An alternative to free trial is a promise of refund if you choose not to play more than 14 days. This would get rid of the "free" accounts. If a gold spammer uses one of these accounts, you ban him to block the refund.
I won't buy a game unseen. $50 bucks for a month of a game I don't like. Even an offline playable demo wouldn't be too bad. As long as it had enough play time. I usually try to get into beta both to help a game I am looking forward to, as well as see if it's enjoyable to me.
I hate to burst your bubble, but you really need to go back and look up the definitions of FACT and OPINION. I have nothing against Free Trials, but saying that there is no Valid argument against free trials is an opinion because what is considered Valid is not just determined by YOUR point of view.
That is your opinion, but your opinion does not invalidate the fact I presented.
Opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
Fact: something that actually exists; reality; truth
Fact: Every MMO has eventually adds a free trial unless they shut down prior to having a chance to do so. The reason is to increase sub's by giving people an opportunity to check the game out with out spending money on it or spending additional money on it making it more likely they will give it a try.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Free trials can be a boon to the consumer and will only impact existing customers if done poorly.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Not having a free trial only benefits the developers as they believe more people will pay to try the game based on the hype surrounding it if they are flying blind.
Which has what to do with your argument below?
Fact: Unless your among those counting on the flying blind box sales for revenue then there is no valid argument against a properly done free trial.
You can keep repeating this nonsense until you're green in the face, but this not fact, it is your opinion.
Fact: If you are among those counting on the flying blind box sales then the only logical arguments to be made are based on taking other peoples money knowing theres a good chance there not going to enjoy your product but counting on them buying it regardless due to the hype surrounding the game initially.
Not a fact. Logical means to draw a general conclusion based on examples. The conclusion you draw will not always be the same for everyone. This is opinion.
This while a valid argument to some is not a valid argument against free trials. The reason why this is not a valid argument?
Simple
Consumer protection laws are designed to ensure fair competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. The laws are designed to prevent businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors and may provide additional protection for the weak and those unable to take care of themselves.
It's not only immoral, it's illegal.
Which has absolutely jack squat to do with free trials being offered. A MMO has no more legal obligation to offer a free trial than a sandwhich maker does to offer a free taste test. As long as you were told what the game is and what the game is about on the box, then the MMO maker has fulfilled his obligation as far as the consumer protection laws go. The company is also fulfilling its obligation to "free flow of information" when it allows previews and reviews to be done of the game. Sorry, but you lose again.
The only forms of valid arguments that could be made are ones that revolve around increasing the developer or publishers revenue and these arguments are solely based on not letting the consumer know what there buying because it's better for our wallets which again is illegal making them all invalid arguments.
If you care to dispute my facts... then by all means do so. Until you have disputed them though, accept that I hold these facts in higher regard than your opinion lol
PS: I actually enjoyed bursting your bubble
The only thing bursting here is your obvious education deficiency. You really need to quit while you're behind as others have tried to tell you exactly the same thing.
I hate to burst your bubble, but you really need to go back and look up the definitions of FACT and OPINION. I have nothing against Free Trials, but saying that there is no Valid argument against free trials is an opinion because what is considered Valid is not just determined by YOUR point of view.
That is your opinion, but your opinion does not invalidate the fact I presented.
Opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
Fact: something that actually exists; reality; truth
Fact: Every MMO has eventually adds a free trial unless they shut down prior to having a chance to do so. The reason is to increase sub's by giving people an opportunity to check the game out with out spending money on it or spending additional money on it making it more likely they will give it a try.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Free trials can be a boon to the consumer and will only impact existing customers if done poorly.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Not having a free trial only benefits the developers as they believe more people will pay to try the game based on the hype surrounding it if they are flying blind.
Which has what to do with your argument below?
Fact: Unless your among those counting on the flying blind box sales for revenue then there is no valid argument against a properly done free trial.
You can keep repeating this nonsense until you're green in the face, but this not fact, it is your opinion.
Fact: If you are among those counting on the flying blind box sales then the only logical arguments to be made are based on taking other peoples money knowing theres a good chance there not going to enjoy your product but counting on them buying it regardless due to the hype surrounding the game initially.
