> @baddmoonrizin said:
> Where in the heck does this 40% keep coming from??
It’s from Ambassador Kael, so please stop moaning about it...
Oh, yeah? Where? Because I asked him personally, and he pointed me to the P1 podcast where I get this quote:
"We have the stats on the people who use the Foundry and it's not an insignificant amount. It's not 100% of the player base. It's not even, you know, 70 or 60 percent of the player base. But it's not a tiny number either."
Granted, 40% is less than "70 or 60 percent", but 40% isn't a number that I've been able to find so far. Since the number has been a point of contention within this thread, which falls under my purview as moderator to quell, that's why I'm asking about it. If someone can point me to where the 40% number actually comes from, then I'll let it be, as long as it stops being an issue to argue over. So, buttercup, cite your source or sit down.
I think I'm among the first to point to that number, so I will try to source it.
That would be appreciated. Thank you.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
They have a core team working on their eco system which is being utilize by all their games so I wouldn't be surprised if their aren't even fulltime STO devs. This would also explain why it would take so long to implement new features in the game. Look at how long it took to get the fill all button for the rep. Or when they asked for feedback why people didn't like the random tfo's, and their was some good feedback but I don't think we have seen anything ingame.
This isn't how game development works. The STO team is the STO team, they don't work on STO, Neverwinter, and Magic or w/e.
This isn't how Cryptic is setup, there is the STO team, Neverwinter team, Magic team, and core team working across titles. Core team was involved a lot in trying to fix the recent Foundry problems.
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
The main reason I didn't use the Foundry more is because it's loaded with search field that go nowhere. I went to go take a look at the the new Spotlight Mission, In Silence, after it was announced only to find that it wasn't showing up in the Spotlight Missions list.
Less that 40% of the player base plays Foundry Missions and someone thinks that's a negative? To get around 40% playing the Foundry with all the listed issues is a miracle. Just imagine how many would play if those issues were resolved in a meaningful way.
For instance, here is an example what is NOT meaningful;
When the exploration clusters were removed many of the players lamented their loss. This was brought up to a developer in either a written interview or a podcast (I think it was a written interview) and the developer's response was something akin to, "There is exploration in the Duty Officer system."
This removal of the Foundry feels a bit like that to me.
Now I may be wrong, but has the Dev Team ever asked the player base what it would take to get them to play the Foundry? I know I've mentioned the Not-A-Search function before, but that may have risen out of other topics.
But, we are all just speculating here. We'll know more with the upcoming podcast.
This is my first post on the topic. Clearly I am reacting to that "around 40%" number. The quote that follows is the post to which I was reacting:
Not surprised by this move at all. Ambassador Kael mentioned, when asked about the Foundry a few weeks ago on a livestream or Priority One Podcast, that the Foundry was used by like less then 40% of the playerbase.
After seeing how the Foundry was used for mostly exploits, and cheating the game, it's not surprising they would axe it.
So that is how it came up on this thread. I have no reason to suspect the forum user of lying, so I took his quote of the Dev at face value.
This isn't how Cryptic is setup, there is the STO team, Neverwinter team, Magic team, and core team working across titles. Core team was involved a lot in trying to fix the recent Foundry problems.
Thank you for repeating what I just said.
The main STO team were the ones shoveling the burden of fixing the Foundry, the other high level systems guys who keep everything running may have helped, but that wasn't their primary job, nor where they the ones holding onto most of the work for it.
Umm, no. That's exactly what Kael said. The core programmer team was being pulled to fix the Foundry. That meant that nothing else could get worked on for any titles while they were doing that. Hence why the Foundry is being shutdown. The Foundry breaking with every update was effecting every game's development due to the core programmer team being tasked to fix it and halt development.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
The main reason I didn't use the Foundry more is because it's loaded with search field that go nowhere. I went to go take a look at the the new Spotlight Mission, In Silence, after it was announced only to find that it wasn't showing up in the Spotlight Missions list.
Less that 40% of the player base plays Foundry Missions and someone thinks that's a negative? To get around 40% playing the Foundry with all the listed issues is a miracle. Just imagine how many would play if those issues were resolved in a meaningful way.
For instance, here is an example what is NOT meaningful;
When the exploration clusters were removed many of the players lamented their loss. This was brought up to a developer in either a written interview or a podcast (I think it was a written interview) and the developer's response was something akin to, "There is exploration in the Duty Officer system."
