The only turn off for me in this WHOLE review. Besides the PotBS + COH had a baby thing....
Is the "like the new star trek movie, they put action first"
REALY?!?!?!?!
You liked that abominasion of all things trek?
Scotty was reduced to a slapstick side kick.
Kirk was shallow and predictable.
Leonerd Nemoy as Spock was good... The other guy... not so much.
I can go on for a VERY long time picking that movie apart. So many things wrong, and yes I know it was a "alternate" timeline. I think thats the only thing that kept me from bombing that movie in all my reviews.
The only turn off for me in this WHOLE review. Besides the PotBS + COH had a baby thing....
Is the "like the new star trek movie, they put action first"
REALY?!?!?!?!
You liked that abominasion of all things trek?
Scotty was reduced to a slapstick side kick. Kirk was shallow and predictable. Leonerd Nemoy as Spock was good... The other guy... not so much. I can go on for a VERY long time picking that movie apart. So many things wrong, and yes I know it was a "alternate" timeline. I think thats the only thing that kept me from bombing that movie in all my reviews.
Come on everybody. Give the people at MMORPG a break. They already said they didn't have a lot of time with the game and that they will have a more detailed preview coming soon.
And doubting their motives when reviewing games is not helpful and doesn't get us anywhere. Statements such as "could we get some more details about missions please?" is much more useful and gives the previewers an idea of what the community wants to hear about.
I for one am glad that MMORPG has been given the permission to release the info that they have. I am cautiously optimistic about this game, but with a month and a half to go until launch, I still have a number of questions. So I am glad for any info that is given.
Hoping this and SWTOR both turn out to be good games. We could use some mmo innovation in the market.
I have been following STO since Perpetual had it. I can't say this will be great or that will be great as I'm not in beta (and wouldn't blow the NDA if I was). I will say this as I've read almost every interview that I have found and watched every vid that I could find, the game sounds like it will rock.
After watching ship combat they guy was accurate when he said like PotBS but much faster (read less boring) and with 3d environment more options.
I have seen some beta vids that were on Youtube (probably deleted by now) and from what I've seen, I am looking forward to it. Space combat and ground combat looks fantastic, you even do more damage (ground) by flanking.
If they do the game world simularly to Champions Online, while not perfect, it will be okay. Kinda nice to be able to switch instances to get away from a tool.
As a previous poster stated, give the guys a chance, they make mistakes but when the forum blows up, they admit it. Far more than other game companies would do.
Klingons being 100% pvp...not true, they are adding pve content (going by what they said yesterday on forums) but there won't be a whole lot of pve at launch so still plan to level primarily through pvp....another case of where they actually listened to us.
Same thing with bridges. They originally stated that there will be NO ship interiors at launch....forums blew up...they had a little extra time (how the hell did that happen?) and so they added bridges, in fact I think you can choose one of 3?
Yes, I pre-ordered and will definately be in game (btw, I think open beta is pre-order only). I'd recommend anyone giving this game so much as a glance to go to startrekonline.com and check out the forums and see what the devs are saying (they have a dev tracker). Don't listen to doomsayers and their ilk.
Btw, no this won't be a WoW killer, maybe one will come along one day but I don't think this one will be it. (nothing against wow but maybe if they got knocked down a notch or two other games would stop copying them)
Btw, no this won't be a WoW killer, maybe one will come along one day but I don't think this one will be it. (nothing against wow but maybe if they got knocked down a notch or two other games would stop copying them)
The only turn off for me in this WHOLE review. Besides the PotBS + COH had a baby thing....
Is the "like the new star trek movie, they put action first"
REALY?!?!?!?!
You liked that abominasion of all things trek?
Scotty was reduced to a slapstick side kick. Kirk was shallow and predictable. Leonerd Nemoy as Spock was good... The other guy... not so much. I can go on for a VERY long time picking that movie apart. So many things wrong, and yes I know it was a "alternate" timeline. I think thats the only thing that kept me from bombing that movie in all my reviews.
Hahaha. I hear you man.
I hate it when people can't let go of the past. The movie was great and so was Zachary Quinto. My wife hates Trek, but she actually liked the movie and said she will gladly watch the sequel with me. That's saying a lot considering I can't get her to watch Next Generation...or any Sci Fi for that matter. She didn't care for Star Wars. She doesn't like Stargate. But she likes the new Trek.
Originally posted by Delusive I hate it when people can't let go of the past. The movie was great and so was Zachary Quinto. My wife hates Trek, but she actually liked the movie and said she will gladly watch the sequel with me.
