My "differing opinion" is that the OP seems to be indulging the delusion that the game was, is, or ever will be ruled by consensus of players, that they will be rewarded for whining about it in massive walls of text.
My "differing opinion" is that the OP seems to be indulging the delusion that the game was, is, or ever will be ruled by consensus of players, that they will be rewarded for whining about it in massive walls of text.
Also there's the idea that new players have any inkling as to what the status of the KDF was at launch.
Another one that I found particularly humorous was when someone tried to claim that newbies immediately compare the number of z-store ships to decide what faction to play...
My "differing opinion" is that the OP seems to be indulging the delusion that the game was, is, or ever will be ruled by consensus of players, that they will be rewarded for whining about it in massive walls of text.
Also there's the idea that new players have any inkling as to what the status of the KDF was at launch.
Another one that I found particularly humorous was when someone tried to claim that newbies immediately compare the number of z-store ships to decide what faction to play...
Which is odd in itself, since one can't even see the number of ships in the C-Store, until one signs into the game and creates a character by picking which Faction to be a part of.
<shrug>
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Which is odd in itself, since one can't even see the number of ships in the C-Store, until one signs into the game and creates a character by picking which Faction to be a part of.<shrug>
True, but really now, how many NEW Players go looking at a games Wiki before starting to play it...
I would venture a guess at maybe a few, but certainly not the majority.
Most folks don't go looking at that type of thing till they get into the game and perhaps get stuck on something.
Hell, a majority don't even come to the forums, never mind the wiki.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Which is odd in itself, since one can't even see the number of ships in the C-Store, until one signs into the game and creates a character by picking which Faction to be a part of.<shrug>
And how many people see we ask questions that the Wiki could have long answered for them? How many people ask questions that a cursory internet search could have revealed?
The PS4 / XBOX launch has brought us a lot of newbies, and should remind us what questions they ask and what they really know about the game. And it will also tell Cryptic how much "innate" interest into the different faction exists, since they are presented as equals on the character selection/creation screen.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
I admit it. I read the entire initial post. It was long. It needed a TL;DR, but I worked through it anyway and in the end, was left wondering what the OP's point was. Most all, if not all of his data is based on a very small survey made by a company that Perpetual hired and he argues that we must show some other larger survey if we want to refute those findings. I say that is absolute BS. A poorly written research paper must stand up to certain basic expectations of all research before anyone would bother digging up the facts to show it's wrong and the same hold true here.
The initial survey was of a very small number.
The initial survey was taken a few years before the launch of the game.
The initial survey was ordered by Perpetual, which later went into Bankruptcy and sold the license and artwork (but not the game engine and other program related IP) to Cryptic.
The initial survey had no binding relation to the Cryptic, nor were they in any way held to it and may not have even been fully aware of it.
With these considerations, the survey and any other statements or "facts" that predate the purchase of the IP and license by Cryptic are useless and have no weight in any discussion regarding this game as the game Perpetual had is not the game that Cryptic released in any way.
That said, here are some facts:
Far more people play a primary character that is Federation.
Far fewer have active alts or mains that are Klingon and Romulan.
AoY and their integration with the Federation and the lack of any real content specific to the other factions would support the stance that Cryptic is seeing the population lean that direction as well.
It can be expected that most content will continue to focus on that larger population of players.
All the surveys and "theorycraft" of years gone by don't mean jack to what the game is now and what Cryptic is doing going forward.
If anything, those that gripe about Crytpic need to be a bit more grateful. Remember, the license for Star Trek in an MMO was help by Perpetual and they went under. That license, back in 2008 when the economy was a wreck, could have ended up with anyone...maybe even EA (god help us all) or just outright canned and never to see the light of day. They stepped in and took what we thought had been lost and gave us a game that has both space and ground combat with a great character and ship customization and interesting missions with a player created content using Foundry. For all the bugs and the gripes players have, they have lost the sight and perspective on just what this game is and how amazing it is compared to so many others out there that were unable to attain this scope of play. That such a small company is able to keep a game of this size and scope is play with the population it has is a credit to them and a great service to us.
Which is odd in itself, since one can't even see the number of ships in the C-Store, until one signs into the game and creates a character by picking which Faction to be a part of.<shrug>
In the end though - Perpetual FAILED to deliver a game (after 4 years) and CBS was so dismayed at all the time and money wasted by Perpetual; they pulled the STO License and said any Company that picked it up would have to meet a hard/contractual release date. Cryptic made a proposal for and won the License and complied with CBS demands and effectively made the V 1.0 retail launched version of this game in 18 months (with all the drawbacks that implies.)