This removal of the Foundry feels a bit like that to me.
Now I may be wrong, but has the Dev Team ever asked the player base what it would take to get them to play the Foundry? I know I've mentioned the Not-A-Search function before, but that may have risen out of other topics.
But, we are all just speculating here. We'll know more with the upcoming podcast.
This is my first post on the topic. Clearly I am reacting to that "around 40%" number. The quote that follows is the post to which I was reacting:
Not surprised by this move at all. Ambassador Kael mentioned, when asked about the Foundry a few weeks ago on a livestream or Priority One Podcast, that the Foundry was used by like less then 40% of the playerbase.
After seeing how the Foundry was used for mostly exploits, and cheating the game, it's not surprising they would axe it.
So that is how it came up on this thread. I have no reason to suspect the forum user of lying, so I took his quote of the Dev at face value.
So, your source is actually another forum user, who is citing a livestream/podcast. At this point, unless told otherwise, I'm left to believe that the podcast in question is the one that Kael himself pointed me to, in which he actually says, "70 to 60 percent". Ok then.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
The main reason I didn't use the Foundry more is because it's loaded with search field that go nowhere. I went to go take a look at the the new Spotlight Mission, In Silence, after it was announced only to find that it wasn't showing up in the Spotlight Missions list.
Less that 40% of the player base plays Foundry Missions and someone thinks that's a negative? To get around 40% playing the Foundry with all the listed issues is a miracle. Just imagine how many would play if those issues were resolved in a meaningful way.
For instance, here is an example what is NOT meaningful;
When the exploration clusters were removed many of the players lamented their loss. This was brought up to a developer in either a written interview or a podcast (I think it was a written interview) and the developer's response was something akin to, "There is exploration in the Duty Officer system."
This removal of the Foundry feels a bit like that to me.
Now I may be wrong, but has the Dev Team ever asked the player base what it would take to get them to play the Foundry? I know I've mentioned the Not-A-Search function before, but that may have risen out of other topics.
But, we are all just speculating here. We'll know more with the upcoming podcast.
This is my first post on the topic. Clearly I am reacting to that "around 40%" number. The quote that follows is the post to which I was reacting:
Not surprised by this move at all. Ambassador Kael mentioned, when asked about the Foundry a few weeks ago on a livestream or Priority One Podcast, that the Foundry was used by like less then 40% of the playerbase.
After seeing how the Foundry was used for mostly exploits, and cheating the game, it's not surprising they would axe it.
So that is how it came up on this thread. I have no reason to suspect the forum user of lying, so I took his quote of the Dev at face value.
So, your source is actually another forum user, who is citing a livestream/podcast. At this point, unless told otherwise, I'm left to believe that the podcast in question is the one that Kael himself pointed me to, in which he actually says, "70 to 60 percent". Ok then.
Yes, and unless someone digs into every stream and podcast featuring the good Ambasador Kael for the last few weeks we'll never know for certain. I am debating doing that very thing, but it will be time consuming unless I get lucky.
Wow, that's a lot (17 pages now ^^) of commentary on a single decision in just a few days; clearly Cryptic's vision for their core values does not match up with a vocal percentage of the player base. If they have had such a conflict assigning personnel to managing code issues, maybe they should have looked at the Foundry as an asset, instead of a liability, and added competent coding staff accordingly. The Foundry was not the major cost center, when compared to paying out premiums to Star Trek actors for the new content we have had in the last year. And despite uneven quality in Foundry missions, they do provide an interesting contrast to the mostly formulaic episodes trickled out each "season"...
Expendables Fleet: Andrew - Bajoran Fed Engineer Ken'taura - Rom/Fed Scientist Gwyllim - Human Fed Delta Tac Savik - Vulcan Fed Temporal Sci Dahar Masters Fleet: Alphal'Fa - Alien KDF Engineer Qun'pau - Rom/KDF Engineer D'nesh - Orion KDF Scientist Ghen'khan - Liberated KDF Tac Welcome to StarBug Online - to boldly Bug where no bug has been before!
STO player since November 2013
This isn't how Cryptic is setup, there is the STO team, Neverwinter team, Magic team, and core team working across titles. Core team was involved a lot in trying to fix the recent Foundry problems.
Thank you for repeating what I just said.
The main STO team were the ones shoveling the burden of fixing the Foundry, the other high level systems guys who keep everything running may have helped, but that wasn't their primary job, nor where they the ones holding onto most of the work for it.
