I kinda feel for OP. Maybe Cryptic should give him an instawin button or something. Jeeze, 5k. That's harsh. Maybe he is an old cast member trying to relive the past or something.
While I appreciate your support of Star Trek Online over the years, the amount you've spent has zero to do with the amount of influence you have over the game.
A free player, a player who has bought a few keys, and someone who's dropped thousands of dollars are all on equal footing here.
Hell, come work for us, we'll pay YOU, AND you'll get more say in how the game is run.
As for your complaint, can you be more specific about what it is you dislike about the Galaxy Class?
Re: Star Trek Voyager Online, we use things from all of the shows. I started on STO right before we released the 2800, and there were a lot of complaints at the time that the Devs only cared about DS9 and were ignoring the rest of the series. We're focused on the Delta Quadrant right now, because it is a part of the galaxy we hadn't been to before. That doesn't mean we're only ever going to do Voyager related stuff. At some point we'll shift focus back from the DQ to other series, at which point we'll get complaints that THAT is the only series we care about. C'est la vie.
. . . oh, and $0.
Edit:
I will say that in my opinion, if you're enjoying something, money spent on it isn't a waste. All hobbies are expensive if you really get into them. I do woodworking, I collect LEGOs and other things, I play games, and I wouldn't want to tally up how much I've spent on any one of those categories. But, I get enjoyment from each of them. The money spent has resulted in that enjoyment, and as long as I'm not overdoing it, or causing myself to go into debt because of it, I'm ok with it. $5k may seem excessive to some of you, and I get that, but so long as the OP was enjoying what he was getting back for that money, I don't see the problem.
Edit 2:
On a separate note, I often hear people talking about how much they've "invested" into the game. I'm confused by this. The money you've put into the game (since F2P), is for specific products within the game. i.e. you purchase a ship, or character slots, or a costume, or a consumable. In each case, the money you put in has given you something to use within the game. I fail to see the "investment" people view this as? If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money. There was a transaction, and I received what I paid for. Even if the broccoli didn't taste very good, that doesn't mean the store owes me anything further.
still nothing from the op? im starting to think this whole thing is one giant trolling thread by the op to get people to bite (already figured before the first reply), that means this is a spam thread full of bile and other nasties. i wouldnt be surprised the OP either never comes to reply or does and decides to strut around and laugh about it.
but thats being presumptious, but still a thought. each games has its whales and fanboys.
while i am at it, i probably spent nothing more then 300-350 quid on this game over the years, most of which went into the LTS back just before LoR. i got what i paid for and thats it.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Hell, come work for us, we'll pay YOU, AND you'll get more say in how the game is run.
Seriously? Do you guys have anything on the East Coast (Cryptic wise, not Cogent). Shoot even if it`s all in the west, where do we apply. I'm retired, I work cheap and have my own health insurance already :-)
On a separate note, I often hear people talking about how much they've "invested" into the game. I'm confused by this. The money you've put into the game (since F2P), is for specific products within the game. i.e. you purchase a ship, or character slots, or a costume, or a consumable. In each case, the money you put in has given you something to use within the game. I fail to see the "investment" people view this as? If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money. There was a transaction, and I received what I paid for. Even if the broccoli didn't taste very good, that doesn't mean the store owes me anything further.
What am I missing here?
the idea that the money people give to you gives them an idea that its recorded on a financial file for that account or something, that means you owe them for the value they put into it. that is the mentality.
so they put in 3,000 dollars into the game, buying stuff, they think that 3,000 dollars they gave you means they get special rights and priviledges because of how much they thrown at it, so they feel a need to think that you owe them so they have a say. i dunno if that made any sense, but i see it happen all the time.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I fail to see the "investment" people view this as? If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money. There was a transaction, and I received what I paid for. Even if the broccoli didn't taste very good, that doesn't mean the store owes me anything further.
What am I missing here?
Is this where I make the nonsensical, hyperbolic comparison of the broccoli giving me food poisoning and then the grocery store clerk coming over to my house and setting it on fire?