That to this day (given the above) some folks do get WHY they focused on the Federation faction primarily just eludes me.
BTW - there's also Interplay's HARD realization that Klingon based Star Trek games just don't do well market wise ('Klingon Academy WAS a good game - BUT pretty much bombed in the market - read didn't sell as well - as 'Starfleet Academy did); so CBS was probably happy with the direction Cryptic took STO at that start.
But in the end - This ship sailed LONG ago. At this point Cryptic has settled on primarily faction agnostic content (Read 'one mission for all') - so I really don't get the need to beat this poor dead horse issue again.
But, that's me.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Armed with all that data and all that history, I bet if you approached CBS with an idea for a Klingon centric online game, Cryptic would happily let you have that tinsy tiny and overly angry part of the market share.
Have it! Make your Klingon centered game. Enjoy! More Trek is never a bad thing. Let's get this done!
In the end though - Perpetual FAILED to deliver a game (after 4 years) and CBS was so dismayed at all the time and money wasted by Perpetual; they pulled the STO License and said any Company that picked it up would have to meet a hard/contractual release date. Cryptic made a proposal for and won the License and complied with CBS demands and effectively made the V 1.0 retail launched version of this game in 18 months (with all the drawbacks that implies.)
That to this day (given the above) some folks do get WHY they focused on the Federation faction primarily just eludes me.
BTW - there's also Interplay's HARD realization that Klingon based Star Trek games just don't do well market wise ('Klingon Academy WAS a good game - BUT pretty much bombed in the market - read didn't sell as well - as 'Starfleet Academy did); so CBS was probably happy with the direction Cryptic took STO at that start.
But in the end - This ship sailed LONG ago. At this point Cryptic has settled on primarily faction agnostic content (Read 'one mission for all') - so I really don't get the need to beat this poor dead horse issue again.
But, that's me.
Ultimately, that is correct. For the most part, all my alts play similar to my main at a certain point with the defining difference being availability of T6 ships. My Federation captains have a wide variety. My KDF and Romulan captains do not. This is really the only difference and when players complain about wanting more focus on other factions, I can only assume this is the heart of the issue. One need only look at the Cstore to see what Cryptic is doing and I for one am not losing sleep over it. It is what it is. The game is still fun and enjoyable even if KDF never gets a T6 carrier or a decent Science ship, but that said...some will QQ because of that. /shrug
Wait a second, I think this "market research" was applied "properly". To wit:
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
By contrast, Cryptic has conducted a poll exclusively within the STO community. The aforementioned TrekMovie is also a Star Trek enthusiast site. Why is it important to poll outside of Star Trek enthusiasts? There's something called self-selection bias:
In statistics, self-selection bias arises in any situation in which individuals select themselves into a group, causing a biased sample with nonprobability sampling. [. . .] A poll suffering from such bias is termed a self-selected listener opinion poll or "SLOP".
That the poll was "Exclusively within the STO community" assumes facts not in evidence. It might be true, but we simply aren't given enough information. Assumptions are problematic. Self-selection bias is about people signing up to surveys on their own, not about people making surveys picking from within a certain group. Self-selection bias is why online polls that are set up and just hope that a representative example find its way to completing are generally considered to be garbage polls with garbage results. We have no evidence that Cryptic's internal polls were simply open to those on the forums, or if they selected particular members to send it to. In either case, that was the audience that they had already attracted, so it was a better poll to gauge likely players than the poorly-worded, vague pre-development polling commissioned by Perpetual.
Someone might argue that the television show was focused on Starfleet and Federation. However, such arguments are invalid because this is also a computer game, which advertises multiple factions. There have already been Star Trek computer games such as Star Trek: Klingon, Star Trek: Klingon Academy and Star Trek: Klingon Honor Guard, which were exclusively from the Klingon perspective.
Those three games account for less than 10% of all Star Trek games to that point. There were far more than that from just the Federation perspective, or with a Federation-heavy focus in the single-player content, with some others featuring a more-balanced multi-faction story.
"The question 'opposing faction' was presented under the assumption that Starfleet was the primary player faction."
No, the incorrect assumption was on Perpetual Entertainment's part after they were surprised by the results. Nowhere in the survey did Nielsen Media Research state that it was "opposing to Starfleet". Otherwise, "Federation (Starfleet)" would not have been an option at all. The reason it states "opposing factions" is because they oppose each other and are not allied.
