On the forums, it's apathy, depression, negativity... it's like we've given up on discussions here... why is that?
People don't like change and think that shouting angrily at the world (OK, forum) will change it back, a naive attitude that'll hopefully get them all banned
If you want to "make a difference", this planet is almost literally crawling with organizations that need your help, whether that help be financial, backbreaking labor, or the invention of a new device to make life a little easier in the Third World. The kid that invented a cheap, easy-to-use filter that turned filthy, polluted water into potable water in eastern Africa? He accomplished something.
Me? I sat on my rapidly-expanding butt and played a computer game. Well, among other things, some of which actually were important, but the point is that I never expected this to be anything but a diversion, a fun way to while away an hour or so at a time. If you were expecting anything to did to make anything different, well, all I can say is that maybe you should temper your expectations.
thats a bit of a strawman.
he was obviously talking about in-game achievements, not 'making a difference' in the lives of people.
Forum you tell what's on your mine, well in the right thread of course. Sure those prior players don't like a lot of changes. When I started to play this game full circle it was fine, but lately things are changing like other games of this type online. Of course I am waiting on the next installment and hope EXP2 will be a lot more things to do like missions with new storyline. Borg, I am kind of burnt out, we new new enemies and more time travel let's travel forward instead of going backwards.
Easy answer:
Because STO is supposed to be a Star Trek game, but its far away from that.
More detailled answer:
Since STO is supposed to be a Star trek game, it appeals to another audience than a "normal" MMO would. This results in a basic conflict between MMO mechanics and a more true to trek game mechanic. (meaning that things should work completely different in order to make this game a Trek game.)
Additionally some devs seem to completely lack a certain respect to the IP. (meaning those devs obviously twist and bend everything to their personal liking, instead of trying to make the game true to the IP.)
"...'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
No, it's not really a "strawman". You want to know what we changed? Thanks to the efforts of my Starfleet captain, B'vat's plan for eternal war between the Federation and Empire has been derailed. In fact, his performance in defense of Qo'noS during the Undine attack helped cement a truce, if not a true partnership, between the groups in 2410!
My Klingon captain rooted out the treachery of the House of Torg, and went to DS9 to teach those Starfleet petaQs how a warrior handles a few Jem"Hadar invading the station!
My Romulan captain uncovered Hakeev's treason, his role in the destruction of the homeworlds, and his intent to sell his own people to the Elachi as a combination food source and nursery for their young. He finished that out by putting a plasma bolt right between that cringing thrai's lying eyes - well, his eye and his eye implant, anyway. Then he spearheaded the defense of Mol'Rihan against an all-out Elachi assault, saving his race's new home.
New characters won't see this, of course - because new characters always start out in early 2409, just before the Battle of Vega, just before a Klingon tried to free the prisoner Franklin Drake, just before the siege of Virinat. Then they get to make the same changes. Because it's a game. Just like every time you reload, say, the old classic Knights of the Old Republic, you're still a junior member of the crew of the Endar Spire. being attacked by Sith forces over Taris. Even if on a previous runthrough you regained all your memories and either seized or destroyed the Star Forge, your new character starts off in exactly the same place.
If you want to make a permanent difference, engage the real world. Video games don't work that way.
Since day one this game has constantly been breaking my immersion.. I keep coming back because I believe in this games potential.. It's kind of been like the games been saying..
"Hey! Here, bask in this universe you love!! ...SIKE! Most of us don't even watch Star Trek!" (Though that one was more like back during release)
"No, no.. really this time! C'mon! ...
... JUST KIDDING!!"
And just when I think things are on the right track, expansion 2 begins to arrive, reminding me of the planned fleet admiral system, which makes me feel a kind of dread over this games future....
The way I see it.. playing with others on a starship is closest to Star Trek, playing with others commanding their own ships is a step away but understandable.. Each person commanding a fleet? Each step towards that just makes the world feel hollow.. It takes some of the life out of it..
I expect different things from an MMO over other games..
It's a place to forge a virtual persona with greater social depth than a singleplayer game or most other genres of multiplayer games.. The whole experience feels more personal, it's a home.. a community for your avatar's virtual existence..
if I play/read/watch any other Star Trek product that deviates so much from the source material, it's easy to overlook and forget about it once it's over.. but with a game like this, it never really ends until you stop logging on or the game dies.. and the deviations are harder to dismiss..and for a long time they were pretty freaken' big.. (Though I don't believe laser dinosaurs are one of them!)