Not a fact. Logical means to draw a general conclusion based on examples. The conclusion you draw will not always be the same for everyone. This is opinion.
This while a valid argument to some is not a valid argument against free trials. The reason why this is not a valid argument?
Simple
Consumer protection laws are designed to ensure fair competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. The laws are designed to prevent businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors and may provide additional protection for the weak and those unable to take care of themselves.
It's not only immoral, it's illegal.
Which has absolutely jack squat to do with free trials being offered. A MMO has no more legal obligation to offer a free trial than a sandwhich maker does to offer a free taste test. As long as you were told what the game is and what the game is about on the box, then the MMO maker has fulfilled his obligation as far as the consumer protection laws go. The company is also fulfilling its obligation to "free flow of information" when it allows previews and reviews to be done of the game. Sorry, but you lose again.
The only forms of valid arguments that could be made are ones that revolve around increasing the developer or publishers revenue and these arguments are solely based on not letting the consumer know what there buying because it's better for our wallets which again is illegal making them all invalid arguments.
If you care to dispute my facts... then by all means do so. Until you have disputed them though, accept that I hold these facts in higher regard than your opinion lol
PS: I actually enjoyed bursting your bubble
The only thing bursting here is your obvious education deficiency. You really need to quit while you're behind as others have tried to tell you exactly the same thing.
I didn't bother reading anything but the last line because I've already explained why it was a fact lol. I just intentionally neglected mentioning it was a subjective fact lol. { Mod Edit }
But hey, you tried and that counts for something I guess lol.
If a company produces a good quality product then offering a free trial IS a competitive advantage to them. Look at it this way. If you have a $50 budget to spend on entertainment and there are 5 possible titles that you might be interested in spending that money on .... 4 of them offer free trials...one of them doesn't. All other things being equal what is the most logical choice for the consumer?
Try out the 4 titles that are offering trials and buy the one you like best. It would be illogical for the consumer to even consider purchasing the 5th title, unless they had some other means (like a friend who owns it) of even trying it....and especialy not until they have already tested out the 4 that are giving them the opportunity.
Companies who don't offer free trials are generaly those where the quality of thier hype excedes the quality of thier product.
There are other ways to deal with the spammer/greifer or garbage account aspect of free trials. No one is saying that you can't require that a free trial be secured with a credit card....nor even that a company can't require a small deposit (say $5-$10) that will be forfiet if you violate thier TOS during the trial period. At the end of the trial, if you decide not to purchase the product the company can return your deposit...if you decide to convert to a paid account...they can credit it towards your purchase.
Bottom line is that trials give an opportunity for a company to put thier product in the hands of a consumer. If it's a competitive market and you produce a good quality product then that's actually one of the strongest sales tools that you can provide. Nothing convinces consumer to make a purchase more strongly then a hands on good experience with the product.
Whatever happened to video game reviewers who are paid to play the game and give us a fair accounting? There's going to be at least an IGN review and a Gamespot review and probably a billion other ones out there.
Why not read reviews and forums after the release and see what real people not involved with the company think? whether they do or don't offer a trial version, there will be thousands of screenshots, videos, reviews and walkthroughs about the game within a month of its release. I doubt any self respecting video game reviewer with so much as a blog is going to sit out on a Star Trek MMO. And they have the potential to go into more depth about the game than a trial account might give access to.