Foundry issues have also been falling in the core teams area (source: dev conversations I've had on ten forward and elsewhere.) Remember that Neverwinter had the system too and that they were using both shared architecture and servers. Issues affecting one have been (but not always, depending) affecting the other and the issues in maintaining the Foundry don't just fall on the STO developer's shoulders. It's a Cryptic-wide issue. The studio could not support the feature and the trade-offs in moving on are not restricted to easing the burden of a select few STO developers (source: front page here.)
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
"We have the stats on the people who use the Foundry and it's not an insignificant amount. It's not 100% of the player base. It's not even, you know, 70 or 60 percent of the player base. But it's not a tiny number either."
Its sub 60%, not 60-70%
Yes, som, I know. I'm also aware that 40% is less than 60%. But so is 50%, but that's more than 40%., so we can nitpick this number all day and get nowhere. My question was, where did 40% come from, because it's looking more and more to be pulled out of thin air.
I understand that you're fine with the Foundry going away, but there are a lot of people who aren't. You seem to be making attempts at marginalizing those feelings, and thereby those people, by inferring through these numbers that they are an insignificant part of the playerbase. Cryptic, via Kael, has stated that they love these people and what they have done, and the devs are just as heartbroken about this. Usually when you come in here with hard facts to bolster or refute statements made in the forum, I've got no issue with it, because you've got facts that you can cite to back you up. But in this instance, maybe cold, hard facts aren't what's needed. Maybe try a little sympathy.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
And yes, its an issue that they didn't bother supporting a system that didn't make them any money and that many people didn't use. It's an issue like not putting a lot of money into, or closing, unprofitable stores is an issue for big box stores.
Or failing to maintaining infrastructure because it's gotten beyond a communities technical and financial ability to support. Sure, people can get by but if that's your standard you don't have much to say in this discussion .
Fixed the quote for you too. This isn't a macroeconomics thread so I won't get into that tangent (due respect), but sufficed to say you're off base to say closures are only natural and justified/
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Wow, that's a lot (17 pages now ^^) of commentary on a single decision in just a few days; clearly Cryptic's vision for their core values does not match up with a vocal percentage of the player base.
Your analysis of the available data is flawed. Each post does not represent a unique user; in fact, were you to clean the data, I believe you might find there are in fact only a handful of people posting on here, on each side.
(Sorry, but my wife is studying for her bachelor's in data science, so I get to pick up a lot about analyzing data sets from her.)
In case anyone is interested, here is the Priority 1 Podcast in question. Jump to 02:33:00 or so for the relevant portion regarding that "less that 40%" number, which, as it turns out, is an inaccurate quote from the stream: http://priorityonepodcast.com/po400/
EDITED TO ADD:
Therefore I must admit my error in perpetuating that number, which I am.
(Sorry, but my wife is studying for her bachelor's in data science, so I get to pick up a lot about analyzing data sets from her.)
Biostatistician here (MS), being able to distinguish individuals in a point pattern analysis doesn't remove the significance of deviation from norms. This is a long thread and it's on a topic people care about (point arrived at through looking at the characteristic of detected signals as well as their frequency overall and per user.)
If you just mean to say that this thread isn't necessarily representative of the population because sample is of orders of magnitude less than the population, okay but that's common to media with voluntary participation. In working through the problem of "what effect does this change have on the STO population" you need to examine both the mechanics of how the Foundry works, its role in social dynamics, the effect of those dynamics on the population, and what it means to lose that (since the Foundry community was a non-random phenomena driven by mechanics in the feature's design.) A component of that is looking at the participation rate but it's only an element in an integrated system.
And to be clear this isn't arguing with the decision since as BenAlexander noted this isn't a snap call but the long consequence of numerous intrinsic factors and design directions (the validity can certainly be questioned but it's not possible to simply about face on this, as far as we've been told.) It's pointing out that removing the Foundry is something that the devs should take into account with future content and event plans. They'll need to fill the void themselves, else take the maximum possible hit from this.
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I think it's to no one's surprise that there aren't many people happy about this decision.