Otherwise, I am just going to mention that a better comparison is collectible card games, or comic books.
You buy a comic book or some Pokemon: the Gathering cards, and you expect your transaction to have a certain amount of value to it, and the company in turn should feel obligated to ensure your transaction remains valuable.
But a transaction is a transaction. And while a company should feel obligated to ensure such a transaction remains valuable as time progresses, it is not a requirement. This is how Magic: the Gathering got away with pretty much making every previous set obsolete with the most recent set, and why I got out of M:tG in my youth. I did not feel like my purchases were retaining their value when the new shiny came along.
STO is not quite at that point, but it's skirting the line closely enough that I think it warrants criticism.
Seriously? Do you guys have anything on the East Coast (Cryptic wise, not Cogent). Shoot even if it`s all in the west, where do we apply. I'm retired, I work cheap and have my own health insurance already :-)
Yes, I'm that Askray@Batbayer in game. Yes, I still play. No, I don't care. Former Community Moderator, Former SSR DJ, Now Full time father to two kids, Husband, Retail Worker. Tiktok: @Askray Facebook: Askray113
I think the investment term means that a player expects a certain amount of return on their purchase and that return being a level of entertainment and satisfaction. I do not regret spending any money until lately, and those purchases I regret are entirely upon myself for not researching the items better.
Someone made the analogy between games like SW or LOTRO that sold content and lets you earn functional gear/items thru play as opposed to STO which is basically opposite. I love LOTRO but when a xpack comes out like Helms Deep with a big price tag for amount of content, I always think of STO and free things. Likewise, I enjoy earning my armor sets instead of paying for a ship that ends up being an expensive buff (trait). So both models have pros and cons. Oh well, I wish we could go back to the old subscription days but I know it will never happen again.
i dont even had the money to get out to the USA much less bonnie scotland a few hundred miles up north or wales a few hundred miles west. even if i could the living prices are steep in CA and thats forgetting all those qualifications one would need and that green card thing.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
i dont even had the money to get out to the USA much less bonnie scotland a few hundred miles up north or wales a few hundred miles west. even if i could the living prices are steep in CA and thats forgetting all those qualifications one would need and that green card thing.
Just move to Mexico! The journey to California is a lot easier from there.
While I appreciate your support of Star Trek Online over the years, the amount you've spent has zero to do with the amount of influence you have over the game.
A free player, a player who has bought a few keys, and someone who's dropped thousands of dollars are all on equal footing here.
Hell, come work for us, we'll pay YOU, AND you'll get more say in how the game is run.
As for your complaint, can you be more specific about what it is you dislike about the Galaxy Class?
Re: Star Trek Voyager Online, we use things from all of the shows. I started on STO right before we released the 2800, and there were a lot of complaints at the time that the Devs only cared about DS9 and were ignoring the rest of the series. We're focused on the Delta Quadrant right now, because it is a part of the galaxy we hadn't been to before. That doesn't mean we're only ever going to do Voyager related stuff. At some point we'll shift focus back from the DQ to other series, at which point we'll get complaints that THAT is the only series we care about. C'est la vie.
. . . oh, and $0.
Edit:
On a separate note, I often hear people talking about how much they've "invested" into the game. I'm confused by this. The money you've put into the game (since F2P), is for specific products within the game. i.e. you purchase a ship, or character slots, or a costume, or a consumable. In each case, the money you put in has given you something to use within the game. I fail to see the "investment" people view this as? If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money. There was a transaction, and I received what I paid for. Even if the broccoli didn't taste very good, that doesn't mean the store owes me anything further.
What am I missing here?