No, the reason that it says opposing faction is that it's not the main faction. Why people would have selected Starfleet as an opposing faction is anybody's guess, but the main ones that come to mind are effectively-delusional belief that a Star Trek MMO would have something other than Starfleet as the main faction and still exist within 6 months of launch, a desire for the game to have some kind of factions within Starfleet (a civil war scenario) as at least part of the story, or as a "none of the above " option, filled in by those who didn't desire an opposing faction or PvP content. Additionally, we don't know how the survey itself was set up. Was Federation (Starfleet) even one of the preset answers, or was it filled in as an "Other" option?
Trying to forge the little data out there into a narrative hammer with which to browbeat Cryptic for both real and imagined shortcomings doesn't get us anywhere. They made mistakes early on, and had some unfortunate timing forced upon them by Perpetual's apparent lack of any progress on the license for years. Maybe if Perpetual had done the work, rather than just commissioning surveys and generating hype, you would have gotten the Star Trek MMO that you wanted, but that didn't happen. Given the state of the industry, it's likely that even Perpetual's Star Trek MMO would have been free-to-play within a short time, as purely pay-to-play MMOs are the exception these days, and even the mighty Star Wars IP couldn't keep The Old Republic a purely-subscription MMO.
This is an MMO, not a Star Trek episode simulator. That would make for a terrible game.
Ohh...ouch...we all just got rick rolled by @oliviaclaire
All they do is start posts that stir up drama by creating extreme stances that rile up the community. Meanwhile, the mods leave the threads and delete most of the responses (check out the first page) as the whole thing spirals out of control.
Wait a second, I think this "market research" was applied "properly". To wit:
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
Tutorial Revamp for the Klingons wasn't unitl Legacy of Romulus which was way later than Season 6.
We got the Romulan Republic not because the Romulan Star Empire was bad, but rather because were being used by the Iconians.
No, the reason that it says opposing faction is that it's not the main faction. Why people would have selected Starfleet as an opposing faction is anybody's guess, but the main ones that come to mind are effectively-delusional belief that a Star Trek MMO would have something other than Starfleet as the main faction and still exist within 6 months of launch, a desire for the game to have some kind of factions within Starfleet (a civil war scenario) as at least part of the story, or as a "none of the above " option, filled in by those who didn't desire an opposing faction or PvP content. Additionally, we don't know how the survey itself was set up. Was Federation (Starfleet) even one of the preset answers, or was it filled in as an "Other" option?
The idea of Factions for STO has long been a controversial issue within the team; Starfleet alone makes for a full development plate. On the other hand, we all recognize the value that factions bring to an MMO. So while we haven't ruled out the possibility of factions at release, at this time, they remain off the table. This decision has been in place for quite a while and hasn't moved. However, we were still curious to measure the perceived value of factions with this survey. We knew that given a choice, most players would choose factions. But we wanted to know if the lack of factions would turn people off. So we tested the faction concept against the non-faction concept by randomly alternating the two game concepts in the survey.
Non-Factions
Boldly go where no one has gone before!
Join Starfleet and explore the greatest wonders from our star system and beyond. Find incredible discoveries in some realms - and dangerous threats in others! Team up with thousands of players as you graduate from Starfleet Academy, master your skills aboard a starship, explore strange new worlds, and seek out new life and new civilizations.
Factions
Experience Star Trek as never before - as a Starfleet officer, a Romulan, or a Klingon!
The time has come to choose sides: Defend the Federation as a Starfleet recruit, outwit your enemies as a cunning Romulan officer, or pursue honor in battle as a merciless Klingon warrior. Can these ancestral enemies unite to combat a re-emerging ancient threat, or will the galaxy plummet into chaos? Join with thousands of players to command starships in epic space combat, explore strange new worlds, and determine the fate of the galaxy!
On average, the introduction of factions lead to an 8% increase in purchase intent for MMO gamers, and 6% for Star Trek fans. That the difference was so marginal, was a surprise to the team. One explanation for surprising result is that a Star Trek MMO is appealing regardless of factions. The other is that factions are just not valued, which I find hard to believe. IMHO, factions would have a greater effect than is indicated in the survey, but these numbers certainly don't support an argument that we should find a way to make factions happen even if it means sacrificing other goals.
