Sorry for the confusion, but I don't see where on the forum us non-social-media people are supposed to place our votes, and I'd rather not sift through this entire thread.
Oh look another whiny entitled minority. My patience is officially gone.
What is so difficult about privilege is that it is a concept that is very counter-intuitive to privileged groups. Privilege is, by the social justice definition, the advantages people have that they don't often think about because they never have to experience the oppressive side. Understanding it requires an active effort to see things from the perspective of other, underprivileged people.
I'm not particularly concerned with the "patience" of someone who gets all the shinies and doesn't think others should be treated equally and have equal opportunities, but jealously wants what little those others get for himself as well and cries about how "OP" they are. I very probably spend more money than you do on this game. Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Sorry for the confusion, but I don't see where on the forum us non-social-media people are supposed to place our votes, and I'd rather not sift through this entire thread.
DELTA - Delta has the classic round saucer section and with what seems like an air control tower on the back, it looks like a proper flight control / main coordinating carrier.
SIGMA - Sigma as a design works, it feels like a streamlined Federation design rather than a kitbash. Its lines are smooth and it looks robust, it can take a beating just by the looks of it.
OMEGA - Omega feels like the Jupiter reborn and that ship deserves a revival. Omega seems like a logical choice, a Jupiter redesign of sorts which can be silently placed inside older missions to replace the original Jupiter model.
Suggestion,
YAMATO - The Federation Battleship (FBB) from various older Trek games had a unique design which just screams 'battleship meets flight carrier'. Redesign it into a 25th century looking vessel and you have something rememberable.
Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Because Romulan players collectively do not spend enough to make it economically worth Cryptic's while to create equal amounts of content/ships/etc for them, as opposed to Feds.
Spending equal amounts of money and staff time on content that is restricted to 17% (or so) of their customer base, to that which can be used by a wider market share is bad business sense. So they make a token investment toward that 17%, and focus their main efforts on the wider market.
You can dislike it all you wish, but ultimately its simple economics.
Oh look another whiny entitled minority. My patience is officially gone.
What is so difficult about privilege is that it is a concept that is very counter-intuitive to privileged groups. Privilege is, by the social justice definition, the advantages people have that they don't often think about because they never have to experience the oppressive side. Understanding it requires an active effort to see things from the perspective of other, underprivileged people.
I'm not particularly concerned with the "patience" of someone who gets all the shinies and doesn't think others should be treated equally and have equal opportunities, but jealously wants what little those others get for himself as well and cries about how "OP" they are. I very probably spend more money than you do on this game. Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Actually on reflection - are you seriously arguing that the Romulan faction gets fewer ships/content/etc not because of their smaller player numbers and fanbase makes it uneconomic, but because there is an active, invisible form of Federation privilege, akin to white privilege (which is for all intents and purposes what you are referring to above).
The MAJOR difference here is that you CHOOSE to play Romulan. People in the real world don't choose the colour of their skin, or whatever else it is that determines their minority status, which leads to society subjecting them to a form of discrimination.
Individual taste determines what people are willing to pay for. Just because the number of customers who like Romulans and are willing to pay for Romulan content is low, making it uneconomic to develop content purely for them, it does not mean you are subject to an invisible form of discrimination.
I for one would very much like to see a full Cardassian faction, but I understand the market for it is limited and even if one is eventually made, it will never rival or come close to equal status with Feds. After all - every Trek series was based around the Federation (or its precursor as in ENT). I'm not being discriminated against, and neither are you.
I can't believe they're gonna pit the Sigma vs the Omega. I know Omega will win because it's Jupiter-ish but the Sigma is so pretty to be cut in the early tournament... *sigh*
Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Because Romulan players collectively do not spend enough to make it economically worth Cryptic's while to create equal amounts of content/ships/etc for them, as opposed to Feds.
Spending equal amounts of money and staff time on content that is restricted to 17% (or so) of their customer base, to that which can be used by a wider market share is bad business sense. So they make a token investment toward that 17%, and focus their main efforts on the wider market.
You can dislike it all you wish, but ultimately its simple economics.
No, that's actually self-fulfilling prophecy (and the fallacy of Circular Reasoning, basically leading to Homunculus fallacy because of "chicken or egg"). If they don't make as much for the other factions, population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions, then population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions ...