I want to love and be immersed in this game as much as I can.. I still have a lot of excitement for it shrouded by the negativity.. I adore the new uniforms and am really enjoying the new Undine stuff!
Been around since Open Beta, before the game's launch. I think it's expanded mightily since it's release. My years of experience with STO have me saying "Just wait a couple years" whenever a new MMO launches, knowing that it's growing pains may eventually pay dividends, which I may reap without actually suffering through them. Despite having went F2P, I feel the LTS I purchased at launch was a good investment.
I don't even bother grinding, really. I mainly enjoy the company of friends I've met here, and fiddle around with the tailor or some pew pew when the mood strikes. I don't fret over someone else's choices when it comes to their STO experience (i.e. uniforms, backstory, etc.), I merely enjoy making my own. TBH, I was never as interested in the game's storyline as I was in my own, and my sense of style definitely trumps "Modern" Starfleet's. (Monochrome again!? Pass.)
To be fair, I rarely post here, so I'm not really typical of the mood here. Easiest answer is happy people play the game, not so happy people come to forums to gripe. Yet, here I am, perusing topics...
Because it's the sound that steel shod boots make on the deck plating of a real warship. As opposed [to] the cushy carpeting on the Federation luxury liners.
If you want to "make a difference", this planet is almost literally crawling with organizations that need your help, whether that help be financial, backbreaking labor, or the invention of a new device to make life a little easier in the Third World. The kid that invented a cheap, easy-to-use filter that turned filthy, polluted water into potable water in eastern Africa? He accomplished something.
Me? I sat on my rapidly-expanding butt and played a computer game. Well, among other things, some of which actually were important, but the point is that I never expected this to be anything but a diversion, a fun way to while away an hour or so at a time. If you were expecting anything to did to make anything different, well, all I can say is that maybe you should temper your expectations.
thats a bit of a strawman.
he was obviously talking about in-game achievements, not 'making a difference' in the lives of people.
Yeah, he took my comments into a whole different realm. If he actually thought about my comments, the things I have said were in relation to the "Star Trek" brand. "Making a Difference" and "Exploration" mentality are the themes behind "Star Trek". When you play the game "Dragon Age", the goal is to influence companions and different cultures to fight off a blight. Within the game of "Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic", you influence the overall outcome of relationships and the endgame scenario. "Star Trek: Online's" endgame is void of such achievements. Players cannot become the hero of the universe.
When I see comments similar to Jonsills', I think they come from a narrow perspective. Modern-day roleplaying games, (Offline Single Player RPGs, "SW: TOR", and "The Elder Scrolls Online"), have more depth and achievements than "Star Trek: Online". Although I fully enjoy the lower-level content, the endgame mechanics, stuff in which people spend money on, do not have anything meaningful behind them. You cannot unlock new levels. You cannot gain more skill points. You cannot obtain new ranks. Etc...
"Star Trek: Online's" version of gaming is 'grind, unlock store tiers, and buy your reward'.
I do not know about everyone else, but I would rather 'earn' my rewards in a meaningful manner.
Other words, "Star Trek: Online" does not give you a fruitful experience that challenges your cognitions.
Yeah, he took my comments into a whole different realm. If he actually thought about my comments, the things I have said were in relation to the "Star Trek" brand. "Making a Difference" and "Exploration" mentality are the themes behind "Star Trek". When you play the game "Dragon Age", the goal is to influence companions and different cultures to fight off a blight. Within the game of "Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic", you influence the overall outcome of relationships and the endgame scenario. "Star Trek: Online's" endgame is void of such achievements. Players cannot become the hero of the universe.
So you want a branching game where a single choice can leave you stuck in a state where you've effectively lost the game and have no method of recovery.... with half the story left to go? Yeah, branching storylines tend to have bad paths, and no one likes those. thus they avoid them buy reading gameplay guides on the internet. And yes, I HAVE played games where the way you play the game has a long-term overall consequence on how the story plays out... it's amusing, once. It gets old fast. Why? Well, like I said about internet guides, once you figure out the "best" way to do it the system becomes lame and boring.
When I see comments similar to Jonsills', I think they come from a narrow perspective. Modern-day roleplaying games, (Offline Single Player RPGs, "SW: TOR", and "The Elder Scrolls Online"), have more depth and achievements than "Star Trek: Online". Although I fully enjoy the lower-level content, the endgame mechanics, stuff in which people spend money on, do not have anything meaningful behind them. You cannot unlock new levels. You cannot gain more skill points. You cannot obtain new ranks. Etc...
so... you want the game to have more features that only paying players get, and you want these to be things that are so important that you can't be end-game competitive without them?
