› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Lifers Starting to Bail!

1…910121415…19

Comments

  • xx19kilosoldxx19kilosold Member Posts: 209

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!

     

    LOL.

    You have done nothing but throw up straw men in this thread. 

    Relative to profits huh, come on man. Now you are reaching.

  • BetabooBetaboo Member Posts: 384

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.

    I can read fine and sometimes even spell correctly. But thank you for asking.

     

    EDIT: LOL i found it funny that i just had to edit that real quickly--so much for spelling.

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    WOW shipped with a ton and i mean a ton of content STO shipped half finished case closed.

    And yes they both shipped with bugs but i have never been in on an opening where the game did not have a few bugs so i cant rant them for that.

     

    Yes, it did and one would need to be crazy in trying to say STO has more content that WoW.  Its not even close.  Cryptic do however have a better record for adding new content than Blizzard does, when you factor in the amount of money they have from subscriptions for re-investment.   Blizzard = more money, but less return to the player for $ than other games.  That is also not compairing it to STO, as its not been out long enough.

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.

    I can read fine and sometimes even spell correctly. But thank you for asking.

     

    EDIT: LOL i found it funny that i just had to edit that real quickly--so much for spelling.

     

    Spelling isn't my strong point, so you'll find a lot of my posts edited to address.  As I have to keep on re-reading them.  Said it in the forums a few times.    Care to share  your shortfalls?  Reading and manners certainly is amongst them.

     

    Now lets grow up and move on.

  • xx19kilosoldxx19kilosold Member Posts: 209

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    WOW shipped with a ton and i mean a ton of content STO shipped half finished case closed.

    And yes they both shipped with bugs but i have never been in on an opening where the game did not have a few bugs so i cant rant them for that.

     

    Yes, it did and one would need to be crazy in trying to say STO has more content that WoW.  Its not even close.  Cryptic do however have a better record for adding new content than Blizzard does, when you factor in the amount of money they have from subscriptions for re-investment.   Blizzard = more money, but less return to the player for $ than other games.  That is also not compairing it to STO, as its not been out long enough.

    Ask yourself this.

    Does WoW have more content than CoX?

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    WOW shipped with a ton and i mean a ton of content STO shipped half finished case closed.

    And yes they both shipped with bugs but i have never been in on an opening where the game did not have a few bugs so i cant rant them for that.

     

    Yes, it did and one would need to be crazy in trying to say STO has more content that WoW.  Its not even close.  Cryptic do however have a better record for adding new content than Blizzard does, when you factor in the amount of money they have from subscriptions for re-investment.   Blizzard = more money, but less return to the player for $ than other games.  That is also not compairing it to STO, as its not been out long enough.

    Ask yourself this.

    Does WoW have more content than CoX?

     

    For return based on the subscriptions, yes.  For content purely on scale, no.  As I keep saying, reletive!

  • wickymageewickymagee Member UncommonPosts: 44

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.  Which was the exact reason why I stated EVE and not STO.

     As with everything there are exceptions to the rule; EVE did get lots of dev support for a long time before it became a mainstream mmo and WoW has had money pouring in for half a decade and has had comparatively little to show for it.  WoW does not have typical mmo problems simply because it has made enough money already to keep most people happy enough to play for another five years and they could loose half their player base and not have to trim personnel (though they probably would if it happened).  MOST mmos have to strike a balance between income and product (just like every free market business in existance).  Basic business models say that if income decreases the product must decrease as well to keep the business solvent, so it is for the vast majority of mmos, especially in the first year or two of activity until the player  base has stabilized and there is more room financially to wiggle.

  • xx19kilosoldxx19kilosold Member Posts: 209

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.

    I can read fine and sometimes even spell correctly. But thank you for asking.

     

    EDIT: LOL i found it funny that i just had to edit that real quickly--so much for spelling.

     

    Spelling isn't my strong point, so you'll find a lot of my posts edited to address.  As I have to keep on re-reading them.  Said it in the forums a few times.    Care to share one of you shortfalls?  Reading certainly is one.

     

    Now lets grow up and move on.

    You ask people if they can read, then tell others to grow up.

    This is pretty funny man.

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.

    I can read fine and sometimes even spell correctly. But thank you for asking.

     

    EDIT: LOL i found it funny that i just had to edit that real quickly--so much for spelling.

     

    Spelling isn't my strong point, so you'll find a lot of my posts edited to address.  As I have to keep on re-reading them.  Said it in the forums a few times.    Care to share one of you shortfalls?  Reading certainly is one.

     

    Now lets grow up and move on.

    You ask people if they can read, then tell others to grow up.

    This is pretty funny man.

     

    Insult for insult.  I said  lets (i.e. we), not him.