Homunculus (Infinite Regress).
Edit: And no, by no means could it be considered "invisible" when it's blatantly obvious and even a Dev has admitted the Circular Reasoning involved.
Oh look another whiny entitled minority. My patience is officially gone.
What is so difficult about privilege is that it is a concept that is very counter-intuitive to privileged groups. Privilege is, by the social justice definition, the advantages people have that they don't often think about because they never have to experience the oppressive side. Understanding it requires an active effort to see things from the perspective of other, underprivileged people.
I'm not particularly concerned with the "patience" of someone who gets all the shinies and doesn't think others should be treated equally and have equal opportunities, but jealously wants what little those others get for himself as well and cries about how "OP" they are. I very probably spend more money than you do on this game. Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Actually on reflection - are you seriously arguing that the Romulan faction gets fewer ships/content/etc not because of their smaller player numbers and fanbase makes it uneconomic, but because there is an active, invisible form of Federation privilege, akin to white privilege (which is for all intents and purposes what you are referring to above).
The MAJOR difference here is that you CHOOSE to play Romulan. People in the real world don't choose the colour of their skin, or whatever else it is that determines their minority status, which leads to society subjecting them to a form of discrimination.
Individual taste determines what people are willing to pay for. Just because the number of customers who like Romulans and are willing to pay for Romulan content is low, making it uneconomic to develop content purely for them, it does not mean you are subject to an invisible form of discrimination.
I for one would very much like to see a full Cardassian faction, but I understand the market for it is limited and even if one is eventually made, it will never rival or come close to equal status with Feds. After all - every Trek series was based around the Federation (or its precursor as in ENT). I'm not being discriminated against, and neither are you.
A very sensible and logical perspective.
Unfortunately, irrational internet social justice warriors often forget that the internet is not the real world and that physical attributes play much less of a role here, and absolutely no role in games, than actions or statements, which are made by choice.
Long story short, being a space-elf is a choice.
If you don't like that choice, go roll something else.
The MAJOR difference here is that you CHOOSE to play Romulan. People in the real world don't choose the colour of their skin, or whatever else it is that determines their minority status, which leads to society subjecting them to a form of discrimination.
Individual taste determines what people are willing to pay for. Just because the number of customers who like Romulans and are willing to pay for Romulan content is low, making it uneconomic to develop content purely for them, it does not mean you are subject to an invisible form of discrimination.
I for one would very much like to see a full Cardassian faction, but I understand the market for it is limited and even if one is eventually made, it will never rival or come close to equal status with Feds. After all - every Trek series was based around the Federation (or its precursor as in ENT). I'm not being discriminated against, and neither are you.
I agree here. I DO understand the call for more Romulan ships and other assets, and I think that is a legitimate discussion.
However, I very much dislike the hyperbolic comparison of likes and dislikes of fictional species or allocation of development efforts for fictional species to some sort of real-life discrimination. That is out of proportion, and from some people (not necessarily protogoth, as s/he has stayed more civil than some I've seen take the same approach) goes right across the line into an ad hominem attack. "You disagree with me! Therefore you are a real life bigot and hater!" No. I cannot condone such rhetoric over a work of fiction.
By all means one can argue that Cryptic putting something in game and promising a certain type of product means they should deliver on it. Or by contrast one may fairly argue that there are canon reasons why a certain thing people playing a minority faction would like (again note: people playing a minority faction, not "oppressed minority") should not happen. AND people are free to argue their likes and dislikes for the fictional species itself, because it does not exist and by definition lacks the complexity and inherent right to dignity that even a single real-life person has, let alone a culture.
Even a single real person is infinitely more complex than a game species. There is no comparison whatsoever. I would appreciate if people would make their case about inclusion or exclusion of in-game assets, or even likes or dislikes of fictional species and characters, without going that route.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I DO understand the call for more Romulan ships and other assets, and I think that is a legitimate discussion.
However, I very much dislike the hyperbolic comparison of likes and dislikes of fictional species or allocation of development efforts for fictional species to some sort of real-life discrimination. That is out of proportion, and from some people (not necessarily protogoth, as s/he has stayed more civil than some I've seen take the same approach) goes right across the line into an ad hominem attack. "You disagree with me! Therefore you are a real life bigot and hater!" No. I cannot condone such rhetoric over a work of fiction.