Truthfully, your idea sounds HORRIBLE. Why? You call it a "meaningful achievement" but due to the massive advantage it confers, EVERYONE (or almost everyone) would work towards it as soon as they became aware of it's existence. Thus most players would end up having it eventually, and the grind to get to it would become trivial.
On the forums, it's apathy, depression, negativity... it's like we've given up on discussions here... why is that?
Two things. First, people are more likely to speak up when they don't like something. Have you ever noticed that whenever someone posts something positive about this game they tend to get ridiculed? That will only discourage them from making any positive posts in the future, so instead we end up with a bunch of rants and complaints. Second, people fear change. It's just human nature. Anything different or new is automatically assumed to be bad and something that should be feared.
A fair number of old-time players who were a bit thrown by 9.5 and are on the verge of giving up hope that the game will ever be more than a shallow game that's fun to dip into now and then. The next expansion is going to be a watershed for them.
I'd love to play the MMOs they think are actually good then.
Well if your a long time KDF player that does pvp it is understandable, this last lockbox basically screwed over everyone that plays mainly KDF.
Aceton assimilator is one of the best consoles and many KDF players pay zen for it only to find out
now its being made available on the exchange to everyone BUT KDF. How fair is that? Why should anyone feel safe making purchases in game now if the devs are only going to give the item away to everyone except the KDF who still has to pay zen for it?
Aside from that, the new lobi escort that was also released is another insult to KDF players, we still are waiting for a more competitve KDF faction escort that has either 5 tac consoles or 5 fore weapons or both in the case of the Xindi escort. Feds and Romulans have them, but KDF still doesn't have 1, and the devs decide to still ignore the KDF and put another OP escort out that isn't a KDF ship. Feds and Roms have options outside of the lobi store and lockboxes for a top tier competitive escort, KDF still doesn't. The new Xindi escort is even more OP then the others and it further makes KDF ships uncompetitive. KDF should have gotten a raptor or escort that was given the same treatment as the Feds Fleet Patrol escort first before anything like the Xindi escort came out.
Anyway since I feel KDF players are being royally screwed over lately I will have a negative attitude most of the time now until we see signs of the KDF being treated fairly. I haven't quit completley yet but have massively scaled back my playing time and not spending money anymore.
If you want to "make a difference", this planet is almost literally crawling with organizations that need your help, whether that help be financial, backbreaking labor, or the invention of a new device to make life a little easier in the Third World. The kid that invented a cheap, easy-to-use filter that turned filthy, polluted water into potable water in eastern Africa? He accomplished something.
Me? I sat on my rapidly-expanding butt and played a computer game. Well, among other things, some of which actually were important, but the point is that I never expected this to be anything but a diversion, a fun way to while away an hour or so at a time. If you were expecting anything to did to make anything different, well, all I can say is that maybe you should temper your expectations.
I'm not one to object too much to Star Trek as it is, it's given me a lot of fun over the years; but that's been as a casual player, who's dipped into it now and then.
What it is, is a shallow game that's fun in bursts. That's not an inconsiderable achievement, but it falls short of what many people must have expected initially, and have hoped for subsequently.
I think that for many people, even some who had played MMOs before and knew the score, there was an expectation that a Star Trek licence would bring forth a deeply immersive MMORPG, somewhat in the old skool mode, where the sense of virtual world (in this case virtual galaxy, and virtual planets) is really strong, and where there's enough depth and richness in the mechanics you can more or less live in the game 24/7. Particularly, something that (were it themepark) would have rich content at the endgame (difficult Raid type encounters for people to use their uber gear and knowledge of the game in), or were it sandboxy, sufficient "sand" to have player-created content that's endlessly entertaining (especially with the potential the Foundry has).
That's not how it's turned out. And probably 9.5 came at a time when lots of people have pretty much done to death the game that it is, and finally lost hope that it's ever going to be the game they wished it were.
So: there's no longer much hope of the rich, deep game the Star Trek licence deserves. There is a game, and it's fun, as I said, it's fun in bursts, and the combat is pretty solid, so it's great for a spin now and then. But it's really nothing more than that, and a chunk of players have come to realize it, and are a bit bitter about it, I guess.