Like wow..................
whos opinion and what customer puts cash in your pocket as a corperation
someone who spends nothing on the game or the people that do spend cash ? As a corperation you should be tracking people who spend cash on your game and you should be sending them surveys about content and what they want from the game
If the game belonged to me I would. It would be a TOP priority
people who spent cash on my game would get my interest as to what they wanted and expected from the game
About the Galaxy that was revamped but not improved
A single Tac Lt is the most BORING option possible....The ship needs more tactical options to make it more fun to play
take away attract fire and manovering cruiser commands there garbage anyway take away some engineering bo slots add some more tac slots or for Goshs sake another science power
you know it was a exploration cruiser ! with HUGE science labs in it...Not a fleet repair ship
and NO it doesn't NOT need a fighter bay !
Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
On a separate note, I often hear people talking about how much they've "invested" into the game. I'm confused by this. The money you've put into the game (since F2P), is for specific products within the game. i.e. you purchase a ship, or character slots, or a costume, or a consumable. In each case, the money you put in has given you something to use within the game. I fail to see the "investment" people view this as? If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money. There was a transaction, and I received what I paid for. Even if the broccoli didn't taste very good, that doesn't mean the store owes me anything further.
What am I missing here?
Maybe terminology?
When I pick up a video game from a store, I am "investing" my money into a form of entertainment.
When I pick up food from a grocery store, I am "investing" my money into the health and well being of my family.
Players are 'investing' their time, energy, and money into playing "Star Trek: Online". Money is not the only form of 'investing'.
On a similar note:
Physical Ownership vrs. Digital Rental
I own a physical copy of "Skyrim" and "Dragon Age: Origins". Within ten to twenty years from now, I will 'still' own and play "Skyrim" and "Dragon Age: Origins". Even though BioWare may go out of business, I will forever have the ability to play "Dragon Age: Origins". When "Dragon Age: Inquisition" was released, I invested money into the purchase of obtaining a hard-copy.
"Star Trek: Online" is a different beast. Unlike the physical longevity of offline software, "Star Trek: Online" has a very limited shelf-life. If, god forbid, "Star Trek: Online" had suddenly been closed down, the money people invest into content would simply vanish.
Although you are seeing things from a 'services' perspective, the consumer sees things from a time, energy, and money investment perspective.
If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money.
...but, your purchases are a form of investment. Supermarkets use a portion of your purchases to give you a better shopping experience. You are investing your time, energy, money, and loyalty to a specific product and supermarket.
...and, you are investing into your health and well-being.
I think "investing" usually means that you put money in a business and hope that some day you get something back.
It's different from just "buying" stuff - if you spend 50 $ on a space ship in STO, you didn't buy a share in the game company - you bought access to that ship.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Your $ has no more say so in this game, than if you spent that kind of $ going to football games, watching nascar, going to the movies, etc....
It's all $ spent, in the name of entertainment!!!
Now with that said, I commend you for keeping the game running, as I myself am 1 of the poor player's with so very little to actually spend out of pocket, even if Cryptic shows very little - no appreciation, I at least appreciate what ALL of the actual spender(s) have done for the game and, people such as myself.
A BIG hearty THANK YOU to you all, is all I can really give back so to speak and, I mean that really.
Remember, "Star Trek: Online" is a an extra expense. Unlike the importance of food, oil, and gas, you don't need "Star Trek: Online" to live.
Regardless about how a player spends money, the individual is investing time, money, and energy into playing "Star Trek: Online". While Cryptic keeps looking at players as a form of metrics, the consumer is looking at "Star Trek: Online" as an added expense.
Once you stop seeing players as investors, (consumers who put time, money, and energy into playing "Star Trek: Online"), you will fail to see the power in consumer loyalty.
I will say that in my opinion, if you're enjoying something, money spent on it isn't a waste. All hobbies are expensive if you really get into them. I do woodworking, I collect LEGOs and other things, I play games, and I wouldn't want to tally up how much I've spent on any one of those categories. But, I get enjoyment from each of them. The money spent has resulted in that enjoyment, and as long as I'm not overdoing it, or causing myself to go into debt because of it, I'm ok with it. $5k may seem excessive to some of you, and I get that, but so long as the OP was enjoying what he was getting back for that money, I don't see the problem.