Another surprise was that the Borg is the most appealing opposing player faction. We knew the Borg would be a popular enemy, but we didn't expect that actually playing as a Borg drone would be so appealing. Though it was a surprise, I think we can understand why they would be a popular player faction. In fact, these results would appear to contradict the overall conclusion that faction value is marginal. One explanation is in the wording of the question. We asked people to select their favorite opposing faction. I can only guess that this wording had the effect of swaying people away from the Federation. Still, this point clearly deserves more research.
That last part amuses me because it basically amounts to Daron saying that the poll they commissioned was poorly thought out.
Wait a second, I think this "market research" was applied "properly". To wit:
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
Tutorial Revamp for the Klingons wasn't unitl Legacy of Romulus which was way later than Season 6.
We got the Romulan Republic not because the Romulan Star Empire was bad, but rather because were being used by the Iconians.
If Star Trek 2009 didn't destroy Romulus, then there would have been a lot of Romulus content since apparently Kestrel (original lead writer of STO) was a fan of Romulans. So we can lay the blame of no Romulan Star Empire playable faction on JJ Abrams.
Wait a second, I think this "market research" was applied "properly". To wit:
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
Tutorial Revamp for the Klingons wasn't unitl Legacy of Romulus which was way later than Season 6.
We got the Romulan Republic not because the Romulan Star Empire was bad, but rather because were being used by the Iconians.
If Star Trek 2009 didn't destroy Romulus, then there would have been a lot of Romulus content since apparently Kestrel (original lead writer of STO) was a fan of Romulans. So we can lay the blame of no Romulan Star Empire playable faction on JJ Abrams.
I dunno... Kestral is the person who wrote the New Romulus story so I'd say the initial lack of playable Romulans was more about not having time to build them.
I come back after years away and folks are still bringing this up? Seriously?
Anyways, for some reason I was hoping this was the other frequently returning discussion: new factions! Because, personally, I still want more playable everything.
Wait a second, I think this "market research" was applied "properly". To wit:
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
Tutorial Revamp for the Klingons wasn't unitl Legacy of Romulus which was way later than Season 6.
We got the Romulan Republic not because the Romulan Star Empire was bad, but rather because were being used by the Iconians.
If Star Trek 2009 didn't destroy Romulus, then there would have been a lot of Romulus content since apparently Kestrel (original lead writer of STO) was a fan of Romulans. So we can lay the blame of no Romulan Star Empire playable faction on JJ Abrams.
I dunno... Kestral is the person who wrote the New Romulus story so I'd say the initial lack of playable Romulans was more about not having time to build them.
Apparently, a bunch of content was written for Romulus before Beta and Kestrel had to scrap it all when word came out from CBS that Romulus was being destroyed in Star Trek 2009 and having to create a new scenario where various Romulans were fighting over the pieces of the Empire. That would have to suck. Working for weeks to months on creating content on a faction that you love and being told to start from scratch.
So even though Kestrel wrote the New Romulus story, it is not the one they originally wanted to tell. Therefore, we are stuck with the Romulan Republic instead of a Romulan Star Empire that wasn't the pawns of the Iconians and is just as strong or stronger than the Federation or Klingons.
In my own defense, this kind of topic comes up far too often and has become tiresome so one might expect sarcasm and foolish posts when faced with another one of these topics.
It'd be better for all if dead horses such as this topic were buried/closed immediately.
^ I have to agree. Fairly clear to me the OP is just trying to troll as this horse was beaten to death (repeatedly) 6 years ago.
Wait a second, I think this "market research" was applied "properly". To wit:
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
Tutorial Revamp for the Klingons wasn't unitl Legacy of Romulus which was way later than Season 6.
We got the Romulan Republic not because the Romulan Star Empire was bad, but rather because were being used by the Iconians.
If Star Trek 2009 didn't destroy Romulus, then there would have been a lot of Romulus content since apparently Kestrel (original lead writer of STO) was a fan of Romulans. So we can lay the blame of no Romulan Star Empire playable faction on JJ Abrams.
I dunno... Kestral is the person who wrote the New Romulus story so I'd say the initial lack of playable Romulans was more about not having time to build them.
Apparently, a bunch of content was written for Romulus before Beta and Kestrel had to scrap it all when word came out from CBS that Romulus was being destroyed in Star Trek 2009 and having to create a new scenario where various Romulans were fighting over the pieces of the Empire. That would have to suck. Working for weeks to months on creating content on a faction that you love and being told to start from scratch.