So you want a branching game where a single choice can leave you stuck in a state where you've effectively lost the game and have no method of recovery.... with half the story left to go?
Hold on... If you played through those particular games, you would know that your statement is not true. As you move through those games I mentioned, their systems do allow you to move between good and bad choices. Second, regardless about what choices you made, the endgame solution didn't end up at a loss. I can tell that you have never played those games.
I'm not one to object too much to Star Trek as it is, it's given me a lot of fun over the years; but that's been as a casual player, who's dipped into it now and then.
What it is, is a shallow game that's fun in bursts. That's not an inconsiderable achievement, but it falls short of what many people must have expected initially, and have hoped for subsequently.
I think that for many people, even some who had played MMOs before and knew the score, there was an expectation that a Star Trek licence would bring forth a deeply immersive MMORPG, somewhat in the old skool mode, where the sense of virtual world (in this case virtual galaxy, and virtual planets) is really strong, and where there's enough depth and richness in the mechanics you can more or less live in the game 24/7. Particularly, something that (were it themepark) would have rich content at the endgame (difficult Raid type encounters for people to use their uber gear and knowledge of the game in), or were it sandboxy, sufficient "sand" to have player-created content that's endlessly entertaining (especially with the potential the Foundry has).
That's not how it's turned out. And probably 9.5 came at a time when lots of people have pretty much done to death the game that it is, and finally lost hope that it's ever going to be the game they wished it were.
So: there's no longer much hope of the rich, deep game the Star Trek licence deserves. There is a game, and it's fun, as I said, it's fun in bursts, and the combat is pretty solid, so it's great for a spin now and then. But it's really nothing more than that, and a chunk of players have come to realize it, and are a bit bitter about it, I guess.
You made several good observations.
While "Star Trek: Online" is good in bursts, the problem is that a "Star Trek" MMO deserves depth and immersion.
I'd love to play the MMOs they think are actually good then.
Well, obviously, on the themepark side, WoW, and on the sandbox side, EVE Online. I think also games like SWG are probably at the back of peoples' minds as a style of gameplay that would have been suitable for Star Trek.
Virtual worldeyness, immersion, depth, richness of content, enough to keep people occupied for years on end.
As opposed to: a pretty solid combat core, and some decent storyline quests and a few decent multiplayer scenarios - but not nearly enough. And not nearly enough other mechanics to fill in for the lack of content. Endgame grind isn't tied to endgame accomplishment, but just to repetition.
This MMO is in the modern MMO model of shallow games that are mainly solo-oriented, with some multiplayer elements tacked on. That's great for something you can enjoy now and then, but it's not a game to inhabit, to live in, like MMORPGs used to be. It's quite far from the original vision of MMORPGs and the potential people felt they had - a potential that, as it turns out, WoW was the last MMORPG to really fulfil, at least partly in a certain direction (and EVE fulfils in another aspect). But in an effort to chase WoW's success, MMO developers have made wrong turn after wrong turn, ending up with these shallow games we have now.
The Star Trek licence really deserved something deeper and richer. It didn't get it; it did get a game that's fun in parts, but not a fun deep game.
As a matter of fact, "Star Trek: Online's" version of NPC interaction dates back to the late 1990s/early 2000s. Games such as "Diablo I" and "Neverwinter Nights I" used a similar method for presenting dialogue options.
Around the year 2004, the way developers made roleplaying games changed. "Star Wars: 'Knights' of the Old Republic", "Oblivion", "Jade Empire" and "Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines" changed how people viewed games. Players moved away from one dimensional rpg experiences, so they can get a complex and dynamic story. "Dragon Age", "Skyrim", "SW: TOR", and "Mass Effect" are a direct result of what those previous games started.
"Dragon Age: Inquisition" and "Mass Effect 4" are going to be released within six to twelve months.
*shrugs*
21st century rpgs are all about dynamic immersion, influential choices, consequences, companion relationships, heroic/villainous deeds, etc...
"Star Trek: Online" lacks all of those qualities.
I do no want to buy my rewards.
I want to earn my rewards (achievements) through character development, stroyline outcomes, and level progression.
"Star Trek: Online" needs those qualities, for its the nature of 'the franchise'.
"Star Trek: Online's" initial download is roughly 7 gb in size.
"Star Wars: The Old Republic's" initial download is roughly 25-30 gb in size for a reason.
I've been around, but didn't start playing or showing up on this forum. I must say I enjoy the game, most of all thanks those developers for making the beam overload more powerful now... Really works excellent!