By all means one can argue that Cryptic putting something in game and promising a certain type of product means they should deliver on it. Or by contrast one may fairly argue that there are canon reasons why a certain thing people playing a minority faction would like (again note: people playing a minority faction, not "oppressed minority") should not happen. AND people are free to argue their likes and dislikes for the fictional species itself, because it does not exist and by definition lacks the complexity and inherent right to dignity that even a single real-life person has, let alone a culture.
Even a single real person is infinitely more complex than a game species. There is no comparison whatsoever. I would appreciate if people would make their case about inclusion or exclusion of in-game assets, or even likes or dislikes of fictional species and characters, without going that route.
Privilege is privilege is privilege, in real life or in a game. If the other factions were afforded equal treatment and equal opportunities, the population of the other factions would not be so small. It might never be entirely on the same level as Fed population, but people will gravitate toward an option for which they see better treatment and more opportunities.
And is aesthetic preference actually "a choice," or is it innate, or some blend of the two?
No, that's actually self-fulfilling prophecy (and the fallacy of circular reasoning, basically leading to Homunculus fallacy because of "chicken or egg"). If they don't make as much for the other factions, population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions, then population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions ...
Homunculus (Infinite Regress).
Where to start?
Firstly, accusing people of employing fallacies comes across as extraordinarily rude and patronising. Its throwing labels around and isn't nice behaviour.
Secondly, your response does not address the underlying issue. Cryptic's goal is ultimately to maximise revenue. Investing in Romulan content to increase Romulan sales and player numbers is certainly one way to generate 'some' more revenue, and doubtless one you would favour.
However - Cryptic's resources are not infinite. How much revenue will ultimately be generated by creating more Romulan content, versus the greater amount which would be created by producing more Fed content? Given that a clear majority of players join STO to play Fed (given the nature of the series - most people join to play Kirks or Picards, not Tomalaks), the answer is clear. Focusing primarily on Federation content, whilst throwing a few bones to the KDFs and Roms, makes economic sense, as it creates MORE revenue than creating equal amounts of content for all. There is not the same market for Romulan content, and frankly never will be no matter how much they invest in it.
EDIT: I have just read your latest post above. I believe my existing response is adequate in rebutting it.
Thirdly, you have sidestepped my point regarding 'privilege', except to claim that it is not 'invisible'
Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Because Romulan players collectively do not spend enough to make it economically worth Cryptic's while to create equal amounts of content/ships/etc for them, as opposed to Feds.
Spending equal amounts of money and staff time on content that is restricted to 17% (or so) of their customer base, to that which can be used by a wider market share is bad business sense. So they make a token investment toward that 17%, and focus their main efforts on the wider market.
You can dislike it all you wish, but ultimately its simple economics.
No, that's actually self-fulfilling prophecy (and the fallacy of Circular Reasoning, basically leading to Homunculus fallacy because of "chicken or egg"). If they don't make as much for the other factions, population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions, then population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions ...
Homunculus (Infinite Regress).
Edit: And no, by no means could it be considered "invisible" when it's blatantly obvious and even a Dev has admitted the Circular Reasoning involved.
That reasoning is popular, and I still think that reasoning is (at least mostly) wrong.
What is the assumption that people pick the faction with the most choices? It seems unlikely anyone assumes that people try to maximize the number of ships they can purchase with their hard-earned money (or hard-earned Dilithium turned into virtual currency that others bought with their hard-earned money).
So the assumption seems to be more that people gravitate towards the faction with the most choices simply because it's more likely something in it finds their taste.
But that would suggest that the number of ships a player buys is pretty similar across any faction, it just matters in which faction he finds something.
The main cost for Cryptic in making ships is independent of the faction. Creating a 3D Model of a brand new Fed ship is not cheaper than making the 3D Model of a brand new Klingon ship. So the main factor is how many instances of a particular ship are bought. If people primarily buy the ships they like (be it aesthetically or due to game mechanics), then ship sales will not depend on how large a particular faction is, but as how appealing the ship is considered in general.
If Federation ships sell more per individual ship, than we have to conclude that part of the appeal of a ship for a majority of players is that it's Fed.
