The review isn't a waste of my time. I've followed this game for a while and have considered playing but, after LotRO and AoC, IP driven mmos have really failed to deliver for me. This review will be a good contrast for me when the next review comes around. I would actually like to see the next re-review by the same person to see how they feel the update has changed their opinion one way or another.
I realize if you're a fan of a game it's hard to hear that your game isn't scoring high, but your "journalist buddy" anecdote only really illustrates your biased agenda in feeding back your criticism of the review process. You want your game to get a better score and feel the upcoming content update will deliver that. Maybe it will, and another review will reflect that if it's true.
I too would like to see better game reviews within a more well defined framework and maybe we'll see that. This review certainly seemed to score more reasonably than many I've seen in the past. I feel that launch reviews, this game included, just scored the games too high. In all I think this was a decent review and an honest 6.4 score is pretty decent. I would rather play a game with an honest middling score than try a game with an 8.x score and be very disappointed at the over-hype.
Yes, I play the game but I am not a raving fanboi of it, nor am I biased. I came back to it recently after a 4-month hiatus. STO is a very casual mmo, one that can be played at your own pace. Granted that's not everyone's playstyle so I'm sure you know the drill - keep looking until you find one that does suit your style.
As for the review being a waste of time, I stand by my comment. The review was done with incomplete information which made the end score faulty. It has been stated earlier that the review was in progress long before Season 4 was set to go live. Nonetheless it was decided to upload the review as is. As for my 'journalist buddy' it wasn't bias at all - just one of the rules of reporting - make sure you have ALL the facts. If the review would have been held off until Season 4 went live, and the reviewer tested it and ended up giving the game an even lower score, I would have accepted it without question. I just think it was lazy to release the re-review in its current state without any sort of disclaimer...wait...wait...well, will you look at that? A disclaimer at the start of the review. Guess my buddy was right after all.
***********
"Editor's Note: Lori's review was written before the Season 4 upgrade of the ground combat system. As such we will be revisiting the game for an Impressions article after Season 4 hits, and we will as always re-evaluate our review in 6-12 months. "
Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. - Marie Curie
I think the review that counts is the number of people who bought the game at release and just left because it was trash and because Cryptic pulled stunts like lying about what features would be in the game, lied about unique items being available for lifetime subs, implied that tLTS were going to be a one-time pre-release offer, and then when there were so many problems, told us that we don't "get it".
Those people leaving probably speaks louder to me about whether spending money with Cryptic is going give me something that I value in the future.
Not a review by professional staff, and certainly not all the feel-good comments from the 40 people still playing the game.
Firstly, we stand by Lori's score. It may not be fair to everyone, but reviews are equal parts opinion and objective criticism. In that much, Lori did very well.
Secondly, we are indeed instituting a new review process, and it has its share of growing pains. Namely, in terms of "Re-Reviews" we're also changing our process there. In short, going forward our Re-Reviews will basically be evaluations based upon the previous review. We'll still cover the game in the listed categories in this review, and as such our scores are generally going to skew lower than before. But, we'll try our damnedest next time to both a.) time the review better and b.) make sure we communicate why a score goes down or up.
Thanks for your patience and feedback. It's all being heard.
I note that her scores are almost spot-on with the 400ish people who have reviewed the game with the "ratings" feature.
Which to me means that in spite of any improvements that have been made to the game, it's still the same junk product. I think your new process nailed it.
I'm interested to see re-reviews of games that I've played or am actively playing, looking forward to it!
Yep, well aware that it's going to cause some noise, but we're not above hearing it. My goal as editor is to make sure our reviews objectively rate each of what we consider the core tennants of the MMO. The 7 categories within Lori's review reflect that. And they'll be scored in every review from here on out.
I think you missed my question so I ask again, what other games have you scored down recently? And do you plan on making each "re-review" a featured news article like you did with this one?
I would like to hear the answer to this question as well.
Just a quick click on the front page shows the Free Realms re-review and it dropped from an 8.x to a 6.5. Reviews are subjective. Just saying, there is a front page re-review and the score was lowered. I guess that answers the question, even though I'm not Bill Murphy. I just thought I'd throw some independent research out there for you.
You may not be Bill Murphy, but he sure wrote out a nice full response within less than 2 mins of your post... I think he might be stalking you!!!
Originally posted by Adamaicryptic studios have never really been too hot at makeing mmo's in the first place and sto oozes similarity with many of cryptics other titles. like city of heroes.