...but, he is spending money on a game in which is making him upset.
Your not a investor, your a consumer of a product. A person that invests is a person that puts capital at risk in the hopes of return of the capital with a profit.
STO should make a effort to get players to enjoy the game and to consume the products it offers. The best way to let them know that your unhappy is to stop buying the product if your unhappy with it's direction and attempt to let them know that.
$1000 a year wasnt that much for me to spend on a game that I thought would be a "good" Star Trek game.
I just thought that the investment would be worth it.
Too bad they couldnt make the galaxy-class starship look like the way Andy Probert designed it.
Great Scott! I didn't think you guys were real... I mean I'd always heard about 'Whales' but always just assumed they were an over-exaggeration from PR and Metrics Companies trying to justify why we need them and their meaningless graphs.
Never actually seen one out in the wild, in all their lack-of-financial-sense beauty.
You know you are what Pop Cap and Zynga hold up as their Omega Particles... the very reason why it's perfectly OK to TRIBBLE over 90% of the intended audience.
I've said before that while outwardly STO seems to have a perfectly 'Fair' Business Model when the reality is that it favours those who don't work, or those willing to spend well over a reasonable value in order to have access to everything... and by proxy the best gear in the game.
The whole system is deeply flawed to the point that the casual audience, which in most games is between 50-80% ends up just never feeling like there is much value-for-money while at the same time without spending they'll never achieve what they want to in-game due to how little they can play.
When people make the excuse "Well it's fine when a F2P sells Time", what they fail to understand is the most valuable resource in any game is Time. All Economic Balance passes are passes specifically for the Progression and Acquirement over time... you sell that directly you are providing a firm "1hr costs $1" Cost:Time Ratio, now we know exactly how much or little we as players are valued.
Sure this isn't specifically a static number, so when we're having fun then we're more willing to Value that Time Higher; when we're not we will crash this valuation just wanting to get through it quicker.
Yet the point is that this always directly affects Balance Decisions directly, so basically having a little button that say "Hey Pay More, you get to Progress Quicker"; only a small group of people will be like "Yeah awesome... Pay to Skip to get to more Fun", while the majority will either see zero value in doing so, or move on to something else because clearly the developer no longer values their Time.
I've been to so many of these BS "How to milk your Whales" type of talks the past few years, at developer conferences for the most part just while waiting for actual talks about development itself, and the one thing they never cover is just how Valuable a Gamer sees their Time; it is a variable not a static entirely dependant upon the person, their means and sensibilities.
What they always do is focus on those that have no sensibilities in their spending, treat them as if they're the only consumers that matter when ultimately they are a fraction of the players you need (not hope, but NEED) in order to keep the game entertaining at the very least for them.
Here we have the other side of the coin too, the entitlement that someone believes they have from large spending. (Oh I can't wait to see the Star Citizen fallout, cause Entitlement from players they've conned $1000s from is going to be an epic backlash)
Look I'm not saying here that Free-to-Play can't or doesn't work, there are some good ideas that done well sure could be a reasonable business model ultimately. Still there is a reason why Final Fantasy XIV, Eve Online, World of ********, even Subscribers for The Old Republic have been on the rise in the recent years... most Consumers are entirely disillusioned by Free-to-Play, they starting to treat it far more as a Demo to experience a game and see if it is even worthwhile.
With Star Trek Online what seems on the surface to be the most reasonable and great implementation is merely two bars for the smallest demographics set so damn high that either you pay over the odds or play far more hours than you even want to in order to gain anything ... and sadly that is what is has devolved into, preying on that want to experience everything and/or have the best there is available to feel Epic within the game.
There is little to no room for those who just want to Role Play, Enjoy a Solidly Designed Game with Great Mechanics; as most of this stuff was very quickly pushed aside early for better profit margins. Sure it is a business, sure it has to make money but just because it isn't taking the Zynga "Pay Wall" blocking progression progress, by holding the most wanted aspects behind pay-walls of Time or Money where neither have good value to the average consumer in many ways this makes it a much worse system because they've already got you hooked enough to where you generally don't have that moment of "Well that was fun, but I'm done now" instead you get more and more invested without realising it.