Well, that says a lot right there. If someone who doesn't like Trek likes the new movie, then it's not really Trek then, is it?
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Originally posted by Delusive I hate it when people can't let go of the past. The movie was great and so was Zachary Quinto. My wife hates Trek, but she actually liked the movie and said she will gladly watch the sequel with me.
Well, that says a lot right there. If someone who doesn't like Trek likes the new movie, then it's not really Trek then, is it?
Right. Just like TNG wasn't "true" Trek because Picard was not a swashbuckling hero like Kirk was.
Originally posted by Delusive I hate it when people can't let go of the past. The movie was great and so was Zachary Quinto. My wife hates Trek, but she actually liked the movie and said she will gladly watch the sequel with me.
Well, that says a lot right there. If someone who doesn't like Trek likes the new movie, then it's not really Trek then, is it?
Not at all. It just means in her eyes, it was a BETTER Trek!
ok in all seriousness with the bashing of the new movie..did you guys forget that between nemesis and enterprise trek all but died? the fan boys and the cannon huggers who kept insisting paramount keep trek inside it's restrictive mold let to it's near death. People like cryptic and jj abrahms are taking the ip and breathing new life into it much the way ron moore did galactica...maybe trek shoulda died off so you'd have nothing to whine about
.... taking the ip and breathing new life into it much the way ron moore did galactica...
You mean that show that was like "Lost" set in space? That soap opera thing with the 2 second shots of spaceships to break up the drama scenes? ....okay...
.... taking the ip and breathing new life into it much the way ron moore did galactica...
You mean that show that was like "Lost" set in space? That soap opera thing with the 2 second shots of spaceships to break up the drama scenes? ....okay...
I agree to a point, but the overall point that is being made here is that it is all a matter of opinion as to what constitutes "true" anything.
Let's take... oh... Batman. As you may know, DC has built up and torn down all of their characters over time. Early Batman was with Robin and adventured in a squeaky-clean version of Gotham painted in bright primary colors. Later versions portrayed him as the solo and much darker "knight".
What's the "true" Batman?
There isn't one. Though, there is the Batman that YOU personally prefer.
That's all.
I personally think that TOS was the finest iteration of ST and it was all down hill from there. That and a buck gets me a cup of coffee.
Never liked phaser weapons and photon torpedoes. Somehow this whole Star Trek thing went passed by my. I wasn't of course raised with Star Trek running on tv day and night either, nor I had Star Wars but somehow I like Star Wars much better. Star Trek just feels like a fun of previous generation and weapons feel a bit outdated. But its not really my point. Star Trek feels like it had its time and it did well, but its time for something new. To chose between STO and SWTOR I without a doubt chose SWTOR. I also don't think STO will be very so popular, but thats only my opinion though.
And of course 3 hours is way too few to even touch what the game feels like. You need to play for at least 30 levels, then you will have enough impression and in-game developed experience to really judge if this game is worth monthly fee. Most of new MMOs will keep everyone who tries them for at least 15-20 levels. Because thats usually where you see a difference, either the game is fun and will keep be engaging and fun further on or you already feel grind and repetitiveness and poor creativity of developers.
The only turn off for me in this WHOLE review. Besides the PotBS + COH had a baby thing....
Is the "like the new star trek movie, they put action first"
REALY?!?!?!?!
You liked that abominasion of all things trek?
Scotty was reduced to a slapstick side kick. Kirk was shallow and predictable. Leonerd Nemoy as Spock was good... The other guy... not so much. I can go on for a VERY long time picking that movie apart. So many things wrong, and yes I know it was a "alternate" timeline. I think thats the only thing that kept me from bombing that movie in all my reviews.
This post reminds me of an episode of the Daily Show where they reported that Trekkies didnt like the new movie because it was "Fun and Enjoyable".
I mean if you look at things in the original series everyone other than Kirk, Spock and Bones are sidekicks.
TOS Kirk wasnt shallow and predictable???? "gee theres an attractive girl in a mini skirt I wonder if Kirk is gonna flirt with her"
I certainly don't consider myself a "Trekkie" though I do have a great fondness and respect for the IP and respect Cryptic enough to give the game a shot right out of the gate but I didn't expect that the game would hold my attention much longer than the first month but the more I hear about it the more I think they may be able to hook me in.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Never liked phaser weapons and photon torpedoes. Somehow this whole Star Trek thing went passed by my. I wasn't of course raised with Star Trek running on tv day and night either, nor I had Star Wars but somehow I like Star Wars much better. Star Trek just feels like a fun of previous generation and weapons feel a bit outdated. But its not really my point. Star Trek feels like it had its time and it did well, but its time for something new. To chose between STO and SWTOR I without a doubt chose SWTOR. I also don't think STO will be very so popular, but thats only my opinion though. And of course 3 hours is way too few to even touch what the game feels like. You need to play for at least 30 levels, then you will have enough impression and in-game developed experience to really judge if this game is worth monthly fee. Most of new MMOs will keep everyone who tries them for at least 15-20 levels. Because thats usually where you see a difference, either the game is fun and will keep be engaging and fun further on or you already feel grind and repetitiveness and poor creativity of developers.