Whatever happened to video game reviewers who are paid to play the game and give us a fair accounting? There's going to be at least an IGN review and a Gamespot review and probably a billion other ones out there. Most of which are influenced in some way by the industry. Why not read reviews and forums after the release and see what real people not involved with the company think? whether they do or don't offer a trial version, there will be thousands of screenshots, videos, reviews and walkthroughs about the game within a month of its release. I doubt any self respecting video game reviewer
Non-sequitor. No such thing.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
If a company produces a good quality product then offering a free trial IS a competitive advantage to them. Look at it this way. If you have a $50 budget to spend on entertainment and there are 5 possible titles that you might be interested in spending that money on .... 4 of them offer free trials...one of them doesn't. All other things being equal what is the most logical choice for the consumer? Try out the 4 titles that are offering trials and buy the one you like best. It would be illogical for the consumer to even consider purchasing the 5th title, unless they had some other means (like a friend who owns it) of even trying it....and especialy not until they have already tested out the 4 that are giving them the opportunity. Companies who don't offer free trials are generaly those where the quality of thier hype excedes the quality of thier product. There are other ways to deal with the spammer/greifer or garbage account aspect of free trials. No one is saying that you can't require that a free trial be secured with a credit card....nor even that a company can't require a small deposit (say $5-$10) that will be forfiet if you violate thier TOS during the trial period. At the end of the trial, if you decide not to purchase the product the company can return your deposit...if you decide to convert to a paid account...they can credit it towards your purchase. Bottom line is that trials give an opportunity for a company to put thier product in the hands of a consumer. If it's a competitive market and you produce a good quality product then that's actually one of the strongest sales tools that you can provide. Nothing convinces consumer to make a purchase more strongly then a hands on good experience with the product.
Like I said, I am not opposed to trials. They do help people in deciding if they want to play a game or not, its just right now, there are so many bad side effects to offering free trials that I feel it just is not worth it. The bigger thing that I was against is that people are demanding a free trial right at launch in which they think they are entitled to have, but I feel they are not. Not even dealing with the extra coding time it would take to make the free trial, But me as a paying customer that actually bought the game, along with the fact that this is at launch, and as we all know, there are not many mmo's that ever get a launch right. Why should I, someone who has payed the 50 or 80 bucks for the game, have to deal with others who are playing for free, sucking up bandwidth, taking up server time, during a time that we already know can be very sketchy to start with. Call me greedy if you want, but I dont think I/we, the paying customers, should have to deal with already burdened servers at launch and a whole slew of people that are playing for free.
As for secured trials, I dont know how well that would work. The game companies already don't have enough people to deal with spammers/gold sellers, yet having secured trials would almost require them to have folks dedicated just for that, which we already know is almost to difficult for them to do with gold sellers anyways. Although, the more that I see and hear about STO and its economy, the less I feel that we would really be dealing a lot with gold spammers, but I felt the same way about when DDO came out and I was wrong there. I guess Aion just left a very bad taste for me as that was the absolute worst I have ever seen a game over run with gold sellers and bots. After that, I am almost at the point that I think trials should just be abolished altogether.
And yes it would take development time to get a well done free trial setup. It's not like it would add years to the development cycle. Your talking weeks to a few months max needed to create a decent free trial and thats if you decided to make a new zone specifically for it instead of simply copying another zone and tweaking it. While I do not program in C++ I am good with Visual Basic, I am also an animator and 3D artist. If I can whip up a decent sized playable area in a few weeks with the tools I have considering this is just my hobby and I rarely take on projects from others I am sure an experienced TEAM can out do me. If they can't well... somethings wrong with the team. Having been on a large development team during a product launch I call nonsense. During the months just before and after release of an MMO the teams are already working at 110% of capacity. The game is likely to have significant changes during this period. Your few weeks of developer time becomes much longer and more expensive because changes in the main game must be reflected in the demo. Unless this is done correctly the demo because a very poor reflection of the main game.
MMOs add demos later when the main games are much more stable. Producing a demo at release of the game is likely to result in a buggier main game. In any case, if they want my money why should they not have to show me why I should give it to them? That free trial, or free trial area is going to be developed sooner or later what difference does it make if it's done sooner? I could tell you the difference, but I'd rather hear what you come up with first lol. And now on to your point about MMO's do not launch with the free trial.... You are correct, and that is the problem we are currently discussing. If they did launch with free trials we would not be here discussing this right now. My point has validation because they DID not launch with free trials and the retnetion rate on many of those MMO's was horrible. AoC is a good example. 700k + box sales, tons of hype, after the first month not even half that number re-subbed. Why? Because the hype as usual was a lie. This left tons of people feeling cheated, they then went out on a crusade to roast AoC alive, not all but many did. A free trial would have saved a lot of those consumers money, it would have spared Funcoms reputation and the game would have likely not been roasted and critisized as harshly as it was. In Age of Conans case I believe a free trial would have saved the consumers and Funcom a lot of grief. This of course is opinion.