It's like an IV Drip of something addictive, before selling or enslaving someone to keep that addiction up over providing an experience that people see the actual value in supporting it further.
This is the exact same thing that Slot Machines do, they're programmed to get you to win just enough that you feel like you're going to come away with more than you went in with ... but ultimately outside of a handful of lucky people most lose big without even knowing it, heck some people don't even know why they're still plinging away day after day with no real success.
Holy schnikies! Just did a cost of living comparison. I'm in Connecticut, which aint cheap. 30% over the us average. But Los Gatos... 329% over the US average. Completely understand why stuff doesn't get resolved quick in game. All the devs are working 3 jobs to pay their rent. Probably sleeping behind the server racks at Cryptic before having to go work at Google and Yahoo for their other two shifts.
Everyone who spends money on "Star Trek: Online" is an investor.
Players are investing in the success of the 'Star Trek Brand'.
This is complete and utter bull.
People spend money on entertainment. It does not matter what that entertainment is. You can spend $15.00 on an MMO Subscription or you can spend $16.00 on HBO for the month. Either way you are paying to be entertained. That is all there is to it.
Yes, your money goes to keeping the company running, but that is just the nature of consumerism. Buying a Pepsi keeps Pepsi in business but it does not mean I am invested into Pepsi or that money spent for a product makes me anything other then a consumer.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
People spend money on entertainment. It does not matter what that entertainment is. You can spend $15.00 on an MMO Subscription or you can spend $16.00 on HBO for the month. Either way you are paying to be entertained. That is all there is to it.
Yes, your money goes to keeping the company running, but that is just the nature of consumerism. Buying a Pepsi keeps Pepsi in business but it does not mean I am invested into Pepsi or that money spent for a product makes me anything other then a consumer.
If we were talking about the average game, your statement may have some kind of logic. "Star Trek" has a very loyal and invested cult following.
As I said in this thread, the problem may be from terminology.
What does it mean to 'invest'?
What is considered as a form of investment? Energy, time, money, etc..?
Each person will define those questions differently.
Whenever I buy a new cell phone, a new TV, or a new car, I expect it to last forever, never degrade in value or ever be replaced with an upgraded or newer model, and for the company that makes the item in question to listen to my every demand and cater to my every whim because I chose to spend money on their product with my own free will.
Comments
A free player, a player who has bought a few keys, and someone who's dropped thousands of dollars are all on equal footing here.
Hell, come work for us, we'll pay YOU, AND you'll get more say in how the game is run.
As for your complaint, can you be more specific about what it is you dislike about the Galaxy Class?
Re: Star Trek Voyager Online, we use things from all of the shows. I started on STO right before we released the 2800, and there were a lot of complaints at the time that the Devs only cared about DS9 and were ignoring the rest of the series. We're focused on the Delta Quadrant right now, because it is a part of the galaxy we hadn't been to before. That doesn't mean we're only ever going to do Voyager related stuff. At some point we'll shift focus back from the DQ to other series, at which point we'll get complaints that THAT is the only series we care about. C'est la vie.
. . . oh, and $0.
Edit:
I will say that in my opinion, if you're enjoying something, money spent on it isn't a waste. All hobbies are expensive if you really get into them. I do woodworking, I collect LEGOs and other things, I play games, and I wouldn't want to tally up how much I've spent on any one of those categories. But, I get enjoyment from each of them. The money spent has resulted in that enjoyment, and as long as I'm not overdoing it, or causing myself to go into debt because of it, I'm ok with it. $5k may seem excessive to some of you, and I get that, but so long as the OP was enjoying what he was getting back for that money, I don't see the problem.