In addition, there is also the faulty assumption that players are someone "Romulan Players" or "Klingon Players" or "Federation Players". Players are players. Your account allows you to make a Captain for any faction. You are not restricted to one. I know this very well, because I have multiple characters per faction.
I think the reason why the Federation remains the most popular faction and always was is because that's the core of Star Trek. Not the Romulans. Not the Cardassians. Not the Borg. Not the Klingons. The Federation. ANd not even the whole of the Federation - only really the Star Fleet parts.
Yes, if you want to use social-justice terms you can call this a "privileged" situation for Federation players, but this isn't a political fight - we're talking about a computer game. This only affects this game, not the real world, like career opportunities.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
New players will typically pick the faction they are most familiar with. Or if knowing little about Star Trek, will likely still end up choosing Federation since they're the default. Hence, higher population, more ships for that population, etc. It's that simple.
There are many valid reasons to complain about the state of the game. This whining pales in comparison to most of them.
No, that's actually self-fulfilling prophecy (and the fallacy of circular reasoning, basically leading to Homunculus fallacy because of "chicken or egg"). If they don't make as much for the other factions, population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions, then population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions ...
Homunculus (Infinite Regress).
Where to start?
Firstly, accusing people of employing fallacies comes across as extraordinarily rude and patronising. Its throwing labels around and isn't nice behaviour.
Secondly, your response does not address the underlying issue. Cryptic's goal is ultimately to maximise revenue. Investing in Romulan content to increase Romulan sales and player numbers is certainly one way to generate 'some' more revenue, and doubtless one you would favour.
However - Cryptic's resources are not infinite. How much revenue will ultimately be generated by creating more Romulan content, versus the greater amount which would be created by producing more Fed content? Given that a clear majority of players join STO to play Fed (given the nature of the series - most people join to play Kirks or Picards, not Tomalaks), the answer is clear. Focusing primarily on Federation content, whilst throwing a few bones to the KDFs and Roms, makes economic sense, as it creates MORE revenue than creating equal amounts of content for all. There is not the same market for Romulan content, and frankly never will be no matter how much they invest in it.
EDIT: I have just read your latest post above. I believe my existing response is adequate in rebutting it.
Thirdly, you have sidestepped my point regarding 'privilege', except to claim that it is not 'invisible'
"Accusing people of employing fallacies." Goodness. J'accuse! A fallacy is a fallacy. There's nothing inherently nice or rude about pointing one out.
Who said anything about Toma-Lax? There were Romulans before "The New Guys" came along and turned the RSE into a society ruled by a gang of uptight fascist bully boys.
And no, I didn't "side-step" your point. I ignored it, because it's ridiculous to pretend that privilege doesn't exist in STO. The Feds are favored. It's such an obvious truth as to not require any argument for its truth.
Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Because Romulan players collectively do not spend enough to make it economically worth Cryptic's while to create equal amounts of content/ships/etc for them, as opposed to Feds.
Spending equal amounts of money and staff time on content that is restricted to 17% (or so) of their customer base, to that which can be used by a wider market share is bad business sense. So they make a token investment toward that 17%, and focus their main efforts on the wider market.
You can dislike it all you wish, but ultimately its simple economics.
No, that's actually self-fulfilling prophecy (and the fallacy of Circular Reasoning, basically leading to Homunculus fallacy because of "chicken or egg"). If they don't make as much for the other factions, population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions, then population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions ...
Homunculus (Infinite Regress).
Edit: And no, by no means could it be considered "invisible" when it's blatantly obvious and even a Dev has admitted the Circular Reasoning involved.
That reasoning is popular, and I still think that reasoning is (at least mostly) wrong.
What is the assumption that people pick the faction with the most choices? It seems unlikely anyone assumes that people try to maximize the number of ships they can purchase with their hard-earned money (or hard-earned Dilithium turned into virtual currency that others bought with their hard-earned money).
So the assumption seems to be more that people gravitate towards the faction with the most choices simply because it's more likely something in it finds their taste.
But that would suggest that the number of ships a player buys is pretty similar across any faction, it just matters in which faction he finds something.