However none of this debunks the fact that there is no valid argument against free trials. . It's somethine every MMO eventually has anyways lol. Feel free to try again, because you have failed yet again. Please put some thought and effort into your next post lol, this is like debating with a 5 year old. In the articles I have seen about demos for single player games the cost is fairly high to produce and the number of people who actually try the demos is not large. Unlike a single player game an MMO has additional costs to handle the people trying the game. Until a game starts making revenue spending real money for demos likely is not in the budget.
Being in an MMO at launch costs a premium. If you insist on a demo then you simply have the option to wait. What happens is that most people don't have the patience.
And yes it would take development time to get a well done free trial setup. It's not like it would add years to the development cycle. Your talking weeks to a few months max needed to create a decent free trial and thats if you decided to make a new zone specifically for it instead of simply copying another zone and tweaking it. While I do not program in C++ I am good with Visual Basic, I am also an animator and 3D artist. If I can whip up a decent sized playable area in a few weeks with the tools I have considering this is just my hobby and I rarely take on projects from others I am sure an experienced TEAM can out do me. If they can't well... somethings wrong with the team. Having been on a large development team during a product launch I call nonsense. During the months just before and after release of an MMO the teams are already working at 110% of capacity. The game is likely to have significant changes during this period. Your few weeks of developer time becomes much longer and more expensive because changes in the main game must be reflected in the demo. Unless this is done correctly the demo because a very poor reflection of the main game.
MMOs add demos later when the main games are much more stable. Producing a demo at release of the game is likely to result in a buggier main game. In any case, if they want my money why should they not have to show me why I should give it to them? That free trial, or free trial area is going to be developed sooner or later what difference does it make if it's done sooner? I could tell you the difference, but I'd rather hear what you come up with first lol. And now on to your point about MMO's do not launch with the free trial.... You are correct, and that is the problem we are currently discussing. If they did launch with free trials we would not be here discussing this right now. My point has validation because they DID not launch with free trials and the retnetion rate on many of those MMO's was horrible. AoC is a good example. 700k + box sales, tons of hype, after the first month not even half that number re-subbed. Why? Because the hype as usual was a lie. This left tons of people feeling cheated, they then went out on a crusade to roast AoC alive, not all but many did. A free trial would have saved a lot of those consumers money, it would have spared Funcoms reputation and the game would have likely not been roasted and critisized as harshly as it was. In Age of Conans case I believe a free trial would have saved the consumers and Funcom a lot of grief. This of course is opinion.
However none of this debunks the fact that there is no valid argument against free trials. . It's somethine every MMO eventually has anyways lol. Feel free to try again, because you have failed yet again. Please put some thought and effort into your next post lol, this is like debating with a 5 year old. In the articles I have seen about demos for single player games the cost is fairly high to produce and the number of people who actually try the demos is not large. Unlike a single player game an MMO has additional costs to handle the people trying the game. Until a game starts making revenue spending real money for demos likely is not in the budget.
Being in an MMO at launch costs a premium. If you insist on a demo then you simply have the option to wait. What happens is that most people don't have the patience.
Well there's a fourth poster with valid arguments against free trials at launch. This is all too easy.
And yes it would take development time to get a well done free trial setup. It's not like it would add years to the development cycle. Your talking weeks to a few months max needed to create a decent free trial and thats if you decided to make a new zone specifically for it instead of simply copying another zone and tweaking it. While I do not program in C++ I am good with Visual Basic, I am also an animator and 3D artist. If I can whip up a decent sized playable area in a few weeks with the tools I have considering this is just my hobby and I rarely take on projects from others I am sure an experienced TEAM can out do me. If they can't well... somethings wrong with the team. Having been on a large development team during a product launch I call nonsense. During the months just before and after release of an MMO the teams are already working at 110% of capacity. The game is likely to have significant changes during this period. Your few weeks of developer time becomes much longer and more expensive because changes in the main game must be reflected in the demo. Unless this is done correctly the demo because a very poor reflection of the main game.