Edit 2:
On a separate note, I often hear people talking about how much they've "invested" into the game. I'm confused by this. The money you've put into the game (since F2P), is for specific products within the game. i.e. you purchase a ship, or character slots, or a costume, or a consumable. In each case, the money you put in has given you something to use within the game. I fail to see the "investment" people view this as? If I go to the grocery store, and buy some broccoli, and then eat it, I have not invested into the store, despite the store getting my money. There was a transaction, and I received what I paid for. Even if the broccoli didn't taste very good, that doesn't mean the store owes me anything further.
What am I missing here?
but thats being presumptious, but still a thought. each games has its whales and fanboys.
while i am at it, i probably spent nothing more then 300-350 quid on this game over the years, most of which went into the LTS back just before LoR. i got what i paid for and thats it.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Salt, Pepper & Butter.
Seriously? Do you guys have anything on the East Coast (Cryptic wise, not Cogent). Shoot even if it`s all in the west, where do we apply. I'm retired, I work cheap and have my own health insurance already :-)
the idea that the money people give to you gives them an idea that its recorded on a financial file for that account or something, that means you owe them for the value they put into it. that is the mentality.
so they put in 3,000 dollars into the game, buying stuff, they think that 3,000 dollars they gave you means they get special rights and priviledges because of how much they thrown at it, so they feel a need to think that you owe them so they have a say. i dunno if that made any sense, but i see it happen all the time.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Is this where I make the nonsensical, hyperbolic comparison of the broccoli giving me food poisoning and then the grocery store clerk coming over to my house and setting it on fire?
Otherwise, I am just going to mention that a better comparison is collectible card games, or comic books.
You buy a comic book or some Pokemon: the Gathering cards, and you expect your transaction to have a certain amount of value to it, and the company in turn should feel obligated to ensure your transaction remains valuable.
But a transaction is a transaction. And while a company should feel obligated to ensure such a transaction remains valuable as time progresses, it is not a requirement. This is how Magic: the Gathering got away with pretty much making every previous set obsolete with the most recent set, and why I got out of M:tG in my youth. I did not feel like my purchases were retaining their value when the new shiny came along.
STO is not quite at that point, but it's skirting the line closely enough that I think it warrants criticism.
http://www.crypticstudios.com/openings Cryptic has two offices. One in Seattle, WA and one in Los Gatos, CA (main office)
Former Community Moderator, Former SSR DJ, Now Full time father to two kids, Husband, Retail Worker.
Tiktok: @Askray Facebook: Askray113
Someone made the analogy between games like SW or LOTRO that sold content and lets you earn functional gear/items thru play as opposed to STO which is basically opposite. I love LOTRO but when a xpack comes out like Helms Deep with a big price tag for amount of content, I always think of STO and free things. Likewise, I enjoy earning my armor sets instead of paying for a ship that ends up being an expensive buff (trait). So both models have pros and cons. Oh well, I wish we could go back to the old subscription days but I know it will never happen again.
"When you work with the devil, you wont change the devil, the devil changes you." comes to mind here
i dont even had the money to get out to the USA much less bonnie scotland a few hundred miles up north or wales a few hundred miles west. even if i could the living prices are steep in CA and thats forgetting all those qualifications one would need and that green card thing.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Just move to Mexico! The journey to California is a lot easier from there.
Like wow..................
whos opinion and what customer puts cash in your pocket as a corperation
someone who spends nothing on the game or the people that do spend cash ? As a corperation you should be tracking people who spend cash on your game and you should be sending them surveys about content and what they want from the game
If the game belonged to me I would. It would be a TOP priority
people who spent cash on my game would get my interest as to what they wanted and expected from the game
About the Galaxy that was revamped but not improved
A single Tac Lt is the most BORING option possible....The ship needs more tactical options to make it more fun to play
take away attract fire and manovering cruiser commands there garbage anyway take away some engineering bo slots add some more tac slots or for Goshs sake another science power
you know it was a exploration cruiser ! with HUGE science labs in it...Not a fleet repair ship
and NO it doesn't NOT need a fighter bay !