The main cost for Cryptic in making ships is independent of the faction. Creating a 3D Model of a brand new Fed ship is not cheaper than making the 3D Model of a brand new Klingon ship. So the main factor is how many instances of a particular ship are bought.
In addition, there is also the faulty assumption that players are someone "Romulan Players" or "Klingon Players" or "Federation Players". Players are players. Your account allows you to make a Captain for any faction. You are not restricted to one. I know this very well, because I have multiple characters per faction.
I think the reason why the Federation remains the most popular faction and always was is because that's the core of Star Trek. Not the Romulans. Not the Cardassians. Not the Borg. Not the Klingons. The Federation. ANd not even the whole of the Federation - only really the Star Fleet parts.
Yes, if you want to use social-justice terms you can call this a "privileged" situation for Federation players, but this isn't a political fight - we're talking about a computer game. This only affects this game, not the real world, like career opportunities.
The MMOs which have the most appeal are widely said to be MMOs with the most customization and other player options. While that may be popular, it's also true, popular or not.
You know, I was here when you had to make a Fed before you were "allowed" to make a KDF, and before RRF even existed, so yes, I'm very well aware that I can make a character of any faction, or one from all three. In fact, I have 2 Feds and 2 KDF characters. I also have six RRF characters.
But yes, there are RRF players, people like me who prefer to play RRF, and regard any Fed or KDF characters they have as secondary, or as nothing but mules for extra storage. There are also KDF players who take the same attitude toward any Fed or RRF character(s) they may have. And of course there are Fed players, some of whom never even bother to try KDF or RRF (and since there was a time when your starting choices were limited to Fed, Fed, Fed, Fed, or Fed, ... well, surely you can figure out where this is going without me guiding you). To deny that there are factional players in STO is to deny the reality of the situation.
Pretending that privilege doesn't exist because it's uncomfortable to admit its existence does not make it not exist.
Privilege is privilege is privilege, in real life or in a game. If the other factions were afforded equal treatment and equal opportunities, the population of the other factions would not be so small. It might never be entirely on the same level as Fed population, but people will gravitate toward an option for which they see better treatment and more opportunities.
And is aesthetic preference actually "a choice," or is it innate, or some blend of the two?
I don't think it's necessary to invoke some concept of "privilege" and rhetoric that risks making people feel as though their personal IRL character has been attacked. I really think you undermine your position and the support for it when you take that approach, as do others who use that same tactic for their own reasons.
It would be perfectly reasonable to couch this as a financial/business argument, by pointing out that Cryptic has gotten themselves in a vicious cycle by providing few enough options that sales are lower than they should be, which they then use to justify even fewer offerings. You could then go on to say that Cryptic needs to take the risk to make a major development push as a long-term investment, rather than focusing on easy short-term gains. That is something I suspect you and I agree is a problem in Cryptic/PWE's approach to the game: a self-destructively shortsighted financial focus. Making that argument cuts the legs out of their protestations that something "doesn't sell" and therefore isn't justified.
In contrast, I reiterate that resorting to arguments about "privilege" and elevating in-game concerns and Cryptic/PWE financial decisions to something equivalent to a very serious real-life debate is IMO both unjustified (and risks a completely unnecessary personal insult to people you are talking to), and unhelpful to your goals (unnecessary offense causes people to react against what they might otherwise view as a legitimate position had they not been thus offended).
Edit: The last question there is not germane to whether or not Cryptic should change its business decisions and--like the invocation of "privilege"--risks being construed as a character attack against anyone who disagrees with your position (it again suggests that real-life, personal discrimination is being done to you, and the obvious follow-on implication is that anyone who disagrees with you is of low character). That kind of approach does not help you get your game concerns considered.
More Romulan/Reman options are a good thing, particularly for sci's. But tactics like what you're employing risk alienating even people who up until that have been sympathetic to your arguments.
Post edited by gulberat on
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
That Galaxy-X was sure firing it's phaser lance alot more that it should have been able. Considering its power requirement to fire the weapon in the first place. Form your vid posted here. It fired its phaser lance no less that 6 rimes and that is just plan insane.
i personally don't see why we cant have the Typhon Class from Star Trek : Invasion, I Love that Ship. the nearest I can see here would be Sigma and Epsilon.
But I want the Typhon. and yes it is Typhon and not Typhoon. Look it up.