  • xx19kilosoldxx19kilosold Member Posts: 209

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    WOW shipped with a ton and i mean a ton of content STO shipped half finished case closed.

    And yes they both shipped with bugs but i have never been in on an opening where the game did not have a few bugs so i cant rant them for that.

     

    Yes, it did and one would need to be crazy in trying to say STO has more content that WoW.  Its not even close.  Cryptic do however have a better record for adding new content than Blizzard does, when you factor in the amount of money they have from subscriptions for re-investment.   Blizzard = more money, but less return to the player for $ than other games.  That is also not compairing it to STO, as its not been out long enough.

    Ask yourself this.

    Does WoW have more content than CoX?

     

    For return based on the subscriptions, yes.  For conent purely on scale, no.  As I keep saying, reletive!

    This is flawed logic. Obviously the game is developed enough to be the most successful MMO ever made. At some point if they cross all their T's and dot all their I's then they are allowed to make a profit.  The fact is they have added sufficeint content regardless of their margin of profit. STO and  CO didnt even launch with enough content to warrant the retail price, and they are paying the price for it now.

  • xx19kilosoldxx19kilosold Member Posts: 209

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.

    I can read fine and sometimes even spell correctly. But thank you for asking.

     

    EDIT: LOL i found it funny that i just had to edit that real quickly--so much for spelling.

     

    Spelling isn't my strong point, so you'll find a lot of my posts edited to address.  As I have to keep on re-reading them.  Said it in the forums a few times.    Care to share one of you shortfalls?  Reading certainly is one.

     

    Now lets grow up and move on.

    You ask people if they can read, then tell others to grow up.

    This is pretty funny man.

     

    Insult for insult.  I said  lets (i.e. we), not him.

    Thats pretty funny because you told me to learn to read, and I have not insulted you one time. Whatever man.

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    STO certianly didn't.  I don't think it will for some time yet either.

     

    CO did though, it just lacked repeatability and an end game.  Unfortuantly something that isn't uncommon these days.  Not saying it what the industry should be aiming for, just the way it is.   People were more upset about the launch day patch screwing the game up.

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Thats pretty funny because you told me to learn to read, and I have not insulted you one time. Whatever man.

     

    Look I don't want to get into an agrument here, but you did.  You clearly posted without reading my post, calling me a defensive fanbio.  I did not tell you to learn to read, I asked could you.  Given you had clearly not read my post.

     

    I am not a fanbio.  STO has many many faults and was released before its time.  It is however still enjoyable and people are playing it.  So its not doom and gloom, as this thread is trying to depict.

  • BetabooBetaboo Member Posts: 384

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by wickymagee

    You must remember that a company will only devote as many resources to a game as it warrants the game is worth to them.  To be financially viable a game has to generate a certain ammount of revenue.  If sub numbers fall low enough the company will devote fewer resources to that game; fewer devs means fewer content updates which will eventually lead to lower sub rates and so on until the game shuts down.  A company would be foolish to continue a game with a low sub rate simply because some people like it the way it is.

    That's not to say that STO is unsalvageable; it's still in it's first six months being active, problems can be fixed, new content added and Cryptic can try to stem the flow of criticism about the game by actively trying to make it better.  The proof will come in the next six to nine months; whether or not they care to devote enough resources to make surface combat more interesting (and look better) and add more depth to the types of quests that are issued.  If Cryptic doesn't release huge updates relatively soon then I see this game as dead in the water.

    That is true.  There is a balance.  Although it doesn't always translate into how many updates a game receives.  Look at WoW.  The most profitable MMO by far, yet its updates relatively are sparce compained to less profitable games.  EVE Online ran for years with hardly any subs and received more attention.

    This just isnt true. Go look at past patch notes for WoW. From the begining, then come back and say....ooppss.

     

    And just for the record, I dont like WoW personally, but I wont make shit up to bash it either.

     

    I played WoW for years.  Given the money Blizzard make from it, it has had a reletive poor return.  There are less profitable games, which have seen a mich higher relative return in content.

     

    At a point profit from subscription is simply profit and not a reinventment into the game.  Which was the point of my comment.  WoW should have tons of expansions, not just the two (soon to be three).

    How bout a citation to go along with all that hyperbole?

     

    Seriously, WoW has added a lot of content through updates. This is typical of the STO" fanboy" defense tactics, bash on WoW and it some how makes STO better? 

    Really?

     

     

     

    Seriously can you read?  Reletive to profit!!!!!!  As for relating to STO, my reply wasn't even about it.  It was around development re-investment in general.

    I can read fine and sometimes even spell correctly. But thank you for asking.

     

    EDIT: LOL i found it funny that i just had to edit that real quickly--so much for spelling.