MMOs add demos later when the main games are much more stable. Producing a demo at release of the game is likely to result in a buggier main game.
Eh, for an MMO a "demo" is just something like a 7 day free trial. As far as I know no MMO makes separate zones for their free trials. Just have a free trial let people play the main game or a short period and follow how Blizzard does it to reduce spammers (which also requires hiring some people, but Blizzard does a phenomenal job).
Anyhow, I don't see how a free trial for an MMO costs much money to make. It's a tiny bit of programming for the subscription and free trial id bit and then you are done.
I do understand why they don't have them though. MMOs tend to be very grindy compared to normal games. A free trial is more likely to cause people to not want to play it, I'd think, compared to a free trial for a standard game. Also, initial box sales might get tremendously reduced by a free trial. This naturally lowers the initial amount of money a company gets for a game (though potentially not in a significant way), and after spending years on the product that probably isn't too appealing of a prospect. That said, it might just be industry fears that keep them from launching with a free trial. I certainly don't know of any MMO that decided to try launching with a free trial....then again, I hardly know any MMOs that had good launches and it would definitely be stupid financially to have a free trial at launch for a game with lots of problems.
And yes it would take development time to get a well done free trial setup. It's not like it would add years to the development cycle. Your talking weeks to a few months max needed to create a decent free trial and thats if you decided to make a new zone specifically for it instead of simply copying another zone and tweaking it. While I do not program in C++ I am good with Visual Basic, I am also an animator and 3D artist. If I can whip up a decent sized playable area in a few weeks with the tools I have considering this is just my hobby and I rarely take on projects from others I am sure an experienced TEAM can out do me. If they can't well... somethings wrong with the team. Having been on a large development team during a product launch I call nonsense. During the months just before and after release of an MMO the teams are already working at 110% of capacity. The game is likely to have significant changes during this period. Your few weeks of developer time becomes much longer and more expensive because changes in the main game must be reflected in the demo. Unless this is done correctly the demo because a very poor reflection of the main game.
MMOs add demos later when the main games are much more stable. Producing a demo at release of the game is likely to result in a buggier main game.
Eh, for an MMO a "demo" is just something like a 7 day free trial. As far as I know no MMO makes separate zones for their free trials. Just have a free trial let people play the main game or a short period and follow how Blizzard does it to reduce spammers (which also requires hiring some people, but Blizzard does a phenomenal job).
Some games use a limited area like an island to control the size and down load time of the demo. Requiring people to download 5 - 20 gb to try a game has a tendancy to lower the usefulness of the option. There have been occasional whines about the download times required for MMO demos on the main forum. Blizzard has a fairly complex download on demand option for their demo which allows someone to start playing quickly.
Anyhow, I don't see how a free trial for an MMO costs much money to make. It's a tiny bit of programming for the subscription and free trial id bit and then you are done.
A tiny amount of programming often becomes much more difficult once you actually look at all that is involved. When a manager says those words you know you are in trouble.
I do understand why they don't have them though. MMOs tend to be very grindy compared to normal games. A free trial is more likely to cause people to not want to play it, I'd think, compared to a free trial for a standard game. Also, initial box sales might get tremendously reduced by a free trial. This naturally lowers the initial amount of money a company gets for a game (though potentially not in a significant way), and after spending years on the product that probably isn't too appealing of a prospect. That said, it might just be industry fears that keep them from launching with a free trial. I certainly don't know of any MMO that decided to try launching with a free trial....then again, I hardly know any MMOs that had good launches and it would definitely be stupid financially to have a free trial at launch for a game with lots of problems.