City of Heroes/Villains - Cryptic's 1st MMO
Champions Online - Cryptic's 2nd MMO
Star Trek Online - Cryptic's 3rd MMO
Fun fact: STO is built on the Champions Online game engine. They literally took the Champions Online engine and used it to build STO.
There seems to be more chat about scores dropping from one review to another, so I will add to it
Have people ever thought that over time the reviews expectations of a game can change.
I am sure there are plenty of games that people have played that they thought rates a 8 and 6 months later play a new game that they rate a 8 and then never play the previous game again.
I would guess when Everquest came out it rated a 9-10 (there was not a lot around that was that good) now look at it, I bet it would hardy rate a 4. Things change.. Move on
STO has increased since release in most part for C-Store stuff and federation players content. The Klingons and their players have been kicked to the ground by the developers time and again with failed promises for content and additions. The through the casual bone or lied promise at the KDF players base while hidden developing even more goodies and incentives for the Feds. So sorry, but the game IMO deserves an even worse rating.
"I am the harbinger of hope. I am the sword of the righteous. And to all who hear my words, I say this: What you give to this Empire, I shall give back unto you." -Empress Jamyl Sarum I
The games iright if one want to play federation. It's Bridge Commander made online with a monthly fee.
The Devs do not even pretend to favour faction equality as they had more the a year to bring the KDF on par with the Federation. They should have renamed or rereleased the game as FEDERATION ONLINE a long time ago.
But, we'll try our damnedest next time to both a.) time the review better and b.) make sure we communicate why a score goes down or up.
Thanks for your patience and feedback. It's all being heard.
Both good ideas.
On a different but kinda relevant point, I'd really like to see a re-review of WoW done using this new system. I've always found it odd that this site & members seem to hold WoW in such low regard when so many people actually play it, arguably the most played western mmo currently.
you have been too kind in your review score. Star Trek Online is so buggy it is unplayable with 64BIT Win 7 install. The tech support for this game is non exsistant, I contacted support 14 times and not once did I receive a reply,. Oh! and it wasn't just me whom had the same problems, thousands of other wannie be players suffer the same fate. "Fatal file error!" The game just exits. (And I downloaded & reinstalled 3 times)
Really really annoying, I just gave uop and delted this waste of HD space rubbish.
Any time I got to play for 5 mins though the ground combat seemed ok, but space combat was dismal, I was expecting a star wars galaxies type experience in space, how let down I was.
Really is bad timing, you've could've kept Lori's work and just amended references/scores relative to the ground combat update in two weeks, rather than put this up now.
For the people who think the score should have went up instead of down are forgetting the first review was way too high. It should have been a 4.5 - 5. So in that sense, it went up.
End game means different things to different people. For some its PvE, for some its PvP, for others its crafting, collecting, etc. For me, its simply having new missions to do. And for that purpose I have all the content I will ever need with the Foundry. I literally have a new mission to play every single time I log on, and that is far more than any other MMO currently offers me.
I realize it's just your opinion...BUT...If you're saying that STO offers more than other MMO's offer currently you have truly lost your mind...And you're coming off as a major shrill for this Game which everyone knows was a tremendous disappointment...And yes I played it...The Game sucked...It was a tremendous repetitive bore...Maybe it has improved some...And good for you that you're having a good time playing it...But not realizing it's not even close to comparing to a AAA title is a bit naive at this point...
Saying a game has improved yet lowering its score is contradictory. Also, writing up a new review when you know a big update is coming out in 2 weeks and saying your going to do another review afterward is a waste of time.
The original score may have been too high to begin with. Some areas may have improved while others fell far short of expectation and worsened over time. The methods behind how a game is scored may change over time. There are any number of reasons a games overall score could drop from one review to the next.
Hope and dream all you want, the game is still not up to snuff for many. They don't need you coming here to try and make excuses for the game or try and sell it to them. People are perfectly capable of using their own judgement.
End game means different things to different people. For some its PvE, for some its PvP, for others its crafting, collecting, etc. For me, its simply having new missions to do. And for that purpose I have all the content I will ever need with the Foundry. I literally have a new mission to play every single time I log on, and that is far more than any other MMO currently offers me.