     

    Spelling isn't my strong point, so you'll find a lot of my posts edited to address.  As I have to keep on re-reading them.  Said it in the forums a few times.    Care to share one of you shortfalls?  Reading certainly is one.

     

    Now lets grow up and move on.

    You ask people if they can read, then tell others to grow up.

    This is pretty funny man.

     

    Insult for insult.  I said  lets (i.e. we), not him.

    Where did i insult you?

  • gandalesgandales Member UncommonPosts: 472

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Originally posted by Betaboo

    WOW shipped with a ton and i mean a ton of content STO shipped half finished case closed.

    And yes they both shipped with bugs but i have never been in on an opening where the game did not have a few bugs so i cant rant them for that.

     

    Yes, it did and one would need to be crazy in trying to say STO has more content that WoW.  Its not even close.  Cryptic do however have a better record for adding new content than Blizzard does, when you factor in the amount of money they have from subscriptions for re-investment.   Blizzard = more money, but less return to the player for $ than other games.  That is also not compairing it to STO, as its not been out long enough.

    Ask yourself this.

    Does WoW have more content than CoX?

     

    For return based on the subscriptions, yes.  For conent purely on scale, no.  As I keep saying, reletive!

    This is flawed logic. Obviously the game is developed enough to be the most successful MMO ever made. At some point if they cross all their T's and dot all their I's then they are allowed to make a profit.  The fact is they have added sufficeint content regardless of their margin of profit. STO and  CO didnt even launch with enough content to warrant the retail price, and they are paying the price for it now.

    That actually makes sense. If you have a game with 100k subscribers and another 10M which is a 100 times, they potentially has at least 100 times the development budget that translates in amount, quality and clean nature of the new content. However, that is a developer company issue and costumer. Even the awesomeness of the wow is not 100 times better than many games that has 100k subscriber or less. Should I feel that blizzard ripped me off because of that? Of course not, should I refrain from buying wow? even less.  

    My point and the many here in this thread is not about your opinions of STO (or CO that looks it is not as hated as the previous one or just basically ignored), you are entitled to them, if that  people are taking them to the extreme, I am still expecting the blood pact of no matter if they are the last developer on earth to not buying a game from them ever. 

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by xx19kilosold

    This is flawed logic. Obviously the game is developed enough to be the most successful MMO ever made. At some point if they cross all their T's and dot all their I's then they are allowed to make a profit.  The fact is they have added sufficeint content regardless of their margin of profit. STO and  CO didnt even launch with enough content to warrant the retail price, and they are paying the price for it now.

     

    Yeah, but there's still a balance.   Different companies have different break points for re-investment.  WoW is polished, but that's all you can really say about it.  Its as about as generaic a MMO can get.  More effort is put into re-balancing than adding fresh content.  Given there are other MMOs that add content much quicker than they do, demonstrates the lack of re-investment.

     

    Where as histocially Cryptic are amongst the higher turn around on content bracket, but it being less polished.

  • MeTedMeTed Member Posts: 129

    Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

    Originally posted by MeTed

     Agent Smith: I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your company and I realized that you're not actually MMO developers. Every MMO on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus.  are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure.

     

    Coolest character in the film. By far.

     By far!

    His eloquence was outstanding in V for Vendetta if you haven't seen that one yet.

  • MMO_DoubterMMO_Doubter Member Posts: 5,056

    Originally posted by MeTed

     By far!

    His eloquence was outstanding in V for Vendetta if you haven't seen that one yet.

    I have, and I agree.

    "" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2

  • RocketRangerRocketRanger Member Posts: 8

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Most are by people who haven't played for some time, if at all.  So I'd not read anything into it.  Unfortuantly for some reason this site attracts general MMO haters, who get attached to a game/company to bash.  In this case its because quite a few of them ended up getting banned from the STO forums for their attitude, so have gone on a campaign.  Which I guess will continue until the next game comes along to get banned from.

     

    Based upon the number of instances for Starbase-1 and the population in each.  Numbers are down from launch, but only to around what a typical industry % drop off would be.

     

    The fact is STO was released before it should have been and incomplete in many areas.  Although why getting upset over a game is beyond me.  If its enjoyable to some, but not to others its not a big deal.  There's much more important things in life.  So yeah, there are upset people.  However there's also people who actually like the game, despite seeing room for improvement.

    Hi Grapevine

    Sorry to reply so late!

    I must admit...i pickup STO for $23 at a store trying to get rid of stock. My buddy said I should try it but not sub. So I did exactly that and I must admit I was forced to give me CC details to activate the free 30day! But pretty much 20 days into play you just got upset at the Shallow nature of everything. I now understand why he said don’t sub.