And yes it would take development time to get a well done free trial setup. It's not like it would add years to the development cycle. Your talking weeks to a few months max needed to create a decent free trial and thats if you decided to make a new zone specifically for it instead of simply copying another zone and tweaking it. While I do not program in C++ I am good with Visual Basic, I am also an animator and 3D artist. If I can whip up a decent sized playable area in a few weeks with the tools I have considering this is just my hobby and I rarely take on projects from others I am sure an experienced TEAM can out do me. If they can't well... somethings wrong with the team. Having been on a large development team during a product launch I call nonsense. During the months just before and after release of an MMO the teams are already working at 110% of capacity. The game is likely to have significant changes during this period. Your few weeks of developer time becomes much longer and more expensive because changes in the main game must be reflected in the demo. Unless this is done correctly the demo because a very poor reflection of the main game.
MMOs add demos later when the main games are much more stable. Producing a demo at release of the game is likely to result in a buggier main game.
Eh, for an MMO a "demo" is just something like a 7 day free trial. As far as I know no MMO makes separate zones for their free trials. Just have a free trial let people play the main game or a short period and follow how Blizzard does it to reduce spammers (which also requires hiring some people, but Blizzard does a phenomenal job).
Some games use a limited area like an island to control the size and down load time of the demo. Requiring people to download 5 - 20 gb to try a game has a tendancy to lower the usefulness of the option. There have been occasional whines about the download times required for MMO demos on the main forum. Blizzard has a fairly complex download on demand option for their demo which allows someone to start playing quickly.
Anyhow, I don't see how a free trial for an MMO costs much money to make. It's a tiny bit of programming for the subscription and free trial id bit and then you are done.
A tiny amount of programming often becomes much more difficult once you actually look at all that is involved. When a manager says those words you know you are in trouble.
Some SINGLE PLAYER games use limited areas to control size and content. I'm not aware of any MMOs like that. MMOs control time. Hence the only big "problem" is getting the player of the trial the actual program. Considering even F2P games can handle free trial downloads I don't see how it is anything remotely difficult. Heck, worst case scenario one can just toss some money at the problem and have a third party handle the download and bandwidth.
I certainly see how demos are difficult for single-player games. There you don't have an easy time limit to reign people in with. You certainly have to get into the trouble of limiting content and modifying the game heavily. That's not an issue with MMOs though, so making a free trial avoids the vast amount of work required for a "demo."
And yes it would take development time to get a well done free trial setup. It's not like it would add years to the development cycle. Your talking weeks to a few months max needed to create a decent free trial and thats if you decided to make a new zone specifically for it instead of simply copying another zone and tweaking it. While I do not program in C++ I am good with Visual Basic, I am also an animator and 3D artist. If I can whip up a decent sized playable area in a few weeks with the tools I have considering this is just my hobby and I rarely take on projects from others I am sure an experienced TEAM can out do me. If they can't well... somethings wrong with the team. Having been on a large development team during a product launch I call nonsense. During the months just before and after release of an MMO the teams are already working at 110% of capacity. The game is likely to have significant changes during this period. Your few weeks of developer time becomes much longer and more expensive because changes in the main game must be reflected in the demo. Unless this is done correctly the demo because a very poor reflection of the main game.
MMOs add demos later when the main games are much more stable. Producing a demo at release of the game is likely to result in a buggier main game. In any case, if they want my money why should they not have to show me why I should give it to them? That free trial, or free trial area is going to be developed sooner or later what difference does it make if it's done sooner? I could tell you the difference, but I'd rather hear what you come up with first lol. And now on to your point about MMO's do not launch with the free trial.... You are correct, and that is the problem we are currently discussing. If they did launch with free trials we would not be here discussing this right now. My point has validation because they DID not launch with free trials and the retnetion rate on many of those MMO's was horrible. AoC is a good example. 700k + box sales, tons of hype, after the first month not even half that number re-subbed. Why? Because the hype as usual was a lie. This left tons of people feeling cheated, they then went out on a crusade to roast AoC alive, not all but many did. A free trial would have saved a lot of those consumers money, it would have spared Funcoms reputation and the game would have likely not been roasted and critisized as harshly as it was. In Age of Conans case I believe a free trial would have saved the consumers and Funcom a lot of grief. This of course is opinion.