But, it might leave the chance that other stuff will get more development time than they did before, and we see benefits elsewhere. Of course, it is unlikely that this will always be as highly visible as losing the Foundry is. We'll see what happens.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
What I'm critiquing, Duncan, is the unsupported assertion that the large number of pages in this thread indicates a widespread anger regarding this change, as if each post were a unique data point. I haven't cleaned the data myself, so I can only go by what I seem to be seeing, but it would seem that the majority of the posts here come from less than twenty or so of the game's end users - and not all of them are angry.
In terms of biostatistics, imagine attempting to draw conclusions about the distribution of genetic abnormalities in the general population by analyzing DNA information from a single hamlet in the Adirondacks, and trying to fill the dataset out by having some of the people undergo testing several times.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Moi aussi, moi aussi. (Btw, I'm American, but have dabbled in other languages.)
Maybe some of the Foundry authors can team up (via email if necessary) to brainstorm some ideas on how to rebuild or reverse-engineer the Foundry and make it usable outside of STO? And - most importantly - make it absolutely clear that Cryptic, PWE, and CBS could not be blamed (verbally and/or via litigation) for *any* of its side-effects (i.e., software bugs).
As the last active Red Squad tester to knowledge- I felt it was my duty to return to the forums and express my feelings about this sun-setting; my goal being to hopefully put some thoughts to rest on both sides of this occurrence.
I've been around quite a long time, going all the way back to the closed beta days of Champions. I was selected for Red Squad (24/7 Alpha QA access to STO) by Dan Stahl; a person whom I (and many of you, if you knew/know who he was/is) deeply miss. We were an external team that helped shape and polish off the founding systems and content of STO "Vanilla" prior to it's launch through reports & feedback.
The Foundry was a pretty unique, truly amazing aspect of the Cryptic-family series of games. In all my years of gaming, I have come to the realization that what makes a game last the sands of time is it's primary ability to give the consumer a unique identity they can relate and hold on to. Cryptic has approached this philosophy in relatively all of it's titles; Champions gave players the ability to customize a Superhero head-to-toe in their own image (Within reason, of course). With STO, Trekkies and general fans of Sci-Fi alike could finally slip into the uniform they've always dreamed of and explore space. This pattern continues with their other titles as well.
I have always seen the foundry, since day 1, to be a double-edged sword. The concept of what the Foundry has always tried to accomplish was beyond admirable. UGC (User-Generated Content); when executed properly, can generate unbelievable results and replay-ability for your title/s. Not only does it augment your development capacity to create content for your gaming community to digest, but it also gives that same community a unique outlet of expression and further identity.
While the idea has always been sound, it's implementation has always been a thorn. I've had a lot of hopes over the years for the Foundry, but it's just never seemed to pan out the way Developer & Community alike would hope. I mean, I personally asked for a cut-scene addition since day 1- and here we are years later seeing the Foundry come to a close before that ever happened. That's not to say the idea fell on deaf ears, as I know there were quite a few devs who were also keen on seeing it through. There are a lot of reasons for stunted growth in development of tools like these, but it usually boils down to property rights and proprietary code (or at least the willingness by certain people in higher places to allow); something that is very difficult to put into a consumers hands without impeding on. There is essentially a lot of red tape in STO/Cryptic Engine development. Cryptic is also not alone in this endeavor, and it takes the OKs of many people who only look at numbers and have probably never even stepped into the game/s themselves. That is the business aspect of things; and while it may be off-putting to know who is really in control of the fate of these games, they are also the people that ensure this title and the other Cryptic games continue to be developed.
Foundry was and can be seen as an independent experience that required a lot of time and effort to grow & maintain that in reality did not have a way of being monetized. While I am disappointed they do not agree that our subscription profits warranted our continue usage of foundry, I can understand the undertaking it is to continuously support a secondary product that essentially doubles production effort for all games tied to the core, with no actual return. Regardless if this is the outcome of poor planning and numerous attempts to plug the holes of a leaking ship, I commend Cryptic for those attempts. They could have given up on Foundry a long time ago, and opt'd to try for our sake.
With that said, I do hope and implore Cryptic to find ways to further involve community authors and contributors input/feedback. Even if you run contests for story submissions or mission scripts- credit those who still want to write content for your game/s- Not everyone is an artist or wishes to pursue content creation, but to leave those who have helped this game grow with not much more than a consolation prize would be to do a disservice to both community, and your own efforts.
With death comes life, and so should the Foundry's life not go in vain. Please take this opportunity to focus on the tasks you have, while freeing you of some burdens I hope only drives you to innovation, and creativity. There are ways around every hurdle, and I believe this staff is capable of making something of the reallocation of resources.