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Haha! Sweet, thanks, brother. Off to find a job.
Maybe terminology?
When I pick up a video game from a store, I am "investing" my money into a form of entertainment.
When I pick up food from a grocery store, I am "investing" my money into the health and well being of my family.
Players are 'investing' their time, energy, and money into playing "Star Trek: Online". Money is not the only form of 'investing'.
On a similar note:
Physical Ownership vrs. Digital Rental
I own a physical copy of "Skyrim" and "Dragon Age: Origins". Within ten to twenty years from now, I will 'still' own and play "Skyrim" and "Dragon Age: Origins". Even though BioWare may go out of business, I will forever have the ability to play "Dragon Age: Origins". When "Dragon Age: Inquisition" was released, I invested money into the purchase of obtaining a hard-copy.
"Star Trek: Online" is a different beast. Unlike the physical longevity of offline software, "Star Trek: Online" has a very limited shelf-life. If, god forbid, "Star Trek: Online" had suddenly been closed down, the money people invest into content would simply vanish.
Although you are seeing things from a 'services' perspective, the consumer sees things from a time, energy, and money investment perspective.
Its all about terminology and perspective.
...but, your purchases are a form of investment. Supermarkets use a portion of your purchases to give you a better shopping experience. You are investing your time, energy, money, and loyalty to a specific product and supermarket.
...and, you are investing into your health and well-being.
Sheesh... entitle much?
It's different from just "buying" stuff - if you spend 50 $ on a space ship in STO, you didn't buy a share in the game company - you bought access to that ship.
It's all $ spent, in the name of entertainment!!!
Now with that said, I commend you for keeping the game running, as I myself am 1 of the poor player's with so very little to actually spend out of pocket, even if Cryptic shows very little - no appreciation, I at least appreciate what ALL of the actual spender(s) have done for the game and, people such as myself.
A BIG hearty THANK YOU to you all, is all I can really give back so to speak and, I mean that really.
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
Regardless about how a player spends money, the individual is investing time, money, and energy into playing "Star Trek: Online". While Cryptic keeps looking at players as a form of metrics, the consumer is looking at "Star Trek: Online" as an added expense.
Once you stop seeing players as investors, (consumers who put time, money, and energy into playing "Star Trek: Online"), you will fail to see the power in consumer loyalty.
Link: Comment I made in Another Thread
Cryptic is very disconnected from the logic behind consumer loyalty and appreciation.
Link: Comment I made in Another Thread
Everyone who spends money on "Star Trek: Online" is an investor.
Players are investing in the success of the 'Star Trek Brand'.
Please don't milk the franchise.
If Cryptic gave one darn about loyalty, players would not have to grind for anniversary and event ships.
...but, he is spending money on a game in which is making him upset.
Conundrum?
STO should make a effort to get players to enjoy the game and to consume the products it offers. The best way to let them know that your unhappy is to stop buying the product if your unhappy with it's direction and attempt to let them know that.
Great Scott! I didn't think you guys were real... I mean I'd always heard about 'Whales' but always just assumed they were an over-exaggeration from PR and Metrics Companies trying to justify why we need them and their meaningless graphs.
Never actually seen one out in the wild, in all their lack-of-financial-sense beauty.
You know you are what Pop Cap and Zynga hold up as their Omega Particles... the very reason why it's perfectly OK to TRIBBLE over 90% of the intended audience.
I've said before that while outwardly STO seems to have a perfectly 'Fair' Business Model when the reality is that it favours those who don't work, or those willing to spend well over a reasonable value in order to have access to everything... and by proxy the best gear in the game.
The whole system is deeply flawed to the point that the casual audience, which in most games is between 50-80% ends up just never feeling like there is much value-for-money while at the same time without spending they'll never achieve what they want to in-game due to how little they can play.
