Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Lifers Starting to Bail!
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
LotRO (cough).
Yet you can't provide any evidence that it isn't other than anecdotal, while all the metrics with which other mmos are gauged point to STO failing big time already.
All the signs of desperation emanating from Cryptic point to it as well.
A mmo that's even remotely successful doesn't need their forum mods rushing in to stamp out any threads from people leaving or criticizing the game. They don't need them banning people just for speaking out about issues. A healthy game can take a little heat and not sweat it.
Successful games don't need their lead producer rushing around to any publication that will listen less than a month after the game is released , desperately telling everyone that they're working hard to add more and fix things (Heck, they already knew they were in big trouble near the end of beta because Zinc was doing that very thing BEFORE release).
Successful games don't have the cost of their game drop to bargain bin prices a month and a half after they're released.
There's plenty more too. It just keeps stacking up.
Yet all we get from the lifers and fanbois is "I was in x instance the other day and it was busy". Here's a newsflash. STO's limit on most instances (maybe all) is 40 players...... umm sooo ya.
Pro tip for ya too. When you look at the instance list and see all the rest are pretty much empty, or there's not many on the list? Ya, it's not supposed to be like that.
Ya some people are on a campaign. They should be. We all should be. We shouldn't be seeing company after company after company doing the same thing to us and whistling Dixie away down the happy path after they do it.. Players of mmos should be seeing the release state of the games they enjoy improving, not deteriorating with every new one. Your logic seems to be that everyone should essentially shut up as long as there's ANYONE that's still around bending over and grabbing ankle for Cryptic.
Heh, were you that guy way back in the 70's telling everyone to stop "campaigning" against the Ford Pinto because obviously some still liked driving it?
"Heh, you guys, quit telling everyone to stay away from the Poison Ivy! Obviously that guy standing in it over there isn't scratching, so he must think it's ok!"
Evidence isn't exactly anything the haters are posting. Just random spin.
As I said way back in this thread. Anyone who's playing can see that main social hub (i.e. Starbase-1) has the same number of instances since launch, with a drop off in population in each being no more than what's typical for the industy.
There is still loads of activity (i.e. sectors aren't empty). Joining patrols still often leads to it being a group experience, through auto joining. The game is nowhere near empty, or emptying.
Some people are so deluded by hate, they just find any excuse.
I still have to see any evidence that STO has failed or failing. All i see loads of personal vandetta and nothing more. Personal gripes and hate does not equal to evidence.
Forgot to add...
Its not two missions though. They added two new sectors (one mission, one explore) for the Federation and (can't remember the number) exploration sectors for Klingons. Although the latter should have been there anyway, so shouldn't really be counted. In addition to three Rear Adminal episodes, three STFs, some fleet actions, a PvP scenario and the dailies.
Yep, love my lifetime sub to LOTRO. The game isn't for everyone, and I don't play it all the time. However, it is always there waiting for me. I'm not a founder though. I didn't toss up the money for a lifetime sub at the very beginning. I did that later once I knew I liked the game.
I've stated where the evidence is. Cryptic never release figures, so you can only tell how well a game is going if you can see it for youself. STO is not amongst the most popular MMOs, but that doesn't mean its not successful. If its financially viable and people playing are enjoying it, its a success. Haters just move on, or at least should do if they weren't on a campaign.
X-Fire is a pile. It doesn't even work with a lot of games. STO being one of them. Reported many times and explained on the STO forum. The API doesn't exist.
Who said anything about DSE?
I didn't follow STO too closely at launch, but how long were people able to play it before committing to the lifetime sub? Great thing about LOTRO for me was I got to play from around November 2006 (closed beta) to April 2007 (launch) before buying the lifetime sub. So after about six months of play time I was pretty sure it was the way to go.
It didn't work properly for a while, but it works now.
Still doesn't work. As for the other games it struggles with, its hit and miss.
Its the same as LotRO's lifetime sub, i.e. founders and those picking one up later.
With LotRO I went the other way. The beta really put me off the game, but through bordem at the time I bought a copy at retail. Paid monthly for a while, then left as it had next to zero end game. Went back for Moria and wished I'd bought a lifetime sub.
In fact for most of the beta I also hated STO. It wasn't until I got to Lt Cmdr, I actually started to enjoy it. In fact I still really hate the lower levels. I also hate tier three, but that's more to do with the ships than the missions. Which is exactly how I felt about LotR, i.e. not perfect but good fun overall. Not that STO compairs to LotRO in the grander sence.
You mean your anecdotal evidence of a "seems full to me" nature? LOL. A highly instance game like this, that's meaningless. Cryptic will never release the figures because they're nothing to brag about. They tried to con people and succeeded on some level with the vague "one million accounts" statement. They had their "well over 100k" statement last month...what's "well over"? 120k? Over 100k subs less than 2 months after launch for such a big IP is hardly impressive. Anyway, I bet you'll never see that statement about over 100k subs again.
Cryptic only has themselves to blame for the hate. If they trashed some no-name IP, no one would care. Taking a dump on Star Trek is another story. Couple that with their outright disdain for their customers, and it's not a surprise they get so much grief. You don't have to make Pintos or Pacers, or toys that small children injure themselves with to deserve scorn from consumers.
OK you said patrols, which also had a pop limit of 5 people last time I played...what's your point? A game with one server having enough people to put 5 people in the same mission? /golfclap
I stated the social hub, for which you can see the instances if you are in game. As you can switch between them.