"And of course 3 hours is way too few to even touch what the game feels like. You need to play for at least 30 levels"
Sentiments like this are one of the problems I think mmo players tend to have and why our "opinions" seem to come off so negatively, I agree with the article in that often times you can tell in 15 minutes or so if you will like a game much and in the basically slow levelling world of mmo's level 30 can often times take as long to reach as a "good" console/offline rpg and if it does take that long and you then grow tired of the game have you not gotten your moneys worth and is the game truly a "failure".
Ultimately I'm certain devs would want to keep a person a customer forever but the truth is that is a rarety and will probably stay that way, but how/why would not being able to keep a particular player interested for more than a year be a "failure".
And that's to say that I love rpg's and mmo's are an extension of those games, they often cost the same or less than any other new game on the market and your first month is (as I know it) always free. If I enjoyed it enough to play it for a month I would probably not mind subbing for atleast a few more months and if after that time I felt the need to move on why is that a bad thing?
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Its because fanboys have gotten so much that they seem to take things for granted. We're so negative about everything and everything has to be the way we want it or else...doom and gloom. Honestly they could have taken ten years to make this game and included everything people are complaining about now and I believe there would still be some proclaiming this game a failure without playing it.
You can't say STO is anything like POTBS ... ALL PVP IN STO IS INSTANCED! STO is NOT a "MMO" it is a single player game with instanced multiplayer options.
Um... that's exactly like PotBS
I call games like this Graphical Lobby Games.
There is a graphical lobby, where you wait for (and choose) missions. Interaction there is limited. In PotBS the 'lobby' was the Travel Map. You could travel there, and chat - everything else you had to go to an instance.
You can't say STO is anything like POTBS or COH ALL PVP IN STO IS INSTANCED! STO is NOT a "MMO" it is a single player game with instanced multiplayer options.
I would point out that POTBS PB were infact an instance..the open sea ships fights were instances that closed either when a group was full or when the timer to join had expired. The OP's comparrison to POTBS dealt not with instances but how the ship battles were fault. Such as broadsides and having to manuver your ship. Along with the fact that skill and tactics were just as important as your lvl and the ship you had.
Oh by the way your discription sounds like Guild Wars and COH/COV to me
P.S. Unless you are breaking the NDA you agreed to perhaps you should wait and try the two week open beta in january before you keep screaming how bad the game is.
Magic is impressive, but now Minsc leads! Swords for everyone!
I'm fully awake after downing 2 mt. dews in the last 30 mins. I started yawning through this article. Wheres the action or the fun factor? Painting my ship pretty colors? Ya that sounds compelling. You gave me the impression that the grouping was very tedious with lots of the standard waiting for more people to join garbage that every game deals with. If thats the case just say it. Why bother with this at launch? Another quick postive impression of this game with nothing bad to say? Give us a break already.
My thoughts so far: 1) tutorials should not have to be reviewed because it's not really the -real- game, and, 2) the space combat is like POTBS but faster which means it translates to being a lot more simplier and not strategic. The reason why the ship battles in POTBS are rad is because they are slow because you have to take time to think...still not impressed.
Comments
The only turn off for me in this WHOLE review. Besides the PotBS + COH had a baby thing....
Is the "like the new star trek movie, they put action first"
REALY?!?!?!?!
You liked that abominasion of all things trek?
Scotty was reduced to a slapstick side kick.
Kirk was shallow and predictable.
Leonerd Nemoy as Spock was good... The other guy... not so much.
I can go on for a VERY long time picking that movie apart. So many things wrong, and yes I know it was a "alternate" timeline. I think thats the only thing that kept me from bombing that movie in all my reviews.
So much crap, so little quality.
Hahaha. I hear you man.
Come on everybody. Give the people at MMORPG a break. They already said they didn't have a lot of time with the game and that they will have a more detailed preview coming soon.
And doubting their motives when reviewing games is not helpful and doesn't get us anywhere. Statements such as "could we get some more details about missions please?" is much more useful and gives the previewers an idea of what the community wants to hear about.
