Facebook in any way; signing up for an account, even a "fake" one, allows them to promote themselves as having gained another account. They can go play in the freeway.
I can understand that and respect that to some degree but you can't expect them to change their promotion because of your refusal.
Facebook is simply standard at this point.
I mean this is like complaining that you can't play sto because you refuse to be connected to the internet.
If you decide to act that way, which is understandable, you have to deal with the consequences.
Also, I'm the last who should say that since I once won 5000 cryptic points on Facebook but still: what are the odds of winning that anyway?
It's not that you really loose out on anything.
I'm not a Google employee nor are any of the people I know on Google Plus. Forbes, International Business Times, Business Insider, ZD Net, ... these are only a few sources which have reported this in 2013 (over a period of several months, from January to October). Whether or not this trend has continued, I don't know. Below is a collection of such reports:
Well I do nit know ANYBODY actually using google +, I didn't use google + before it became obligatory for YouTube, I only use it for that and... I have no less then 7 google + accounts which have been forced upon me/ automatically created. I can't take that numbers serious.
I believe the "automagical" and "unwanted, suspicious growth off of the side of the services they actually want to use" (YouTube) first occurred in September of 2013; the first news article to report that Google Plus had surpassed Twitter was published in January of 2013. I started my Google+ page prior to January of 2013, and certainly before Google+ was "forced" on YouTube users in September of 2013.
Actually I was referring to the policy change that happened in November 2011, where all new Gmail accounts required creation of a Google Plus account. The significant spike in Google+ accounts between mid 2011 and December 2011 indicates this had a large effect on Google+ user counts. However, actual use of Google+ continues even now to lag so far behind other social networks, similarly indicating that the majority of those accounts are just zombies.
The "services they actually want to use": Gmail, Google Apps, Google Docs/Drive.
...I don't think you guys realize what "like" is supposed to mean...
We enjoy something first, then maybe it gets "likes"--not the other way around.
Yes, this will get you a lot of "likes"--but they're bribes, nothing more. It does not indicate anyone actually likes ARC (most don't, or are ambivalent). What we LIKE is STO. What we LIKE is free stuff. This is... kind of creepy, really.
I can understand that and respect that to some degree but you can't expect them to change their promotion because of your refusal.
Facebook is simply standard at this point.
I mean this is like complaining that you can't play sto because you refuse to be connected to the internet.
If you decide to act that way, which is understandable, you have to deal with the consequences.
Also, I'm the last who should say that since I once won 5000 cryptic points on Facebook but still: what are the odds of winning that anyway?
It's not that you really loose out on anything.
That's not what I'm saying.
I don't expect them to change the promotion (which is now almost over, but I never did expect them to do so); I'm merely suggesting that they include Google+ in future promotions of this type. I am not alone in my use of Google+ to protest Facebook.
Well I do nit know ANYBODY actually using google +, I didn't use google + before it became obligatory for YouTube, I only use it for that and... I have no less then 7 google + accounts which have been forced upon me/ automatically created. I can't take that numbers serious.
Most of my current and former coworkers use Google+ to a greater or lesser degree; they're not all in my Google+ "circles" (which I have kept rather small so far), and I know several other people outside of work who also use Google+ to a greater or lesser extent.
Actually I was referring to the policy change that happened in November 2011, where all new Gmail accounts required creation of a Google Plus account. The significant spike in Google+ accounts between mid 2011 and December 2011 indicates this had a large effect on Google+ user counts. However, actual use of Google+ continues even now to lag so far behind other social networks, similarly indicating that the majority of those accounts are just zombies.
The "services they actually want to use": Gmail, Google Apps, Google Docs/Drive.
This predates the Youtube shenanigans by 2 years.
I've had Gmail for over a decade; I was never forced to make a Google+ account, but I was offered the option to do so at some point, and I did. While it's not Facebook (figuratively), it's also not Facebook (literally), and that's groovy to me.
Comments
Quit pretending that you're somehow morally superior to everyone else just because you don't use that filthy social media. What next, proclaiming intellectual superiority because you don't watch TV? Demanding we all look up to the high-caste folk who only read Literature and nonfiction, instead of genre?
Here's the thing, I don't like Arc, and even more, I really dislike this new Arc themed website for STO.