"Star Wars: The Old Republic's" initial download is roughly 25-30 gb in size for a reason.
Ewwwww, TOR. All those GB's, and the character creation and wardrobe choices are so spartan and uninspired. Get with 21st Century Fashion already.
:P
Because it's the sound that steel shod boots make on the deck plating of a real warship. As opposed [to] the cushy carpeting on the Federation luxury liners.
Hold on... If you played through those particular games, you would know that your statement is not true. As you move through those games I mentioned, their systems do allow you to move between good and bad choices. Second, regardless about what choices you made, the endgame solution didn't end up at a loss. I can tell that you have never played those games.
I never said I'd played Dragon Age, I said that I've played games where decisions have long term consequences. Invariably, the existence of long term consequences meant looking up the desired end state in a strategy guide and carefully choosing actions that lead to the desired outcome rather than actually playing through the game to find out what happens. Why? Because surprises aren't always fun....
I never said I'd played Dragon Age, I said that I've played games where decisions have long term consequences. Invariably, the existence of long term consequences meant looking up the desired end state in a strategy guide and carefully choosing actions that lead to the desired outcome rather than actually playing through the game to find out what happens. Why? Because surprises aren't always fun....
If you have to look up what choice to make, then maybe RPGs aren't your gaming style? The point of an RPG is to immerse yourself in your character and take the consequences of that character's choices as they come and deal with them - they're the very thing you bounce off of to make the game engaging and fun, to give you something to chew on, a problem to solve.
Of course, it's up to developers to make the choices such that you don't necessarily utterly gimp yourself by any given choice.
But if you're looking up the results of choices to get a good result, then you're going by a min-maxing strategy, you're not roleplaying.
It's actually always been a "thing", this distinction between people who play roleplaying games for roleplaying, and people who play them for the progression and combat. Few people are wholly or exclusively one or the other, but people do tend to be predominantly one or the other.
If you have to look up what choice to make, then maybe RPGs aren't your gaming style? The point of an RPG is to immerse yourself in your character and take the consequences of that character's choices as they come and deal with them - they're the very thing you bounce off of to make the game engaging and fun, to give you something to chew on, a problem to solve.
Of course, it's up to developers to make the choices such that you don't necessarily utterly gimp yourself by any given choice.
But if you're looking up the results of choices to get a good result, then you're going by a min-maxing strategy, you're not roleplaying.
It's actually always been a "thing", this distinction between people who play roleplaying games for roleplaying, and people who play them for the progression and combat. Few people are wholly or exclusively one or the other, but people do tend to be predominantly one or the other.
Yeah, here's the thing, STO is an MMO, when have you seen an MMO do that?
I play games for the fun of it. Knowing that my choices have long term consequences really isn't very fun.
And yes I have played RPGs, but for me "fun" is doing stuff like stomping a boss in FFX-2 so many times he oversouls. (Yes you can do that with certain bosses) Then stealing from him to get loot. Why? because it's loot you can't find elsewhere.
Dinos with lazors got nothing on time travelling Space TRIBBLE, the planet of mobsters, and the planet of Romans. And I don't mean Space Romans aka Romulans, I mean ROMANS. You people ******** about the lazor dinos are missing the point that Star Trek has ALWAYS been schlock.
I don't know. I mean saying Trek has always been about schlock sort of runs counter to the main idea of this dev blog:
With the steadily improving quality of mission content available throughout STO as well as our recent efforts to explore more distant parts of the galaxy, Exploration Clusters have become something were reluctant to steer new players towards because they are not up to our current standards. But one of the main reasons theyve stayed in the game as long as they have, is that Exploration Clusters remain a major source of crafting materials. As has been mentioned in other developer blogs, Season 9.5 marks a re-launching of our Research and Development system. This also comes with an update to how crafting materials are earned (most notably by adding them to PvE queue rewards). As a result, weve been able to reexamine the inclusion of Exploration Clusters in STO and found them not to be up to the quality of experience we want our players to have.
I mean, if Trek was always about schlock, then shouldn't the schlocky exploration content be right in line with Trek?
Although I think one of the biggest reasons to be negative right now is that with the change to exploration clusters, the development team that just made that dev blog post about high standards of quality, actually lessened the quality of DOFFing.