Remember a True Carrier is a mobile station, not very manuverable but tough enough to take a pounding, Whilst commanding its fighters and support craft, usually not that heavily armed either.
A True Carrier is a "park and assist" ship. would be good to see some Flak weapons on it as well, to keep enemy fighters and torps at bay.
we cant have it cause, like i told someone else, it belongs to Activision, its their own Design, so Cryptic cant just use it, unless Activision allows it.
Ups someone allready answered to that.....erm the Option to Delete your own Comment would be a nice thing now -_-
Comments
Oh look another whiny entitled minority. My patience is officially gone.
Well the icon for the "Design" part on the promotion's main page has changed, just no link to the next page yet...
Thank you for the time...
Cryptic, would you actulaly like me to spend actual Money? It's Simple:
I'm guessing... like that.
My character Tsin'xing
What is so difficult about privilege is that it is a concept that is very counter-intuitive to privileged groups. Privilege is, by the social justice definition, the advantages people have that they don't often think about because they never have to experience the oppressive side. Understanding it requires an active effort to see things from the perspective of other, underprivileged people.
I'm not particularly concerned with the "patience" of someone who gets all the shinies and doesn't think others should be treated equally and have equal opportunities, but jealously wants what little those others get for himself as well and cries about how "OP" they are. I very probably spend more money than you do on this game. Tell me again why I'm "entitled" and "whiny" and shouldn't get treatment and opportunities equal to what a Fed player gets in the game?
Looks like they just opened
Member Access Denied Armada!
My forum single-issue of rage: Make the Proton Experimental Weapon go for subsystem targetting!
DELTA - Delta has the classic round saucer section and with what seems like an air control tower on the back, it looks like a proper flight control / main coordinating carrier.
SIGMA - Sigma as a design works, it feels like a streamlined Federation design rather than a kitbash. Its lines are smooth and it looks robust, it can take a beating just by the looks of it.
OMEGA - Omega feels like the Jupiter reborn and that ship deserves a revival. Omega seems like a logical choice, a Jupiter redesign of sorts which can be silently placed inside older missions to replace the original Jupiter model.
Suggestion,
YAMATO - The Federation Battleship (FBB) from various older Trek games had a unique design which just screams 'battleship meets flight carrier'. Redesign it into a 25th century looking vessel and you have something rememberable.
I believe the big white space you reference is a side launch deck for the hangar.
Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER
Expatriot Might Characters in EXILE
Spending equal amounts of money and staff time on content that is restricted to 17% (or so) of their customer base, to that which can be used by a wider market share is bad business sense. So they make a token investment toward that 17%, and focus their main efforts on the wider market.
You can dislike it all you wish, but ultimately its simple economics.
from the looks of it, it'll be Omega vs. Sigma for round 4. Would of preferred those two for a latter bracket, if it was possible.
Thank you for the time...
Cryptic, would you actulaly like me to spend actual Money? It's Simple:
You seem to be taking this game too seriously, or mentally ill, and either way should probably get out more.
Be happy that Cryptic is listening to player feedback for once and quit expecting special snowflake treatment because it isn't "your" feedback.
Regardless, design Delta is my personal favorite because it's derpy looking.
The MAJOR difference here is that you CHOOSE to play Romulan. People in the real world don't choose the colour of their skin, or whatever else it is that determines their minority status, which leads to society subjecting them to a form of discrimination.
Individual taste determines what people are willing to pay for. Just because the number of customers who like Romulans and are willing to pay for Romulan content is low, making it uneconomic to develop content purely for them, it does not mean you are subject to an invisible form of discrimination.
I for one would very much like to see a full Cardassian faction, but I understand the market for it is limited and even if one is eventually made, it will never rival or come close to equal status with Feds. After all - every Trek series was based around the Federation (or its precursor as in ENT). I'm not being discriminated against, and neither are you.
No, that's actually self-fulfilling prophecy (and the fallacy of Circular Reasoning, basically leading to Homunculus fallacy because of "chicken or egg"). If they don't make as much for the other factions, population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions, then population in the other factions is restricted by design, therefore the other factions don't spend as much money, therefore they don't make as much for the other factions ...
Homunculus (Infinite Regress).