Other areas as you point out are worthless for measurements due to the mechanics of the game. However, plenty of people being around does demonstate its not lacking players. Especially as they are spread out between rank, missions, sectors, etc. It is not like a ghost town in other MMOs, where you mainly only see players in the top level areas.
Unfortuantly there is no other means of measuring it. So it is a lot more evidence than anyone not playing can come up with.
As I keep saying. Popularity does not indicate success. It does however indicate degrees of success. Just because its a niche MMO, does not mean its unsuccessful. Not everyone has to be number one. Rightfully or wrongly Cryptic are known to aim for the 100k subscription mark when they develop games.
We've already seen that there's no use posting evidence because those that talk of "spin" and such will poo poo any given unless it 's in-line with their thinking.
Here's another bit just for the heck of it though.
Here we see an article touting the sales numbers for STO, and speculating that with combined sales of the regular game and collectors edition it topped the list given. http://trekmovie.com/2010/03/15/star-trek-online-debuts-with-strong-sales-could-help-future-of-star-trek-games/
I'm not going to do all the work for you, so you can go look for yourself, but I will tell you that Bioshock 2 had sales numbers for the PS3 and XBox of around 1.6 million by the end of Feb 2010 (ahh heck, here, I will do some of the work for you after all http://vgchartz.com/games/index.php?&results=50&name=&console=&keyword=&publisher=&genre=&order=Hits&boxart=Both&showdeleted=®ion=All&alphasort=B. I'm fairly confident that everyone can acknowledge that the sales were most likely over 2 million if the PC version were included.
JE recently stated that STO had 100K subscribers as of the end of March (keep in mind this is before those that bought the 3 month sub packs, which was the most popular option taken, decide if they're staying or not). Now anyone with any sense knows that if they're saying 100K, then it's sure to be much less, but hey, lets keep on those rose coloured glasses..
Even if 100K is an honest number, if that isn't evidence enough of an "epic fail" I don't know what is.
But ya, I know we're going to hear that a mmo losing 95% (most likely more since I'm going off of Bio's numbers here) of the people that bought the game within the first two months is normal... but I think most people will enjoy a good laugh when they do see it said.
They said well over 100K.
Of course there's a drop off and a turn over of players (i.e. joiners and leavers). There always is with MMOs. Doesn't means it not a success though.
No, he said 100k. You can bet if it was "well over" they'd be touting that "well over" number, not one that seems lower.
No he did not. They said well over 100k, but had a company policy of not stating subscription figures. Which is the only indicator we really have, as a base line. From that one can assume it was at the time beween 130-170k, given a margin. With the typical MMO drop rate, which is being seen. That would lower it to bewteen the low and lower mid region within the 100k range.
Still in profit by their goal and still plenty enough players for people to enjoy the game. So not a failure, just not a major popular success.
You are correct, the quote was "well over 100k". Like I asked before, what does that mean? If I have a fever of 104, that's "well over" 100. He could consider 105k to be well over 100k. My guess was 120k. Your 130-170k is as much of guess with no basis in fact as mine or any other. If they were at your higher end, he could have said "over 150k" or "close to 200k" and made the number sound better...
Heya Hagon, saw some of your recent posts on the official forums...WOW. I'm surprised you weren't banned and your posts deleted. Even the CDF didn't jump you much. I guess they can't dismiss you as a Bioware/Blizzard viral marketer or something LOL.
So.. ya.... not 95%......only 94%. Dude you have to realize just how silly you're looking here. If a product shows over 90% of the people that tried it are dissatisfied enough not to spend any more money on it when to the public's perception the product's gauge of success is people spending more money on it, then it's a failure. Simple as that.
Whether Cryptic/Atari can manage to still eke out a profit is inconsequential. Then the only "success" is Cryptic/Atari's ability to manage a cost/how many are scammed ratio.
Where the hell are you getting 90% from?
Maybe you need to look up what success is. Its has scales. You can still be right at the bottom of that scale and be successful. You are confusing it with popularity.
Well 5k isn't well over.
120k, is feasible as "well over" and I did state my range was also an estimate. It wouldn't have been near 200k, or the statement would have been either its around or approaching that figure. Hence why I used a 30k window.
I know I keep on saying this, but being only highly popular isn't the only measure of success. A game can be niche and be successful.
What typical mmo drop rate? Typical if you have only been following mmos since just before the release of AoC and WAR I guess, but certainly not at all typical. In fact what's typical is around a 20% drop off rate from "box sales" to first paid month subs. The only other game before AoC, WAR, STO that ever deviated from that was way back when SWG was released. I'd throw in Tabula Rasa there too just to be generous to your position.
AoC/WAR was two years ago. Which is quite an acceptable tend period and the market's changed a hell of a lot since SWG, which incidently had around a 50% drop off and suicide drop years later thanks to the NGE.
These days its between 30 and 40%, which is the stablising three month point. Then they either stay at that rate until they shutdown or have the fortune of bounching back a bit. They never regain full popularity. The only real exception has been EVE and WoW, although the latter hasn't seen any growth for two years.
Starbase-1 instances at launch had around 60 people in each, now its around the 40 mark. So an estimated (three month) drop off based upon that being 33%.
You're just wanting to play desperation semantics. You're like Clinton wanting to debate just what "is" is. hehehe
I was actually being generous with the 90%. It's more like 95%. If you lose 95% of the 2 000 000 people that bought the game, you're left with 100 000.