I realize it's just your opinion...BUT...If you're saying that STO offers more than other MMO's offer currently you have truly lost your mind...And you're coming off as a major shrill for this Game which everyone knows was a tremendous disappointment...And yes I played it...The Game sucked...It was a tremendous repetitive bore...Maybe it has improved some...And good for you that you're having a good time playing it...But not realizing it's not even close to comparing to a AAA title is a bit naive at this point...
Ahh...so here is the problem....you said "you played it". When? Lately? I agree that STO was not ready at launch. There was much lacking at that time and I was vocal about it. However, I have stuck with it as I knew it would not remain static. Cryptic has gone to great lengths to add to the game that which was missing at launch. In fact, they have gone above and beyond. STO is now a far better game then it was. All the more surprising when it garners a lower score then it had previously. With S4 the last major "flaw" of the game will be addressed. While I have yet to have a chance to spend time with the changes being made to ground combat, from what I have seen it will be 100% better then what was offered at launch. So, what is different in my comments and yours....I have also played the game AND STILL DO.
End game means different things to different people. For some its PvE, for some its PvP, for others its crafting, collecting, etc. For me, its simply having new missions to do. And for that purpose I have all the content I will ever need with the Foundry. I literally have a new mission to play every single time I log on, and that is far more than any other MMO currently offers me.
I realize it's just your opinion...BUT...If you're saying that STO offers more than other MMO's offer currently you have truly lost your mind...
If you actually take the time to read my post you'll see exactly what I mean, as I stated it plainly. STO's Foundry means that every single time I log in I have a new mission that I have never played before. I'm not aware of any other game that does that.
I have a life time subscription, I also thought the first review was to high. The game is poor on polish, social and value. They are slow to act on anything but c-store additions. The improvements to ground combat should have started in March of 2010, before many of the rage quits.
There is still almost no end game, many bugs still there from launch, and new ones. Pops ups durning game play are annoying. Many abilities like target exposed enemy, and your secondary attack stop working in combat. Buttons don't work and have to be pressed again sometimes. Space combat is overly repetitious and to easy on elite. All the mobs in space feel the same.
They didn't really add anything to PVP, except a couple of maps players don't use. The queues broke down and by the time they had them fixed many of the PVP players had quit. You will sit 30 to 45 minutes in a space PVP queue. You can't get a ground queue within a hour, I have waited three or more. Until I just gave up on PVP.
The prices in c-store are to high, like this review. I think it should be 5.0, up from a 4.0. The game will improve when the new ground combat goes live but there is still nothing to do. Except some single player quest from UGC. I didn't think the game needed more single player quest, and was bored with them in June of 2010.
I'm a big Star Trek fan and I played this game for one month. After about 2 weeks I was looking for a reason to log on. I've never seen so many options only available in a cash shop in a P2P game. I found costumes, character creation, etc. extremely limiting for someone with an active account.
The ground combat was ok, the space combat.... not so much. I could somewhat get behind the slower, more tactical combat, but it was overdone IMO. Many non-boss ships had to be hit 50 times or more before they'd blow up (die). Compare that to any other MMO.
Also, travel. Way too much long boring travel. Even with the few shortcuts that were available, I was often just staring at my ship for 10 minutes or more, slowing plodding my way towards some specific sector.
The only thing the game got right, IMO, was the sounds and graphics. It very much looks and sounds like Star Trek should.
If this game ever goes F2P (and, tbh, I'm absolutely amazed this hasn't happened yet), I might revisit it. No chance I will if it doesn't.
What I find horrifying about this the fact that MMORPG did this review right before a major update. It's like they didn't do any research before they picked up the game and went into the game completely biased. Bad form MMORPG.com.
We know Season 4 is right around the corner, as well as new sets of FEs (yea!). Season 4 will come with Borg Invasion, Ground Combat 2.0, and later on the Duty Officer System. This article is a continuation of the nay-sayer who said this game wouldn't last a year. Well it's still here, and its been going quite strongly. And planning to do a rereview of the game in the calm right before a major update isn't just bad form its the sign of a bad reporter. It's like reporting on how good the olympics was the week before it starts.
Comments
Yes, I play the game but I am not a raving fanboi of it, nor am I biased. I came back to it recently after a 4-month hiatus. STO is a very casual mmo, one that can be played at your own pace. Granted that's not everyone's playstyle so I'm sure you know the drill - keep looking until you find one that does suit your style.