So even though Kestrel wrote the New Romulus story, it is not the one they originally wanted to tell. Therefore, we are stuck with the Romulan Republic instead of a Romulan Star Empire that wasn't the pawns of the Iconians and is just as strong or stronger than the Federation or Klingons.
Hard to say how much it actually changed as a result. A large amount of the back story of the Romulans in STO actually hinges on Nemesis. Nero's assassination of the senate lead to a prolonged civil war. It was this civil war that allowed Sela to rise to power and also gave the Republic the opportunity to migrate to Mol'Rihan.
IF all of that was in the original plan... the story would have been much the same. But with Romulus as the capital of the RSE.
Now the side story where Hakeev was an ally of the Iconians... yeah.... that'd be different at least.
Comments
Lol that was pretty funny, thank you
Another one that I found particularly humorous was when someone tried to claim that newbies immediately compare the number of z-store ships to decide what faction to play...
My character Tsin'xing
Which is odd in itself, since one can't even see the number of ships in the C-Store, until one signs into the game and creates a character by picking which Faction to be a part of.
<shrug>
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
I would venture a guess at maybe a few, but certainly not the majority.
Most folks don't go looking at that type of thing till they get into the game and perhaps get stuck on something.
Hell, a majority don't even come to the forums, never mind the wiki.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
The PS4 / XBOX launch has brought us a lot of newbies, and should remind us what questions they ask and what they really know about the game. And it will also tell Cryptic how much "innate" interest into the different faction exists, since they are presented as equals on the character selection/creation screen.
The initial survey was of a very small number.
The initial survey was taken a few years before the launch of the game.
The initial survey was ordered by Perpetual, which later went into Bankruptcy and sold the license and artwork (but not the game engine and other program related IP) to Cryptic.
The initial survey had no binding relation to the Cryptic, nor were they in any way held to it and may not have even been fully aware of it.
With these considerations, the survey and any other statements or "facts" that predate the purchase of the IP and license by Cryptic are useless and have no weight in any discussion regarding this game as the game Perpetual had is not the game that Cryptic released in any way.
That said, here are some facts:
Far more people play a primary character that is Federation.
Far fewer have active alts or mains that are Klingon and Romulan.
AoY and their integration with the Federation and the lack of any real content specific to the other factions would support the stance that Cryptic is seeing the population lean that direction as well.
It can be expected that most content will continue to focus on that larger population of players.
All the surveys and "theorycraft" of years gone by don't mean jack to what the game is now and what Cryptic is doing going forward.
If anything, those that gripe about Crytpic need to be a bit more grateful. Remember, the license for Star Trek in an MMO was help by Perpetual and they went under. That license, back in 2008 when the economy was a wreck, could have ended up with anyone...maybe even EA (god help us all) or just outright canned and never to see the light of day. They stepped in and took what we thought had been lost and gave us a game that has both space and ground combat with a great character and ship customization and interesting missions with a player created content using Foundry. For all the bugs and the gripes players have, they have lost the sight and perspective on just what this game is and how amazing it is compared to so many others out there that were unable to attain this scope of play. That such a small company is able to keep a game of this size and scope is play with the population it has is a credit to them and a great service to us.
My character Tsin'xing
That to this day (given the above) some folks do get WHY they focused on the Federation faction primarily just eludes me.
BTW - there's also Interplay's HARD realization that Klingon based Star Trek games just don't do well market wise ('Klingon Academy WAS a good game - BUT pretty much bombed in the market - read didn't sell as well - as 'Starfleet Academy did); so CBS was probably happy with the direction Cryptic took STO at that start.
But in the end - This ship sailed LONG ago. At this point Cryptic has settled on primarily faction agnostic content (Read 'one mission for all') - so I really don't get the need to beat this poor dead horse issue again.
But, that's me.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Have it! Make your Klingon centered game. Enjoy! More Trek is never a bad thing. Let's get this done!
Ultimately, that is correct. For the most part, all my alts play similar to my main at a certain point with the defining difference being availability of T6 ships. My Federation captains have a wide variety. My KDF and Romulan captains do not. This is really the only difference and when players complain about wanting more focus on other factions, I can only assume this is the heart of the issue. One need only look at the Cstore to see what Cryptic is doing and I for one am not losing sleep over it. It is what it is. The game is still fun and enjoyable even if KDF never gets a T6 carrier or a decent Science ship, but that said...some will QQ because of that. /shrug
They took the most popular option and locked it behind a paywall. Option Two was at least in the game since launch, however, it took them "way too long" to finally flesh them out to "near faction status" with the tutorial revamp in Season 6. Option Three is what they've been designing since day 1, and Option 4 got a Republic because "empires are bad"...