Edit: And no, by no means could it be considered "invisible" when it's blatantly obvious and even a Dev has admitted the Circular Reasoning involved.
A very sensible and logical perspective.
Unfortunately, irrational internet social justice warriors often forget that the internet is not the real world and that physical attributes play much less of a role here, and absolutely no role in games, than actions or statements, which are made by choice.
Long story short, being a space-elf is a choice.
If you don't like that choice, go roll something else.
I agree here. I DO understand the call for more Romulan ships and other assets, and I think that is a legitimate discussion.
However, I very much dislike the hyperbolic comparison of likes and dislikes of fictional species or allocation of development efforts for fictional species to some sort of real-life discrimination. That is out of proportion, and from some people (not necessarily protogoth, as s/he has stayed more civil than some I've seen take the same approach) goes right across the line into an ad hominem attack. "You disagree with me! Therefore you are a real life bigot and hater!" No. I cannot condone such rhetoric over a work of fiction.
By all means one can argue that Cryptic putting something in game and promising a certain type of product means they should deliver on it. Or by contrast one may fairly argue that there are canon reasons why a certain thing people playing a minority faction would like (again note: people playing a minority faction, not "oppressed minority") should not happen. AND people are free to argue their likes and dislikes for the fictional species itself, because it does not exist and by definition lacks the complexity and inherent right to dignity that even a single real-life person has, let alone a culture.
Even a single real person is infinitely more complex than a game species. There is no comparison whatsoever. I would appreciate if people would make their case about inclusion or exclusion of in-game assets, or even likes or dislikes of fictional species and characters, without going that route.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Privilege is privilege is privilege, in real life or in a game. If the other factions were afforded equal treatment and equal opportunities, the population of the other factions would not be so small. It might never be entirely on the same level as Fed population, but people will gravitate toward an option for which they see better treatment and more opportunities.
And is aesthetic preference actually "a choice," or is it innate, or some blend of the two?
Firstly, accusing people of employing fallacies comes across as extraordinarily rude and patronising. Its throwing labels around and isn't nice behaviour.
Secondly, your response does not address the underlying issue. Cryptic's goal is ultimately to maximise revenue. Investing in Romulan content to increase Romulan sales and player numbers is certainly one way to generate 'some' more revenue, and doubtless one you would favour.
However - Cryptic's resources are not infinite. How much revenue will ultimately be generated by creating more Romulan content, versus the greater amount which would be created by producing more Fed content? Given that a clear majority of players join STO to play Fed (given the nature of the series - most people join to play Kirks or Picards, not Tomalaks), the answer is clear. Focusing primarily on Federation content, whilst throwing a few bones to the KDFs and Roms, makes economic sense, as it creates MORE revenue than creating equal amounts of content for all. There is not the same market for Romulan content, and frankly never will be no matter how much they invest in it.
EDIT: I have just read your latest post above. I believe my existing response is adequate in rebutting it.
Thirdly, you have sidestepped my point regarding 'privilege', except to claim that it is not 'invisible'
What you are saying is you are unhappy with rolling a space-elf, but do not want to admit it to yourself because reasons.
Either go re-roll, or find a corner to sit in and stay quiet.
Now, have you voted for a ship design?
If not, do so.
Afterwards I heavily advise seeking professional help for your inability to differentiate reality and video games.
What is the assumption that people pick the faction with the most choices? It seems unlikely anyone assumes that people try to maximize the number of ships they can purchase with their hard-earned money (or hard-earned Dilithium turned into virtual currency that others bought with their hard-earned money).
So the assumption seems to be more that people gravitate towards the faction with the most choices simply because it's more likely something in it finds their taste.
But that would suggest that the number of ships a player buys is pretty similar across any faction, it just matters in which faction he finds something.
The main cost for Cryptic in making ships is independent of the faction. Creating a 3D Model of a brand new Fed ship is not cheaper than making the 3D Model of a brand new Klingon ship. So the main factor is how many instances of a particular ship are bought. If people primarily buy the ships they like (be it aesthetically or due to game mechanics), then ship sales will not depend on how large a particular faction is, but as how appealing the ship is considered in general.
If Federation ships sell more per individual ship, than we have to conclude that part of the appeal of a ship for a majority of players is that it's Fed.