As for the review being a waste of time, I stand by my comment. The review was done with incomplete information which made the end score faulty. It has been stated earlier that the review was in progress long before Season 4 was set to go live. Nonetheless it was decided to upload the review as is. As for my 'journalist buddy' it wasn't bias at all - just one of the rules of reporting - make sure you have ALL the facts. If the review would have been held off until Season 4 went live, and the reviewer tested it and ended up giving the game an even lower score, I would have accepted it without question. I just think it was lazy to release the re-review in its current state without any sort of disclaimer...wait...wait...well, will you look at that? A disclaimer at the start of the review. Guess my buddy was right after all.
***********
"Editor's Note: Lori's review was written before the Season 4 upgrade of the ground combat system. As such we will be revisiting the game for an Impressions article after Season 4 hits, and we will as always re-evaluate our review in 6-12 months. "
Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. - Marie Curie
I think the review that counts is the number of people who bought the game at release and just left because it was trash and because Cryptic pulled stunts like lying about what features would be in the game, lied about unique items being available for lifetime subs, implied that tLTS were going to be a one-time pre-release offer, and then when there were so many problems, told us that we don't "get it".
Those people leaving probably speaks louder to me about whether spending money with Cryptic is going give me something that I value in the future.
Not a review by professional staff, and certainly not all the feel-good comments from the 40 people still playing the game.
RELAX!@!! BREATHE!!!
I note that her scores are almost spot-on with the 400ish people who have reviewed the game with the "ratings" feature.
Which to me means that in spite of any improvements that have been made to the game, it's still the same junk product. I think your new process nailed it.
I'm interested to see re-reviews of games that I've played or am actively playing, looking forward to it!
RELAX!@!! BREATHE!!!
You may not be Bill Murphy, but he sure wrote out a nice full response within less than 2 mins of your post... I think he might be stalking you!!!
City of Heroes/Villains - Cryptic's 1st MMO
Champions Online - Cryptic's 2nd MMO
Star Trek Online - Cryptic's 3rd MMO
Fun fact: STO is built on the Champions Online game engine. They literally took the Champions Online engine and used it to build STO.
There seems to be more chat about scores dropping from one review to another, so I will add to it
Have people ever thought that over time the reviews expectations of a game can change.
I am sure there are plenty of games that people have played that they thought rates a 8 and 6 months later play a new game that they rate a 8 and then never play the previous game again.
I would guess when Everquest came out it rated a 9-10 (there was not a lot around that was that good) now look at it, I bet it would hardy rate a 4. Things change.. Move on
Stunning graphics ?
STO has increased since release in most part for C-Store stuff and federation players content. The Klingons and their players have been kicked to the ground by the developers time and again with failed promises for content and additions. The through the casual bone or lied promise at the KDF players base while hidden developing even more goodies and incentives for the Feds. So sorry, but the game IMO deserves an even worse rating.
Thanks for the honest review. Appreciate it.
"I am the harbinger of hope. I am the sword of the righteous. And to all who hear my words, I say this: What you give to this Empire, I shall give back unto you."
-Empress Jamyl Sarum I
The "new score" was right..
The old was flawed and to high..
But I guess this game is alright if you are a Star Trek fan, and that is all that reallly means something ..right ?
The games iright if one want to play federation. It's Bridge Commander made online with a monthly fee.
The Devs do not even pretend to favour faction equality as they had more the a year to bring the KDF on par with the Federation. They should have renamed or rereleased the game as FEDERATION ONLINE a long time ago.
Both good ideas.
On a different but kinda relevant point, I'd really like to see a re-review of WoW done using this new system. I've always found it odd that this site & members seem to hold WoW in such low regard when so many people actually play it, arguably the most played western mmo currently.
Hey Lori May!
you have been too kind in your review score. Star Trek Online is so buggy it is unplayable with 64BIT Win 7 install. The tech support for this game is non exsistant, I contacted support 14 times and not once did I receive a reply,. Oh! and it wasn't just me whom had the same problems, thousands of other wannie be players suffer the same fate. "Fatal file error!" The game just exits. (And I downloaded & reinstalled 3 times)
Really really annoying, I just gave uop and delted this waste of HD space rubbish.
Any time I got to play for 5 mins though the ground combat seemed ok, but space combat was dismal, I was expecting a star wars galaxies type experience in space, how let down I was.
FINAL SCORE: 1
Total Crap!
Go Black Prophecy ---It is better and it's free
Really is bad timing, you've could've kept Lori's work and just amended references/scores relative to the ground combat update in two weeks, rather than put this up now.