Demonstrating that either they didn't think the change through very well, or they don't communicate well with each other. Considering the Dev specifically in charge of DOFFing isn't even aware of the various missions that were lost in the change, I think it's both. And I support the negativity because I mean really ... what the hell is the point anymore? The right hand and left hand don't know what they're doing if they can go in and change around chunks of content in the name of improving quality, and in the process remove chunks of DOFF missions and not even KNOW they were doing it.
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
http://www.deviantart.com/art/Don-t-Make-Waves-368331780
^how about this for a Geko sponsored poster^
He left a real (impression) on me with his haughty comments, on STOked...
People don't like change and think that shouting angrily at the world (OK, forum) will change it back, a naive attitude that'll hopefully get them all banned
thats a bit of a strawman.
he was obviously talking about in-game achievements, not 'making a difference' in the lives of people.
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Time will only tell!
Easy answer:
Because STO is supposed to be a Star Trek game, but its far away from that.
More detailled answer:
Since STO is supposed to be a Star trek game, it appeals to another audience than a "normal" MMO would. This results in a basic conflict between MMO mechanics and a more true to trek game mechanic.
(meaning that things should work completely different in order to make this game a Trek game.)
Additionally some devs seem to completely lack a certain respect to the IP.
(meaning those devs obviously twist and bend everything to their personal liking, instead of trying to make the game true to the IP.)
My Klingon captain rooted out the treachery of the House of Torg, and went to DS9 to teach those Starfleet petaQs how a warrior handles a few Jem"Hadar invading the station!
My Romulan captain uncovered Hakeev's treason, his role in the destruction of the homeworlds, and his intent to sell his own people to the Elachi as a combination food source and nursery for their young. He finished that out by putting a plasma bolt right between that cringing thrai's lying eyes - well, his eye and his eye implant, anyway. Then he spearheaded the defense of Mol'Rihan against an all-out Elachi assault, saving his race's new home.
New characters won't see this, of course - because new characters always start out in early 2409, just before the Battle of Vega, just before a Klingon tried to free the prisoner Franklin Drake, just before the siege of Virinat. Then they get to make the same changes. Because it's a game. Just like every time you reload, say, the old classic Knights of the Old Republic, you're still a junior member of the crew of the Endar Spire. being attacked by Sith forces over Taris. Even if on a previous runthrough you regained all your memories and either seized or destroyed the Star Forge, your new character starts off in exactly the same place.
If you want to make a permanent difference, engage the real world. Video games don't work that way.
"Hey! Here, bask in this universe you love!! ...SIKE! Most of us don't even watch Star Trek!" (Though that one was more like back during release)
"No, no.. really this time! C'mon! ...
... JUST KIDDING!!"
And just when I think things are on the right track, expansion 2 begins to arrive, reminding me of the planned fleet admiral system, which makes me feel a kind of dread over this games future....
The way I see it.. playing with others on a starship is closest to Star Trek, playing with others commanding their own ships is a step away but understandable.. Each person commanding a fleet? Each step towards that just makes the world feel hollow.. It takes some of the life out of it..
I expect different things from an MMO over other games..
It's a place to forge a virtual persona with greater social depth than a singleplayer game or most other genres of multiplayer games.. The whole experience feels more personal, it's a home.. a community for your avatar's virtual existence..
if I play/read/watch any other Star Trek product that deviates so much from the source material, it's easy to overlook and forget about it once it's over.. but with a game like this, it never really ends until you stop logging on or the game dies.. and the deviations are harder to dismiss..and for a long time they were pretty freaken' big.. (Though I don't believe laser dinosaurs are one of them!)
I want to love and be immersed in this game as much as I can.. I still have a lot of excitement for it shrouded by the negativity.. I adore the new uniforms and am really enjoying the new Undine stuff!
I don't even bother grinding, really. I mainly enjoy the company of friends I've met here, and fiddle around with the tailor or some pew pew when the mood strikes. I don't fret over someone else's choices when it comes to their STO experience (i.e. uniforms, backstory, etc.), I merely enjoy making my own. TBH, I was never as interested in the game's storyline as I was in my own, and my sense of style definitely trumps "Modern" Starfleet's. (Monochrome again!? Pass.)
To be fair, I rarely post here, so I'm not really typical of the mood here. Easiest answer is happy people play the game, not so happy people come to forums to gripe. Yet, here I am, perusing topics...