I for one am glad that MMORPG has been given the permission to release the info that they have. I am cautiously optimistic about this game, but with a month and a half to go until launch, I still have a number of questions. So I am glad for any info that is given.
Hoping this and SWTOR both turn out to be good games. We could use some mmo innovation in the market.
That's my two cents. Peace.
I have been following STO since Perpetual had it. I can't say this will be great or that will be great as I'm not in beta (and wouldn't blow the NDA if I was). I will say this as I've read almost every interview that I have found and watched every vid that I could find, the game sounds like it will rock.
After watching ship combat they guy was accurate when he said like PotBS but much faster (read less boring) and with 3d environment more options.
I have seen some beta vids that were on Youtube (probably deleted by now) and from what I've seen, I am looking forward to it. Space combat and ground combat looks fantastic, you even do more damage (ground) by flanking.
If they do the game world simularly to Champions Online, while not perfect, it will be okay. Kinda nice to be able to switch instances to get away from a tool.
As a previous poster stated, give the guys a chance, they make mistakes but when the forum blows up, they admit it. Far more than other game companies would do.
Klingons being 100% pvp...not true, they are adding pve content (going by what they said yesterday on forums) but there won't be a whole lot of pve at launch so still plan to level primarily through pvp....another case of where they actually listened to us.
Same thing with bridges. They originally stated that there will be NO ship interiors at launch....forums blew up...they had a little extra time (how the hell did that happen?) and so they added bridges, in fact I think you can choose one of 3?
Yes, I pre-ordered and will definately be in game (btw, I think open beta is pre-order only). I'd recommend anyone giving this game so much as a glance to go to startrekonline.com and check out the forums and see what the devs are saying (they have a dev tracker). Don't listen to doomsayers and their ilk.
Btw, no this won't be a WoW killer, maybe one will come along one day but I don't think this one will be it. (nothing against wow but maybe if they got knocked down a notch or two other games would stop copying them)
Guild Site http://aocbloodandthunder.guildlaunch.com
Please, let it NOT be a WoW killer...
Because then "those people" might come in to STO!
Hahaha. I hear you man.
I hate it when people can't let go of the past. The movie was great and so was Zachary Quinto. My wife hates Trek, but she actually liked the movie and said she will gladly watch the sequel with me. That's saying a lot considering I can't get her to watch Next Generation...or any Sci Fi for that matter. She didn't care for Star Wars. She doesn't like Stargate. But she likes the new Trek.
Well, that says a lot right there. If someone who doesn't like Trek likes the new movie, then it's not really Trek then, is it?
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Well, that says a lot right there. If someone who doesn't like Trek likes the new movie, then it's not really Trek then, is it?
Right. Just like TNG wasn't "true" Trek because Picard was not a swashbuckling hero like Kirk was.
Ever hear of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy?
Well, that says a lot right there. If someone who doesn't like Trek likes the new movie, then it's not really Trek then, is it?
Not at all. It just means in her eyes, it was a BETTER Trek!
ok in all seriousness with the bashing of the new movie..did you guys forget that between nemesis and enterprise trek all but died? the fan boys and the cannon huggers who kept insisting paramount keep trek inside it's restrictive mold let to it's near death. People like cryptic and jj abrahms are taking the ip and breathing new life into it much the way ron moore did galactica...maybe trek shoulda died off so you'd have nothing to whine about
so say we all
No because it wont happen.
You mean that show that was like "Lost" set in space? That soap opera thing with the 2 second shots of spaceships to break up the drama scenes? ....okay...
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
You mean that show that was like "Lost" set in space? That soap opera thing with the 2 second shots of spaceships to break up the drama scenes? ....okay...
I agree to a point, but the overall point that is being made here is that it is all a matter of opinion as to what constitutes "true" anything.
Let's take... oh... Batman. As you may know, DC has built up and torn down all of their characters over time. Early Batman was with Robin and adventured in a squeaky-clean version of Gotham painted in bright primary colors. Later versions portrayed him as the solo and much darker "knight".
What's the "true" Batman?
There isn't one. Though, there is the Batman that YOU personally prefer.
That's all.
I personally think that TOS was the finest iteration of ST and it was all down hill from there. That and a buck gets me a cup of coffee.