In addition, there is also the faulty assumption that players are someone "Romulan Players" or "Klingon Players" or "Federation Players". Players are players. Your account allows you to make a Captain for any faction. You are not restricted to one. I know this very well, because I have multiple characters per faction.
I think the reason why the Federation remains the most popular faction and always was is because that's the core of Star Trek. Not the Romulans. Not the Cardassians. Not the Borg. Not the Klingons. The Federation. ANd not even the whole of the Federation - only really the Star Fleet parts.
Yes, if you want to use social-justice terms you can call this a "privileged" situation for Federation players, but this isn't a political fight - we're talking about a computer game. This only affects this game, not the real world, like career opportunities.
There are many valid reasons to complain about the state of the game. This whining pales in comparison to most of them.
"Accusing people of employing fallacies." Goodness. J'accuse! A fallacy is a fallacy. There's nothing inherently nice or rude about pointing one out.
Who said anything about Toma-Lax? There were Romulans before "The New Guys" came along and turned the RSE into a society ruled by a gang of uptight fascist bully boys.
And no, I didn't "side-step" your point. I ignored it, because it's ridiculous to pretend that privilege doesn't exist in STO. The Feds are favored. It's such an obvious truth as to not require any argument for its truth.
The MMOs which have the most appeal are widely said to be MMOs with the most customization and other player options. While that may be popular, it's also true, popular or not.
You know, I was here when you had to make a Fed before you were "allowed" to make a KDF, and before RRF even existed, so yes, I'm very well aware that I can make a character of any faction, or one from all three. In fact, I have 2 Feds and 2 KDF characters. I also have six RRF characters.
But yes, there are RRF players, people like me who prefer to play RRF, and regard any Fed or KDF characters they have as secondary, or as nothing but mules for extra storage. There are also KDF players who take the same attitude toward any Fed or RRF character(s) they may have. And of course there are Fed players, some of whom never even bother to try KDF or RRF (and since there was a time when your starting choices were limited to Fed, Fed, Fed, Fed, or Fed, ... well, surely you can figure out where this is going without me guiding you). To deny that there are factional players in STO is to deny the reality of the situation.
Pretending that privilege doesn't exist because it's uncomfortable to admit its existence does not make it not exist.
I don't think it's necessary to invoke some concept of "privilege" and rhetoric that risks making people feel as though their personal IRL character has been attacked. I really think you undermine your position and the support for it when you take that approach, as do others who use that same tactic for their own reasons.
It would be perfectly reasonable to couch this as a financial/business argument, by pointing out that Cryptic has gotten themselves in a vicious cycle by providing few enough options that sales are lower than they should be, which they then use to justify even fewer offerings. You could then go on to say that Cryptic needs to take the risk to make a major development push as a long-term investment, rather than focusing on easy short-term gains. That is something I suspect you and I agree is a problem in Cryptic/PWE's approach to the game: a self-destructively shortsighted financial focus. Making that argument cuts the legs out of their protestations that something "doesn't sell" and therefore isn't justified.
In contrast, I reiterate that resorting to arguments about "privilege" and elevating in-game concerns and Cryptic/PWE financial decisions to something equivalent to a very serious real-life debate is IMO both unjustified (and risks a completely unnecessary personal insult to people you are talking to), and unhelpful to your goals (unnecessary offense causes people to react against what they might otherwise view as a legitimate position had they not been thus offended).
Edit: The last question there is not germane to whether or not Cryptic should change its business decisions and--like the invocation of "privilege"--risks being construed as a character attack against anyone who disagrees with your position (it again suggests that real-life, personal discrimination is being done to you, and the obvious follow-on implication is that anyone who disagrees with you is of low character). That kind of approach does not help you get your game concerns considered.
More Romulan/Reman options are a good thing, particularly for sci's. But tactics like what you're employing risk alienating even people who up until that have been sympathetic to your arguments.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
errrrr Video?? Thats my Signature Lol
we cant have it cause, like i told someone else, it belongs to Activision, its their own Design, so Cryptic cant just use it, unless Activision allows it.
Ups someone allready answered to that.....erm the Option to Delete your own Comment would be a nice thing now -_-
Unfortunately i was not able to get much attention with my Initial Post.....Reposted it on the Voting Site and really hope they will have a look at it