When I see comments similar to Jonsills', I think they come from a narrow perspective. Modern-day roleplaying games, (Offline Single Player RPGs, "SW: TOR", and "The Elder Scrolls Online"), have more depth and achievements than "Star Trek: Online". Although I fully enjoy the lower-level content, the endgame mechanics, stuff in which people spend money on, do not have anything meaningful behind them. You cannot unlock new levels. You cannot gain more skill points. You cannot obtain new ranks. Etc...
"Star Trek: Online's" version of gaming is 'grind, unlock store tiers, and buy your reward'.
I do not know about everyone else, but I would rather 'earn' my rewards in a meaningful manner.
Other words, "Star Trek: Online" does not give you a fruitful experience that challenges your cognitions.
Again, you are way-way-way off the mark.
I feel bad for people who cannot distinguish between realism and fantasy.
Before you leave your next comment, please go play those games I mentioned.
You will see the flaw in your comments.
"Star Trek" has always been a commentary about the human condition.
Players deserve better.
Truthfully, your idea sounds HORRIBLE. Why? You call it a "meaningful achievement" but due to the massive advantage it confers, EVERYONE (or almost everyone) would work towards it as soon as they became aware of it's existence. Thus most players would end up having it eventually, and the grind to get to it would become trivial.
My character Tsin'xing
Two things. First, people are more likely to speak up when they don't like something. Have you ever noticed that whenever someone posts something positive about this game they tend to get ridiculed? That will only discourage them from making any positive posts in the future, so instead we end up with a bunch of rants and complaints. Second, people fear change. It's just human nature. Anything different or new is automatically assumed to be bad and something that should be feared.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Aceton assimilator is one of the best consoles and many KDF players pay zen for it only to find out
now its being made available on the exchange to everyone BUT KDF. How fair is that? Why should anyone feel safe making purchases in game now if the devs are only going to give the item away to everyone except the KDF who still has to pay zen for it?
Aside from that, the new lobi escort that was also released is another insult to KDF players, we still are waiting for a more competitve KDF faction escort that has either 5 tac consoles or 5 fore weapons or both in the case of the Xindi escort. Feds and Romulans have them, but KDF still doesn't have 1, and the devs decide to still ignore the KDF and put another OP escort out that isn't a KDF ship. Feds and Roms have options outside of the lobi store and lockboxes for a top tier competitive escort, KDF still doesn't. The new Xindi escort is even more OP then the others and it further makes KDF ships uncompetitive. KDF should have gotten a raptor or escort that was given the same treatment as the Feds Fleet Patrol escort first before anything like the Xindi escort came out.
Anyway since I feel KDF players are being royally screwed over lately I will have a negative attitude most of the time now until we see signs of the KDF being treated fairly. I haven't quit completley yet but have massively scaled back my playing time and not spending money anymore.
I'm not one to object too much to Star Trek as it is, it's given me a lot of fun over the years; but that's been as a casual player, who's dipped into it now and then.
What it is, is a shallow game that's fun in bursts. That's not an inconsiderable achievement, but it falls short of what many people must have expected initially, and have hoped for subsequently.
I think that for many people, even some who had played MMOs before and knew the score, there was an expectation that a Star Trek licence would bring forth a deeply immersive MMORPG, somewhat in the old skool mode, where the sense of virtual world (in this case virtual galaxy, and virtual planets) is really strong, and where there's enough depth and richness in the mechanics you can more or less live in the game 24/7. Particularly, something that (were it themepark) would have rich content at the endgame (difficult Raid type encounters for people to use their uber gear and knowledge of the game in), or were it sandboxy, sufficient "sand" to have player-created content that's endlessly entertaining (especially with the potential the Foundry has).
That's not how it's turned out. And probably 9.5 came at a time when lots of people have pretty much done to death the game that it is, and finally lost hope that it's ever going to be the game they wished it were.
So: there's no longer much hope of the rich, deep game the Star Trek licence deserves. There is a game, and it's fun, as I said, it's fun in bursts, and the combat is pretty solid, so it's great for a spin now and then. But it's really nothing more than that, and a chunk of players have come to realize it, and are a bit bitter about it, I guess.
You made several good observations.
While "Star Trek: Online" is good in bursts, the problem is that a "Star Trek" MMO deserves depth and immersion.
I absolutely agree.
Well, obviously, on the themepark side, WoW, and on the sandbox side, EVE Online. I think also games like SWG are probably at the back of peoples' minds as a style of gameplay that would have been suitable for Star Trek.
Virtual worldeyness, immersion, depth, richness of content, enough to keep people occupied for years on end.