Never liked phaser weapons and photon torpedoes. Somehow this whole Star Trek thing went passed by my. I wasn't of course raised with Star Trek running on tv day and night either, nor I had Star Wars but somehow I like Star Wars much better. Star Trek just feels like a fun of previous generation and weapons feel a bit outdated. But its not really my point. Star Trek feels like it had its time and it did well, but its time for something new. To chose between STO and SWTOR I without a doubt chose SWTOR. I also don't think STO will be very so popular, but thats only my opinion though.
And of course 3 hours is way too few to even touch what the game feels like. You need to play for at least 30 levels, then you will have enough impression and in-game developed experience to really judge if this game is worth monthly fee. Most of new MMOs will keep everyone who tries them for at least 15-20 levels. Because thats usually where you see a difference, either the game is fun and will keep be engaging and fun further on or you already feel grind and repetitiveness and poor creativity of developers.
This post reminds me of an episode of the Daily Show where they reported that Trekkies didnt like the new movie because it was "Fun and Enjoyable".
I mean if you look at things in the original series everyone other than Kirk, Spock and Bones are sidekicks.
TOS Kirk wasnt shallow and predictable???? "gee theres an attractive girl in a mini skirt I wonder if Kirk is gonna flirt with her"
I certainly don't consider myself a "Trekkie" though I do have a great fondness and respect for the IP and respect Cryptic enough to give the game a shot right out of the gate but I didn't expect that the game would hold my attention much longer than the first month but the more I hear about it the more I think they may be able to hook me in.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
"And of course 3 hours is way too few to even touch what the game feels like. You need to play for at least 30 levels"
Sentiments like this are one of the problems I think mmo players tend to have and why our "opinions" seem to come off so negatively, I agree with the article in that often times you can tell in 15 minutes or so if you will like a game much and in the basically slow levelling world of mmo's level 30 can often times take as long to reach as a "good" console/offline rpg and if it does take that long and you then grow tired of the game have you not gotten your moneys worth and is the game truly a "failure".
Ultimately I'm certain devs would want to keep a person a customer forever but the truth is that is a rarety and will probably stay that way, but how/why would not being able to keep a particular player interested for more than a year be a "failure".
And that's to say that I love rpg's and mmo's are an extension of those games, they often cost the same or less than any other new game on the market and your first month is (as I know it) always free. If I enjoyed it enough to play it for a month I would probably not mind subbing for atleast a few more months and if after that time I felt the need to move on why is that a bad thing?
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Its because fanboys have gotten so much that they seem to take things for granted. We're so negative about everything and everything has to be the way we want it or else...doom and gloom. Honestly they could have taken ten years to make this game and included everything people are complaining about now and I believe there would still be some proclaiming this game a failure without playing it.
You can't say STO is anything like POTBS or COH
ALL PVP IN STO IS INSTANCED!
STO is NOT a "MMO" it is a single player game with instanced multiplayer options.
Um... that's exactly like PotBS
I call games like this Graphical Lobby Games.
There is a graphical lobby, where you wait for (and choose) missions. Interaction there is limited. In PotBS the 'lobby' was the Travel Map. You could travel there, and chat - everything else you had to go to an instance.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
I would point out that POTBS PB were infact an instance..the open sea ships fights were instances that closed either when a group was full or when the timer to join had expired. The OP's comparrison to POTBS dealt not with instances but how the ship battles were fault. Such as broadsides and having to manuver your ship. Along with the fact that skill and tactics were just as important as your lvl and the ship you had.
Oh by the way your discription sounds like Guild Wars and COH/COV to me
P.S. Unless you are breaking the NDA you agreed to perhaps you should wait and try the two week open beta in january before you keep screaming how bad the game is.
Magic is impressive, but now Minsc leads! Swords for everyone!
Woah...strong words! I just plan on saving my money and seeing the Clash of the Titans remake...
RELEASE THE KRAKEN!
I'm fully awake after downing 2 mt. dews in the last 30 mins. I started yawning through this article. Wheres the action or the fun factor? Painting my ship pretty colors? Ya that sounds compelling. You gave me the impression that the grouping was very tedious with lots of the standard waiting for more people to join garbage that every game deals with. If thats the case just say it. Why bother with this at launch? Another quick postive impression of this game with nothing bad to say? Give us a break already.
My thoughts so far: 1) tutorials should not have to be reviewed because it's not really the -real- game, and, 2) the space combat is like POTBS but faster which means it translates to being a lot more simplier and not strategic. The reason why the ship battles in POTBS are rad is because they are slow because you have to take time to think...still not impressed.
Woah...strong words! I just plan on saving my money and seeing the Clash of the Titans remake...
RELEASE THE KRAKEN!
How poor are you? You have about 4 months to save up 10 dollars for a ticket for a movie.....