And yes, its an "issue" that they didn't bother supporting a system that didn't make them any money and that many people didn't use. It's an issue like not putting a lot of money into, or closing, unprofitable stores is an issue for big box stores.
Jumping RNGesus on a Pogo stick. That's your standard?. "if its not making us all-the=money! it has to go!. to go! and is fat to be trimmed!". Do you work for EA by any chance? Because it sounds like you would fit in perfectly on its executive board with that mentality.
Overaggressive monetization is major problem in the gaming industry as a whole, Pre-Order Culture, "Early Access", Deluxe editions, Super-Deluxe editions, Bronze, Silver, Gold Editions, Super-Special Platinum Editions, Ultimate Editions that don't even include the game, Season Passes that no longer even include all of the DLC, DLC on-top of DLC for DLC, Micro-transactions that are becoming increasing less "Micro" and more just "Outright Transactions", Loot Boxes. ridiculous levels of grind to drive those micro-transactions and loot boxes. Oh So many Damned Loot Boxes taking advantage of psychologically exploitative gambling mechanics but hey it makes money right?! So that's Okay! right? Who cares if our game is a buggy hot mess. Get the Store online!. The Game industry is too busy swimming in its money bin.who cares about a few gambling addicts.
It all adds up. That pot of money? Is Not Infinite.
Businesses have to make money. That's fair. But its not enough any-more to make some of the money, they have to literally make ALL of the money, every last penny has to be part of their dragon horde or its a failure. Call of Duty Black Ops 4 made $500 Million Dollars in profit in three days. But it wasn't enough for its investors who wanted more, who were promised more, who must have more. So who paid for their hubris? did Activision re-evaluate its Overaggressive monetization. Of course it didn't No it Tribble-Canned 800 developers because they didn't bother supporting a system that didn't make them any money and that many people didn't use. It's an issue like not putting a lot of money into, or closing, unprofitable stores is an issue for big box stores.
And yes, its an "issue" that they didn't bother supporting a system that didn't make them any money and that many people didn't use. It's an issue like not putting a lot of money into, or closing, unprofitable stores is an issue for big box stores.
I think you can not use the Foundry that often and still consider it to be worth maintaining. I haven't read a lot of fiction books in recent years, and there are some genres I would never read, but I still wouldn't be happy if every bookstore closed and Amazon and every other online outlet stopped selling fiction books.
I don't know, maybe that's a bad example, but the point is you can value something without personally engaging in it that frequently.
Comments
That would be appreciated. Thank you.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
I agree - very sad news. Sadly I believe Cryptic has turned a corner in the game's timeline by this decision and not in a good way.
This isn't how Cryptic is setup, there is the STO team, Neverwinter team, Magic team, and core team working across titles. Core team was involved a lot in trying to fix the recent Foundry problems.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
This is my first post on the topic. Clearly I am reacting to that "around 40%" number. The quote that follows is the post to which I was reacting:
So that is how it came up on this thread. I have no reason to suspect the forum user of lying, so I took his quote of the Dev at face value.
Umm, no. That's exactly what Kael said. The core programmer team was being pulled to fix the Foundry. That meant that nothing else could get worked on for any titles while they were doing that. Hence why the Foundry is being shutdown. The Foundry breaking with every update was effecting every game's development due to the core programmer team being tasked to fix it and halt development.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
So, your source is actually another forum user, who is citing a livestream/podcast. At this point, unless told otherwise, I'm left to believe that the podcast in question is the one that Kael himself pointed me to, in which he actually says, "70 to 60 percent". Ok then.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Yes, and unless someone digs into every stream and podcast featuring the good Ambasador Kael for the last few weeks we'll never know for certain. I am debating doing that very thing, but it will be time consuming unless I get lucky.
NOTE:
Edited to complete a sentence.
Savik - Vulcan Fed Temporal Sci
Dahar Masters Fleet: Alphal'Fa - Alien KDF Engineer Qun'pau - Rom/KDF Engineer D'nesh - Orion KDF Scientist Ghen'khan - Liberated KDF Tac
Welcome to StarBug Online - to boldly Bug where no bug has been before!