When people make the excuse "Well it's fine when a F2P sells Time", what they fail to understand is the most valuable resource in any game is Time. All Economic Balance passes are passes specifically for the Progression and Acquirement over time... you sell that directly you are providing a firm "1hr costs $1" Cost:Time Ratio, now we know exactly how much or little we as players are valued.
Sure this isn't specifically a static number, so when we're having fun then we're more willing to Value that Time Higher; when we're not we will crash this valuation just wanting to get through it quicker.
Yet the point is that this always directly affects Balance Decisions directly, so basically having a little button that say "Hey Pay More, you get to Progress Quicker"; only a small group of people will be like "Yeah awesome... Pay to Skip to get to more Fun", while the majority will either see zero value in doing so, or move on to something else because clearly the developer no longer values their Time.
I've been to so many of these BS "How to milk your Whales" type of talks the past few years, at developer conferences for the most part just while waiting for actual talks about development itself, and the one thing they never cover is just how Valuable a Gamer sees their Time; it is a variable not a static entirely dependant upon the person, their means and sensibilities.
What they always do is focus on those that have no sensibilities in their spending, treat them as if they're the only consumers that matter when ultimately they are a fraction of the players you need (not hope, but NEED) in order to keep the game entertaining at the very least for them.
Here we have the other side of the coin too, the entitlement that someone believes they have from large spending. (Oh I can't wait to see the Star Citizen fallout, cause Entitlement from players they've conned $1000s from is going to be an epic backlash)
Look I'm not saying here that Free-to-Play can't or doesn't work, there are some good ideas that done well sure could be a reasonable business model ultimately. Still there is a reason why Final Fantasy XIV, Eve Online, World of ********, even Subscribers for The Old Republic have been on the rise in the recent years... most Consumers are entirely disillusioned by Free-to-Play, they starting to treat it far more as a Demo to experience a game and see if it is even worthwhile.
With Star Trek Online what seems on the surface to be the most reasonable and great implementation is merely two bars for the smallest demographics set so damn high that either you pay over the odds or play far more hours than you even want to in order to gain anything ... and sadly that is what is has devolved into, preying on that want to experience everything and/or have the best there is available to feel Epic within the game.
There is little to no room for those who just want to Role Play, Enjoy a Solidly Designed Game with Great Mechanics; as most of this stuff was very quickly pushed aside early for better profit margins. Sure it is a business, sure it has to make money but just because it isn't taking the Zynga "Pay Wall" blocking progression progress, by holding the most wanted aspects behind pay-walls of Time or Money where neither have good value to the average consumer in many ways this makes it a much worse system because they've already got you hooked enough to where you generally don't have that moment of "Well that was fun, but I'm done now" instead you get more and more invested without realising it.
It's like an IV Drip of something addictive, before selling or enslaving someone to keep that addiction up over providing an experience that people see the actual value in supporting it further.
This is the exact same thing that Slot Machines do, they're programmed to get you to win just enough that you feel like you're going to come away with more than you went in with ... but ultimately outside of a handful of lucky people most lose big without even knowing it, heck some people don't even know why they're still plinging away day after day with no real success.
People spend money on entertainment. It does not matter what that entertainment is. You can spend $15.00 on an MMO Subscription or you can spend $16.00 on HBO for the month. Either way you are paying to be entertained. That is all there is to it.
Yes, your money goes to keeping the company running, but that is just the nature of consumerism. Buying a Pepsi keeps Pepsi in business but it does not mean I am invested into Pepsi or that money spent for a product makes me anything other then a consumer.
If we were talking about the average game, your statement may have some kind of logic. "Star Trek" has a very loyal and invested cult following.
As I said in this thread, the problem may be from terminology.
What does it mean to 'invest'?
What is considered as a form of investment? Energy, time, money, etc..?
Each person will define those questions differently.
Whenever I buy a new cell phone, a new TV, or a new car, I expect it to last forever, never degrade in value or ever be replaced with an upgraded or newer model, and for the company that makes the item in question to listen to my every demand and cater to my every whim because I chose to spend money on their product with my own free will.
That's just how the world works dammit!