Since the forced move over here, I have quit posting, and reading most forum posts by community members, as well as general posts by Cryptic. When I do navigate the site, it is only by direct link from the STO launcher. In fact, this is my first post, since the move. I find this site very clumsy compared to the previous STO site. I have retreated away from Arc, like the plague, and continue to only play STO via the STO launcher, disengaging from previous community forum post reading and submitting, as I find it too cumbersome now.
Twitter is up to 9171 Follows now, so 7 Legacy packs (5 base + 2 bonus), or 0.076% chance of winning.
in theory I guess you can give them a prize of equal value related to the game they do play but then I notice that this compo only seems to be tied to sto.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
They'll probably still give them the pack. Winning a $160 pack is a fantastic way to bring in a new player.
Mine Trap Supporter
For one thing, I used to have an account with Rolling Stone (the magazine), through which I could log in and post feedback in the comments section. Then one day, I went to log in and this little "Log in with Facebook" TRIBBLE appeared in front of me, and I felt this massive "NO!" welling up inside me. Despite my best efforts to find a way to log in without using Facebook, I could find none. I raged (although only my cats heard it, alas). I had noticed this trend already, multiple sites requiring you to have Facebook in order to log in, and I found the very idea to be foolhardy. I had also believed that it would never happen to Rolling Stone. I was obviously mistaken. It didn"t last long, however; Rolling Stone now apparently allows people to log in by other methods (including, I've been told, Rolling Stone accounts again, although whether or not that means that I could use an old account which may have been deleted entirely when they took the inane step to require Facebook in order to log in and use the site, I do not know). I do not want a one-stop log in to everything (the reasons should be obvious to anyone with any awareness of, or clue about, internet security), nor a one-size-fits-all approach to my internet usage. I also prefer to shop at places OTHER than Walmart (because of my opposition to a one-size-fits-all approach, and many, many other reasons).
For another thing, Twitter has contributed to the deterioration of attention spans, correct spelling, and correct grammar (as if these things had not already become bad enough). I cannot abide it. There used to be a site called "Woofer" which had a minimum character/word count; if I were going to use something of that nature, I would of course choose Woofer.
Finally, Google+ has been, at least at times (such as a time prior to Google's decision to push Google+ on YouTube users), the second most popular social media site, behind Facebook, yet game publishers like PWE seem to have overlooked it entirely. It's time for some greater awareness on the part of game publishers; some people specifically chose to use Google+ in protest against Facebook and Twitter and MySpace, and the game publishers are missing out on an audience of potential customers by not including Google+ in promotions of this sort.
That habit of forced Facebook account is annoying and tbh disturbing.
But if anything just make a no-name account just for log ins.... no need to post or add friends there.
As for Google +.... when has this ever been used by anyone but google employees?
There is no point I know of when that had even remote significance.
No. I refuse to support Facebook in any way; signing up for an account, even a "fake" one, allows them to promote themselves as having gained another account. They can go play in the freeway.
I'm not a Google employee nor are any of the people I know on Google Plus. Forbes, International Business Times, Business Insider, ZD Net, ... these are only a few sources which have reported this in 2013 (over a period of several months, from January to October). Whether or not this trend has continued, I don't know. Below is a collection of such reports:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2013/01/26/watch-out-facebook-with-google-at-2-and-youtube-at-3-google-inc-could-catch-up/
http://www.ibtimes.com/google-plus-becomes-worlds-no-2-social-network-after-facebook-knocking-twitter-1042956
http://www.businessinsider.com/google-plus-is-outpacing-twitter-2013-5
http://www.zdnet.com/facebook-remains-top-social-network-google-youtube-battle-for-second-7000015303/
http://venturebeat.com/2013/07/08/google-plus-one-number-two/
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/google-540m-monthly-users-lags-behind-facebook-article-1.1500403
I don't want to use Arc, I don't want to install Arc, I don't see any use for Arc, I don't see any improvements by using Arc, I don't like Arc at all... and i'll stop playing the game at the exact moment i'm forced to use Arc to play. Is it clear?
I've been having a hard time lately finding a reason to log into Star Grind Online, i just keep checking the news to see if there's something that would actually push me to do it. All i see are Arc promotion "bribes" and event "daily grinds" for stuff i don't want.