For the people who think the score should have went up instead of down are forgetting the first review was way too high. It should have been a 4.5 - 5. So in that sense, it went up.
I realize it's just your opinion...BUT...If you're saying that STO offers more than other MMO's offer currently you have truly lost your mind...And you're coming off as a major shrill for this Game which everyone knows was a tremendous disappointment...And yes I played it...The Game sucked...It was a tremendous repetitive bore...Maybe it has improved some...And good for you that you're having a good time playing it...But not realizing it's not even close to comparing to a AAA title is a bit naive at this point...
The original score may have been too high to begin with. Some areas may have improved while others fell far short of expectation and worsened over time. The methods behind how a game is scored may change over time. There are any number of reasons a games overall score could drop from one review to the next.
Hope and dream all you want, the game is still not up to snuff for many. They don't need you coming here to try and make excuses for the game or try and sell it to them. People are perfectly capable of using their own judgement.
Ahh...so here is the problem....you said "you played it". When? Lately? I agree that STO was not ready at launch. There was much lacking at that time and I was vocal about it. However, I have stuck with it as I knew it would not remain static. Cryptic has gone to great lengths to add to the game that which was missing at launch. In fact, they have gone above and beyond. STO is now a far better game then it was. All the more surprising when it garners a lower score then it had previously. With S4 the last major "flaw" of the game will be addressed. While I have yet to have a chance to spend time with the changes being made to ground combat, from what I have seen it will be 100% better then what was offered at launch. So, what is different in my comments and yours....I have also played the game AND STILL DO.
Let's party like it is 1863!
I realize it's just your opinion...BUT...If you're saying that STO offers more than other MMO's offer currently you have truly lost your mind...
If you actually take the time to read my post you'll see exactly what I mean, as I stated it plainly. STO's Foundry means that every single time I log in I have a new mission that I have never played before. I'm not aware of any other game that does that.I have a life time subscription, I also thought the first review was to high. The game is poor on polish, social and value. They are slow to act on anything but c-store additions. The improvements to ground combat should have started in March of 2010, before many of the rage quits.
There is still almost no end game, many bugs still there from launch, and new ones. Pops ups durning game play are annoying. Many abilities like target exposed enemy, and your secondary attack stop working in combat. Buttons don't work and have to be pressed again sometimes. Space combat is overly repetitious and to easy on elite. All the mobs in space feel the same.
They didn't really add anything to PVP, except a couple of maps players don't use. The queues broke down and by the time they had them fixed many of the PVP players had quit. You will sit 30 to 45 minutes in a space PVP queue. You can't get a ground queue within a hour, I have waited three or more. Until I just gave up on PVP.
The prices in c-store are to high, like this review. I think it should be 5.0, up from a 4.0. The game will improve when the new ground combat goes live but there is still nothing to do. Except some single player quest from UGC. I didn't think the game needed more single player quest, and was bored with them in June of 2010.
I'm a big Star Trek fan and I played this game for one month. After about 2 weeks I was looking for a reason to log on. I've never seen so many options only available in a cash shop in a P2P game. I found costumes, character creation, etc. extremely limiting for someone with an active account.
The ground combat was ok, the space combat.... not so much. I could somewhat get behind the slower, more tactical combat, but it was overdone IMO. Many non-boss ships had to be hit 50 times or more before they'd blow up (die). Compare that to any other MMO.
Also, travel. Way too much long boring travel. Even with the few shortcuts that were available, I was often just staring at my ship for 10 minutes or more, slowing plodding my way towards some specific sector.
The only thing the game got right, IMO, was the sounds and graphics. It very much looks and sounds like Star Trek should.
If this game ever goes F2P (and, tbh, I'm absolutely amazed this hasn't happened yet), I might revisit it. No chance I will if it doesn't.
What I find horrifying about this the fact that MMORPG did this review right before a major update. It's like they didn't do any research before they picked up the game and went into the game completely biased. Bad form MMORPG.com.
We know Season 4 is right around the corner, as well as new sets of FEs (yea!). Season 4 will come with Borg Invasion, Ground Combat 2.0, and later on the Duty Officer System. This article is a continuation of the nay-sayer who said this game wouldn't last a year. Well it's still here, and its been going quite strongly. And planning to do a rereview of the game in the calm right before a major update isn't just bad form its the sign of a bad reporter. It's like reporting on how good the olympics was the week before it starts.
STO deserves at least an 8/10 if not higher.