As opposed to: a pretty solid combat core, and some decent storyline quests and a few decent multiplayer scenarios - but not nearly enough. And not nearly enough other mechanics to fill in for the lack of content. Endgame grind isn't tied to endgame accomplishment, but just to repetition.
This MMO is in the modern MMO model of shallow games that are mainly solo-oriented, with some multiplayer elements tacked on. That's great for something you can enjoy now and then, but it's not a game to inhabit, to live in, like MMORPGs used to be. It's quite far from the original vision of MMORPGs and the potential people felt they had - a potential that, as it turns out, WoW was the last MMORPG to really fulfil, at least partly in a certain direction (and EVE fulfils in another aspect). But in an effort to chase WoW's success, MMO developers have made wrong turn after wrong turn, ending up with these shallow games we have now.
The Star Trek licence really deserved something deeper and richer. It didn't get it; it did get a game that's fun in parts, but not a fun deep game.
::: LINK ::: Video is an 'example' of modern PC and NPC interaction. Take note at how the NPC and PC interaction is displayed in a cut-scene. When Cryptic tried something similar (Legacy of Romulus), they left out dialogue choices, character development, and influencing outcomes.
As a matter of fact, "Star Trek: Online's" version of NPC interaction dates back to the late 1990s/early 2000s. Games such as "Diablo I" and "Neverwinter Nights I" used a similar method for presenting dialogue options.
Around the year 2004, the way developers made roleplaying games changed. "Star Wars: 'Knights' of the Old Republic", "Oblivion", "Jade Empire" and "Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines" changed how people viewed games. Players moved away from one dimensional rpg experiences, so they can get a complex and dynamic story. "Dragon Age", "Skyrim", "SW: TOR", and "Mass Effect" are a direct result of what those previous games started.
"Dragon Age: Inquisition" and "Mass Effect 4" are going to be released within six to twelve months.
*shrugs*
21st century rpgs are all about dynamic immersion, influential choices, consequences, companion relationships, heroic/villainous deeds, etc...
"Star Trek: Online" lacks all of those qualities.
I do no want to buy my rewards.
I want to earn my rewards (achievements) through character development, stroyline outcomes, and level progression.
"Star Trek: Online" needs those qualities, for its the nature of 'the franchise'.
"Star Trek: Online's" initial download is roughly 7 gb in size.
"Star Wars: The Old Republic's" initial download is roughly 25-30 gb in size for a reason.
Time will only tell!
:P
Im positive that im negative about the apathy of the depression of the negativity of the ...wait what were talking about again ?
My character Tsin'xing
If you have to look up what choice to make, then maybe RPGs aren't your gaming style? The point of an RPG is to immerse yourself in your character and take the consequences of that character's choices as they come and deal with them - they're the very thing you bounce off of to make the game engaging and fun, to give you something to chew on, a problem to solve.
Of course, it's up to developers to make the choices such that you don't necessarily utterly gimp yourself by any given choice.
But if you're looking up the results of choices to get a good result, then you're going by a min-maxing strategy, you're not roleplaying.
It's actually always been a "thing", this distinction between people who play roleplaying games for roleplaying, and people who play them for the progression and combat. Few people are wholly or exclusively one or the other, but people do tend to be predominantly one or the other.
I play games for the fun of it. Knowing that my choices have long term consequences really isn't very fun.
And yes I have played RPGs, but for me "fun" is doing stuff like stomping a boss in FFX-2 so many times he oversouls. (Yes you can do that with certain bosses) Then stealing from him to get loot. Why? because it's loot you can't find elsewhere.
My character Tsin'xing
I don't know. I mean saying Trek has always been about schlock sort of runs counter to the main idea of this dev blog:
I mean, if Trek was always about schlock, then shouldn't the schlocky exploration content be right in line with Trek?
Although I think one of the biggest reasons to be negative right now is that with the change to exploration clusters, the development team that just made that dev blog post about high standards of quality, actually lessened the quality of DOFFing.
Demonstrating that either they didn't think the change through very well, or they don't communicate well with each other. Considering the Dev specifically in charge of DOFFing isn't even aware of the various missions that were lost in the change, I think it's both. And I support the negativity because I mean really ... what the hell is the point anymore? The right hand and left hand don't know what they're doing if they can go in and change around chunks of content in the name of improving quality, and in the process remove chunks of DOFF missions and not even KNOW they were doing it.
Doesn't that game take place a long time ago? In a galaxy far far away?