I've also decided since i'm almost not playing the game recently and not having fun at all when i do it... i'm not spending money on this game anymore. Not until some huge changes are made to the game, starting with account bound reputation or the removal of reputation passives (so we are not forced to complete reps to be competitive even if we don't want any of the stuff)
STO is becoming another asian MMO where "fun equals grind", where the player's skill is unrelevant and the only thing that matters is how much time/money you throw at the grind. Thanks, but no, i want a Star Trek Game. I don't want a sci fi PWE MMO with a ST skin on top. And certainly i don't want a "pay and grind" game like the last annyversary event pointed to.
Oh well... I guess D'Angelo is back.
Nobody stopped doing their giveaways because of this. Those giveaways still generated lots of commerce. Nobody went out of business due to the protests.
If you don't like their giveaway, don't participate in it. It's not for you; it's for a tremendously large bunch of other people. Not everything has to be for you.
Look, they've been up front about it, folks. They're adding the Arc overlay. If you don't like it, you can still use the Steam overlay, thanks in large part to the existing Steam users who raised a massive stink when PWE threatened to take that away during the original planning phase. Acting all surprised about it now doesn't make any sense. It's not like the plans were on display at the local planning department around Alpha Centauri or anything - they've been right here the whole time.
And, seriously? "Tremendously large?" Last I checked (see page 16) there were a maximum of maybe 17 thousand people signed up. Out of a game with a player base of something like 800 thousand, assuming 4 characters per account. See here.
So claiming that the people who are willing to sell their dignity to ARC are a "tremendously large" bunch of people is only true if you're comparing them to a Sherpa village in Bhutan. I wasn't surprised by ARC. I just hate it.
I know that the "big boys" have unified launchers, but...why follow a formulaic business model when the current one has been doing so well? STO has the best F2P model in the industry; you CAN play it free without too much frustration, but the pay-to-use shinies are attractive enough that people will splurge on them.
The main problem that I have with ARC is that it is poorly-designed, ugly, and unnecessary. STO is something of a niche game, and the guys who play STO and enjoy space PVP probably don't want to have to click through a launcher full of pictures of animated cleavage and ads for ground fantasy games to get to their STO. I myself found the ARC client to be a massive, ugly resource hog.
I appreciate that PWE is being open about the fact that they are bribing us to try ARC, but...look, guys, we're mostly Trekkies here. We are smart. Many of us know computers. We know how much things are worth in-game and have a fairly steady in-game and on-forum grapevine to point out which shinies are worth how much. Bribing us with revealing uniforms, 20 lobi, and a weaksauce shuttle is not going to do it. Bribing us to like ARC on Twitbook with Legacy packs just seems...wrong.
"Liking" something on Twitbook is different from trying it out. I tried ARC (before the Khan promotion and stuff, which I'm a little pissed about but not very), and I gave my honest feedback (in a word, it sucks), but there is no way that I will publicly endorse a position that I disagree vehemently with on a platform that I have issues with already.
So that's my 2 cents on this whole affair.
Also, I CAN be bribed. I think that all of us can be bribed to grudgingly accept ARC.
It will cost a bugship, 1000 lobi, and 10k ZEN for me to use ARC. Anything less than that, and I will go play something else when ARC becomes mandatory.
Again, I can be bribed, but I do have some standards for price and such.
I remember when text competitions started to appear using mobile phones. Customers complained because they didn't have a mobile to text in the promotional code. These companies listened and added a postal and website option. Thus allowing more of their customers to take part. The only exceptions I have seen so far are the ones for the hourly draws.
Nothing can be done about it now, but they should listen for the next one.
How do you know there is a tremendously large group of people that can take part?
Remember, MMOs don't live by keeping long-term customers - they live by churn. It's assumed that a certain number of players will drop out over time as they grow bored with the game, and it is essential therefore to attract as many new players as possible. This giveaway is aimed primarily at putting the names of STO, PWE, and Arc in front of as many people as possible, in the hopes that it will stick with some of them.
If it were intended as a "loyalty reward", after all, it would be dropped right into your inbox in-game, with none of this "enter here to win" nonsense.
You are right, and that fact makes me depressed.