STO player since November 2013
Foundry issues have also been falling in the core teams area (source: dev conversations I've had on ten forward and elsewhere.) Remember that Neverwinter had the system too and that they were using both shared architecture and servers. Issues affecting one have been (but not always, depending) affecting the other and the issues in maintaining the Foundry don't just fall on the STO developer's shoulders. It's a Cryptic-wide issue. The studio could not support the feature and the trade-offs in moving on are not restricted to easing the burden of a select few STO developers (source: front page here.)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Yes, som, I know.
I understand that you're fine with the Foundry going away, but there are a lot of people who aren't. You seem to be making attempts at marginalizing those feelings, and thereby those people, by inferring through these numbers that they are an insignificant part of the playerbase. Cryptic, via Kael, has stated that they love these people and what they have done, and the devs are just as heartbroken about this. Usually when you come in here with hard facts to bolster or refute statements made in the forum, I've got no issue with it, because you've got facts that you can cite to back you up. But in this instance, maybe cold, hard facts aren't what's needed. Maybe try a little sympathy.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Or failing to maintaining infrastructure because it's gotten beyond a communities technical and financial ability to support. Sure, people can get by but if that's your standard you don't have much to say in this discussion .
Fixed the quote for you too. This isn't a macroeconomics thread so I won't get into that tangent (due respect), but sufficed to say you're off base to say closures are only natural and justified/
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
(Sorry, but my wife is studying for her bachelor's in data science, so I get to pick up a lot about analyzing data sets from her.)
http://priorityonepodcast.com/po400/
EDITED TO ADD:
Therefore I must admit my error in perpetuating that number, which I am.
Biostatistician here (MS), being able to distinguish individuals in a point pattern analysis doesn't remove the significance of deviation from norms. This is a long thread and it's on a topic people care about (point arrived at through looking at the characteristic of detected signals as well as their frequency overall and per user.)
If you just mean to say that this thread isn't necessarily representative of the population because sample is of orders of magnitude less than the population, okay but that's common to media with voluntary participation. In working through the problem of "what effect does this change have on the STO population" you need to examine both the mechanics of how the Foundry works, its role in social dynamics, the effect of those dynamics on the population, and what it means to lose that (since the Foundry community was a non-random phenomena driven by mechanics in the feature's design.) A component of that is looking at the participation rate but it's only an element in an integrated system.
And to be clear this isn't arguing with the decision since as BenAlexander noted this isn't a snap call but the long consequence of numerous intrinsic factors and design directions (the validity can certainly be questioned but it's not possible to simply about face on this, as far as we've been told.) It's pointing out that removing the Foundry is something that the devs should take into account with future content and event plans. They'll need to fill the void themselves, else take the maximum possible hit from this.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
But, it might leave the chance that other stuff will get more development time than they did before, and we see benefits elsewhere. Of course, it is unlikely that this will always be as highly visible as losing the Foundry is. We'll see what happens.
In terms of biostatistics, imagine attempting to draw conclusions about the distribution of genetic abnormalities in the general population by analyzing DNA information from a single hamlet in the Adirondacks, and trying to fill the dataset out by having some of the people undergo testing several times.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Maybe some of the Foundry authors can team up (via email if necessary) to brainstorm some ideas on how to rebuild or reverse-engineer the Foundry and make it usable outside of STO? And - most importantly - make it absolutely clear that Cryptic, PWE, and CBS could not be blamed (verbally and/or via litigation) for *any* of its side-effects (i.e., software bugs).
I've been around quite a long time, going all the way back to the closed beta days of Champions. I was selected for Red Squad (24/7 Alpha QA access to STO) by Dan Stahl; a person whom I (and many of you, if you knew/know who he was/is) deeply miss. We were an external team that helped shape and polish off the founding systems and content of STO "Vanilla" prior to it's launch through reports & feedback.
The Foundry was a pretty unique, truly amazing aspect of the Cryptic-family series of games. In all my years of gaming, I have come to the realization that what makes a game last the sands of time is it's primary ability to give the consumer a unique identity they can relate and hold on to. Cryptic has approached this philosophy in relatively all of it's titles; Champions gave players the ability to customize a Superhero head-to-toe in their own image (Within reason, of course). With STO, Trekkies and general fans of Sci-Fi alike could finally slip into the uniform they've always dreamed of and explore space. This pattern continues with their other titles as well.
I have always seen the foundry, since day 1, to be a double-edged sword. The concept of what the Foundry has always tried to accomplish was beyond admirable. UGC (User-Generated Content); when executed properly, can generate unbelievable results and replay-ability for your title/s. Not only does it augment your development capacity to create content for your gaming community to digest, but it also gives that same community a unique outlet of expression and further identity.