The rest of the options add up to less than the most recently advertised "KDF is 18% of our playerbase", so I can get behind not building factions for any of them - though when they have time and a reason a "fraction" is something they've proven capable of doing...
Please retitle thread to "rant about how you're not doing KDF 'my way'"...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
That the poll was "Exclusively within the STO community" assumes facts not in evidence. It might be true, but we simply aren't given enough information. Assumptions are problematic. Self-selection bias is about people signing up to surveys on their own, not about people making surveys picking from within a certain group. Self-selection bias is why online polls that are set up and just hope that a representative example find its way to completing are generally considered to be garbage polls with garbage results. We have no evidence that Cryptic's internal polls were simply open to those on the forums, or if they selected particular members to send it to. In either case, that was the audience that they had already attracted, so it was a better poll to gauge likely players than the poorly-worded, vague pre-development polling commissioned by Perpetual.
Those three games account for less than 10% of all Star Trek games to that point. There were far more than that from just the Federation perspective, or with a Federation-heavy focus in the single-player content, with some others featuring a more-balanced multi-faction story.
No, the reason that it says opposing faction is that it's not the main faction. Why people would have selected Starfleet as an opposing faction is anybody's guess, but the main ones that come to mind are effectively-delusional belief that a Star Trek MMO would have something other than Starfleet as the main faction and still exist within 6 months of launch, a desire for the game to have some kind of factions within Starfleet (a civil war scenario) as at least part of the story, or as a "none of the above " option, filled in by those who didn't desire an opposing faction or PvP content. Additionally, we don't know how the survey itself was set up. Was Federation (Starfleet) even one of the preset answers, or was it filled in as an "Other" option?
Trying to forge the little data out there into a narrative hammer with which to browbeat Cryptic for both real and imagined shortcomings doesn't get us anywhere. They made mistakes early on, and had some unfortunate timing forced upon them by Perpetual's apparent lack of any progress on the license for years. Maybe if Perpetual had done the work, rather than just commissioning surveys and generating hype, you would have gotten the Star Trek MMO that you wanted, but that didn't happen. Given the state of the industry, it's likely that even Perpetual's Star Trek MMO would have been free-to-play within a short time, as purely pay-to-play MMOs are the exception these days, and even the mighty Star Wars IP couldn't keep The Old Republic a purely-subscription MMO.
All they do is start posts that stir up drama by creating extreme stances that rile up the community. Meanwhile, the mods leave the threads and delete most of the responses (check out the first page) as the whole thing spirals out of control.
Well played @oliviaclaire, well played.
Tutorial Revamp for the Klingons wasn't unitl Legacy of Romulus which was way later than Season 6.
We got the Romulan Republic not because the Romulan Star Empire was bad, but rather because were being used by the Iconians.
That last part amuses me because it basically amounts to Daron saying that the poll they commissioned was poorly thought out.
My character Tsin'xing
If Star Trek 2009 didn't destroy Romulus, then there would have been a lot of Romulus content since apparently Kestrel (original lead writer of STO) was a fan of Romulans. So we can lay the blame of no Romulan Star Empire playable faction on JJ Abrams.
Also what discussion?? It seems any kind of debate will be dismissed??
Also me after reading all that
My character Tsin'xing
Anyways, for some reason I was hoping this was the other frequently returning discussion: new factions! Because, personally, I still want more playable everything.
Apparently, a bunch of content was written for Romulus before Beta and Kestrel had to scrap it all when word came out from CBS that Romulus was being destroyed in Star Trek 2009 and having to create a new scenario where various Romulans were fighting over the pieces of the Empire. That would have to suck. Working for weeks to months on creating content on a faction that you love and being told to start from scratch.
So even though Kestrel wrote the New Romulus story, it is not the one they originally wanted to tell. Therefore, we are stuck with the Romulan Republic instead of a Romulan Star Empire that wasn't the pawns of the Iconians and is just as strong or stronger than the Federation or Klingons.
Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
I think it's time to expand the FCT
http://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/10052253
Why are you not rejoicing?
IF all of that was in the original plan... the story would have been much the same. But with Romulus as the capital of the RSE.
Now the side story where Hakeev was an ally of the Iconians... yeah.... that'd be different at least.
My character Tsin'xing