I long for the days when quality was smart business, rather than Chinese shiny churn&burn.
Maybe when the Chinese economy collapses because the Africans resent the fact that China now needs to go to Africa for food and resources, things will change. Until then, I'm going to drown my sorrows by shooting Terran ships with my Scimitar.
Churn is a feature of any online site, particularly games. From the highest quality to the lowest. No matter how good a game is, there's always new games coming out, pulling people away, so for an MMO there has to be a constant push of advertising and promotions to bring new people in and/or lure people to have another look.
Churn is an inevitable a force as gravity.
Yes, but I can remember when KEEPING customers was the smart business model.
Brand loyalty used to be something holy. Now it's all about getting more new guys and clearing out the old.
Not just in gaming, either. In every industry I can think of.
My objection to this promotion isn't really an objection due to being left out; things like that happen because companies market to specific audiences with different promotions. My objection is more about the fact that I dislike both Facebook and Twitter immensely, and there are alternative social media sites which are competitive (Google Plus has more users than Twitter, for example) but were left out. Now, I have Google Plus, so I'm obviously not pointing out the relevance of Google+ with an entirely selfless attitude (nor would I pretend to be doing so), but I also think PWE would do well to take note of the untapped market to which they could appeal if they included Google Plus in future promotions that are aimed at social media sites (with attention to the links I posted in my most recent post in this thread, a page ago).
If ever there was a sterling example of artificially inflated user numbers, it's Google Plus. At least with Twitter and Facebook, you know that someone has actually taken the effort, however trivial, to deliberately create a social media account, as opposed to having it created automagically as an unwanted, suspicious growth off of the side of the services they actually want to use.
Not that I wouldn't mind including it in a promotion, since I've had plenty of Google+ accounts forcibly created for me, but in terms of usage as opposed to users, Google+ doesn't even rate. It's understandable for companies to focus on products people seem to actually be using.
I believe the "automagical" and "unwanted, suspicious growth off of the side of the services they actually want to use" (YouTube) first occurred in September of 2013; the first news article to report that Google Plus had surpassed Twitter was published in January of 2013. I started my Google+ page prior to January of 2013, and certainly before Google+ was "forced" on YouTube users in September of 2013.
I can understand that and respect that to some degree but you can't expect them to change their promotion because of your refusal.
Facebook is simply standard at this point.
I mean this is like complaining that you can't play sto because you refuse to be connected to the internet.
If you decide to act that way, which is understandable, you have to deal with the consequences.
Also, I'm the last who should say that since I once won 5000 cryptic points on Facebook but still: what are the odds of winning that anyway?
It's not that you really loose out on anything.
Well I do nit know ANYBODY actually using google +, I didn't use google + before it became obligatory for YouTube, I only use it for that and... I have no less then 7 google + accounts which have been forced upon me/ automatically created. I can't take that numbers serious.
Actually I was referring to the policy change that happened in November 2011, where all new Gmail accounts required creation of a Google Plus account. The significant spike in Google+ accounts between mid 2011 and December 2011 indicates this had a large effect on Google+ user counts. However, actual use of Google+ continues even now to lag so far behind other social networks, similarly indicating that the majority of those accounts are just zombies.
The "services they actually want to use": Gmail, Google Apps, Google Docs/Drive.
This predates the Youtube shenanigans by 2 years.
We enjoy something first, then maybe it gets "likes"--not the other way around.
Yes, this will get you a lot of "likes"--but they're bribes, nothing more. It does not indicate anyone actually likes ARC (most don't, or are ambivalent). What we LIKE is STO. What we LIKE is free stuff. This is... kind of creepy, really.
That's not what I'm saying.
I don't expect them to change the promotion (which is now almost over, but I never did expect them to do so); I'm merely suggesting that they include Google+ in future promotions of this type. I am not alone in my use of Google+ to protest Facebook.
Most of my current and former coworkers use Google+ to a greater or lesser degree; they're not all in my Google+ "circles" (which I have kept rather small so far), and I know several other people outside of work who also use Google+ to a greater or lesser extent.
I've had Gmail for over a decade; I was never forced to make a Google+ account, but I was offered the option to do so at some point, and I did. While it's not Facebook (figuratively), it's also not Facebook (literally), and that's groovy to me.