    The game just feels wrong. I just cancelled 5 days ago and the time runs out today but I did not even log in for the last 4 days. And I must admit the people who are railing STO may be a bit on the harsh side but I can see why. It was disappointing for the Star Trek IP. I did not expect an Arcade Game from this IP and being a MMO...and that’s all you get with this Game.

    It has 0 Star Trek immersions and I think "My Humble 2 cents" ... that no matter how you spin it... To spend Life Time Sub money on this is just silly? I saw the content updates but they don’t seem to be much if you consider it is only 2 missions for 45 days...if i am understanding this right ... so you will be paying $15 for 1 mission per month and that’s it!

    I am not so passionate about Flaming but I do understand why people where so disappointed.

    After all it is Star Trek!

  • DrachasorDrachasor Member Posts: 2,678

    Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

    Originally posted by MeTed

     Agent Smith: I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your company and I realized that you're not actually MMO developers. Every MMO on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus.  are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure.

     

    Coolest character in the film. By far.

    Off-topic, but I was very disappointed when the Lord of the Rings DVDs came out and they didn't have Elrond giving the speech on humans and how he has to escape this place as a DVD special.

  • MMO_DoubterMMO_Doubter Member Posts: 5,056

    Originally posted by Drachasor

    Off-topic, but I was very disappointed when the Lord of the Rings DVDs came out and they didn't have Elrond giving the speech on humans and how he has to escape this place as a DVD special.

    LOL. I kept expecting him to call Frodo "Mr Anderson".

    "" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2

  • ShastraShastra Member Posts: 1,061

    Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

    Originally posted by Shastra

    Originally posted by TheHellfire

    This is not the forum to post if you are a craptic fanboy

    And who set this rule? you?

    Why would such a rule bother you?

    Because any one whether hater or lover can post anywhere he/she likes. What a stupid question to ask.

  • wardog250wardog250 Member Posts: 249

    Originally posted by coolgy

    Life time subscriptions should've really raised the suspicion flag. You have the ask yourself, why do sucessful games not offer life time subs? Because its not profitable. STO Devs knew their game was half assed and would not last, so in addition to selling boxes, they sold two in a sense.

    Too right!

    I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei

  • HagonbokHagonbok Member Posts: 365

    It's so interesting how the few people defending STO know they simply can not debate the facts about the game's more than abundant shortcomings, but can only resort to attacking those speaking out about them.

  • grapevinegrapevine Member UncommonPosts: 1,927

    Originally posted by RocketRanger

    Originally posted by grapevine

    Most are by people who haven't played for some time, if at all.  So I'd not read anything into it.  Unfortuantly for some reason this site attracts general MMO haters, who get attached to a game/company to bash.  In this case its because quite a few of them ended up getting banned from the STO forums for their attitude, so have gone on a campaign.  Which I guess will continue until the next game comes along to get banned from.

     

    Based upon the number of instances for Starbase-1 and the population in each.  Numbers are down from launch, but only to around what a typical industry % drop off would be.

     

    The fact is STO was released before it should have been and incomplete in many areas.  Although why getting upset over a game is beyond me.  If its enjoyable to some, but not to others its not a big deal.  There's much more important things in life.  So yeah, there are upset people.  However there's also people who actually like the game, despite seeing room for improvement.

    Hi Grapevine

    Sorry to reply so late!

    I must admit...i pickup STO for $23 at a store trying to get rid of stock. My buddy said I should try it but not sub. So I did exactly that and I must admit I was forced to give me CC details to activate the free 30day! But pretty much 20 days into play you just got upset at the Shallow nature of everything. I now understand why he said don’t sub.

    The game just feels wrong. I just cancelled 5 days ago and the time runs out today but I did not even log in for the last 4 days. And I must admit the people who are railing STO may be a bit on the harsh side but I can see why. It was disappointing for the Star Trek IP. I did not expect an Arcade Game from this IP and being a MMO...and that’s all you get with this Game.

    It has 0 Star Trek immersions and I think "My Humble 2 cents" ... that no matter how you spin it... To spend Life Time Sub money on this is just silly? I saw the content updates but they don’t seem to be much if you consider it is only 2 missions for 45 days...if i am understanding this right ... so you will be paying $15 for 1 mission per month and that’s it!

    I am not so passionate about Flaming but I do understand why people where so disappointed.

    After all it is Star Trek!

     

    I agree, although being disappointed and going on a campaign of doom and gloom are two different things.  Some people feel as you do, others don't.  Neither are correct, as they are personal opinions.  The game is not failing as some in this thread would like others to believe, which is the only point I'm making (i.e. not that it doesn't have problems in its design).

This discussion has been closed.