While the idea has always been sound, it's implementation has always been a thorn. I've had a lot of hopes over the years for the Foundry, but it's just never seemed to pan out the way Developer & Community alike would hope. I mean, I personally asked for a cut-scene addition since day 1- and here we are years later seeing the Foundry come to a close before that ever happened. That's not to say the idea fell on deaf ears, as I know there were quite a few devs who were also keen on seeing it through. There are a lot of reasons for stunted growth in development of tools like these, but it usually boils down to property rights and proprietary code (or at least the willingness by certain people in higher places to allow); something that is very difficult to put into a consumers hands without impeding on. There is essentially a lot of red tape in STO/Cryptic Engine development. Cryptic is also not alone in this endeavor, and it takes the OKs of many people who only look at numbers and have probably never even stepped into the game/s themselves. That is the business aspect of things; and while it may be off-putting to know who is really in control of the fate of these games, they are also the people that ensure this title and the other Cryptic games continue to be developed.
Foundry was and can be seen as an independent experience that required a lot of time and effort to grow & maintain that in reality did not have a way of being monetized. While I am disappointed they do not agree that our subscription profits warranted our continue usage of foundry, I can understand the undertaking it is to continuously support a secondary product that essentially doubles production effort for all games tied to the core, with no actual return. Regardless if this is the outcome of poor planning and numerous attempts to plug the holes of a leaking ship, I commend Cryptic for those attempts. They could have given up on Foundry a long time ago, and opt'd to try for our sake.
With that said, I do hope and implore Cryptic to find ways to further involve community authors and contributors input/feedback. Even if you run contests for story submissions or mission scripts- credit those who still want to write content for your game/s- Not everyone is an artist or wishes to pursue content creation, but to leave those who have helped this game grow with not much more than a consolation prize would be to do a disservice to both community, and your own efforts.
With death comes life, and so should the Foundry's life not go in vain. Please take this opportunity to focus on the tasks you have, while freeing you of some burdens I hope only drives you to innovation, and creativity. There are ways around every hurdle, and I believe this staff is capable of making something of the reallocation of resources.
Jumping RNGesus on a Pogo stick. That's your standard?. "if its not making us all-the=money! it has to go!. to go! and is fat to be trimmed!". Do you work for EA by any chance? Because it sounds like you would fit in perfectly on its executive board with that mentality.
Overaggressive monetization is major problem in the gaming industry as a whole, Pre-Order Culture, "Early Access", Deluxe editions, Super-Deluxe editions, Bronze, Silver, Gold Editions, Super-Special Platinum Editions, Ultimate Editions that don't even include the game, Season Passes that no longer even include all of the DLC, DLC on-top of DLC for DLC, Micro-transactions that are becoming increasing less "Micro" and more just "Outright Transactions", Loot Boxes. ridiculous levels of grind to drive those micro-transactions and loot boxes. Oh So many Damned Loot Boxes taking advantage of psychologically exploitative gambling mechanics but hey it makes money right?! So that's Okay! right? Who cares if our game is a buggy hot mess. Get the Store online!. The Game industry is too busy swimming in its money bin.who cares about a few gambling addicts.
It all adds up. That pot of money? Is Not Infinite.
Businesses have to make money. That's fair. But its not enough any-more to make some of the money, they have to literally make ALL of the money, every last penny has to be part of their dragon horde or its a failure. Call of Duty Black Ops 4 made $500 Million Dollars in profit in three days. But it wasn't enough for its investors who wanted more, who were promised more, who must have more. So who paid for their hubris? did Activision re-evaluate its Overaggressive monetization. Of course it didn't No it Tribble-Canned 800 developers because they didn't bother supporting a system that didn't make them any money and that many people didn't use. It's an issue like not putting a lot of money into, or closing, unprofitable stores is an issue for big box stores.
I think you can not use the Foundry that often and still consider it to be worth maintaining. I haven't read a lot of fiction books in recent years, and there are some genres I would never read, but I still wouldn't be happy if every bookstore closed and Amazon and every other online outlet stopped selling fiction books.
I don't know, maybe that's a bad example, but the point is you can value something without personally engaging in it that frequently.
Click here for my Foundry tutorial on Creating A Custom Interior Map.