However none of this debunks the fact that there is no valid argument against free trials. . It's somethine every MMO eventually has anyways lol. Feel free to try again, because you have failed yet again. Please put some thought and effort into your next post lol, this is like debating with a 5 year old. In the articles I have seen about demos for single player games the cost is fairly high to produce and the number of people who actually try the demos is not large. Unlike a single player game an MMO has additional costs to handle the people trying the game. Until a game starts making revenue spending real money for demos likely is not in the budget.
Being in an MMO at launch costs a premium. If you insist on a demo then you simply have the option to wait. What happens is that most people don't have the patience.
Hence why I stated it was a subjective fact.
To a developer there are probably half a dozen Valid arguments against a free trial or Demo. Those however will not be valid to a consumer that has regularly dropped $50 on an MMO only to find out it was not what it was advertised to be, it was not enjoyable or they simply could not run it even though they were wll above the recomended system requirements.
Just because it's Valid to a developer does not mean it's valid to the consumer.
Hence why I stated subjective fact
I hope unlike Kntanner3 you are able to understand this.
Some SINGLE PLAYER games use limited areas to control size and content. I'm not aware of any MMOs like that. MMOs control time. Hence the only big "problem" is getting the player of the trial the actual program. Considering even F2P games can handle free trial downloads I don't see how it is anything remotely difficult. Heck, worst case scenario one can just toss some money at the problem and have a third party handle the download and bandwidth.
I certainly see how demos are difficult for single-player games. There you don't have an easy time limit to reign people in with. You certainly have to get into the trouble of limiting content and modifying the game heavily. That's not an issue with MMOs though, so making a free trial avoids the vast amount of work required for a "demo."
EQ2's first demo had a single light weight zone which was used as a starting zone and demo. I believe EQ1 added a similar zone. Vanguard had such a zone added as well but don't know if that required a full download or not.
CO 's current demo limits you to a single zone but is unlimited on time. I believe that game requires a full download.
Some SINGLE PLAYER games use limited areas to control size and content. I'm not aware of any MMOs like that. MMOs control time. Hence the only big "problem" is getting the player of the trial the actual program. Considering even F2P games can handle free trial downloads I don't see how it is anything remotely difficult. Heck, worst case scenario one can just toss some money at the problem and have a third party handle the download and bandwidth.
I certainly see how demos are difficult for single-player games. There you don't have an easy time limit to reign people in with. You certainly have to get into the trouble of limiting content and modifying the game heavily. That's not an issue with MMOs though, so making a free trial avoids the vast amount of work required for a "demo."
EQ2's first demo had a single light weight zone which was used as a starting zone and demo. I believe EQ1 added a similar zone. Vanguard had such a zone added as well but don't know if that required a full download or not.
CO 's current demo limits you to a single zone but is unlimited on time. I believe that game requires a full download.
An MMO can limit on time or space for a demo.
Limiting you to one zone isn't that hard. While it seems a bit needlessly difficult compared to a timed trial, the point remains that a timed trial is easy to implement.
That way I won"t be dissappointed if I pick it up.
After years playing MMO's I find this is the best approach for me to get the best enjoyment out of an MMO. I find this way I enjoy the game or not based on it's own merits rather than preconceived notions which I think leads to a lot of dissappointment players feel about a game.
Einherjar_LC says: WTB the true successor to UO or Asheron's Call pst!
I'm going in like every other mmo I try, i'm looking to have fun. The game has potential in my eyes anyways.
I agree with you. Unlike most MMOs that I anxiously await I am not following STO detail by detail as it gets released. I feel like I will have a better assessment of the game if I just go into it without reading all the hype, gossip, and rumors. I will try it and if it feels like a smooth game with enough content to keep me occupied I will likely play for a long time.
I'm going in like every other mmo I try, i'm looking to have fun. The game has potential in my eyes anyways.
I agree with you. Unlike most MMOs that I anxiously await I am not following STO detail by detail as it gets released. I feel like I will have a better assessment of the game if I just go into it without reading all the hype, gossip, and rumors. I will try it and if it feels like a smooth game with enough content to keep me occupied I will likely play for a long time.
Personally I don't see the virtue in spending money mostly blindly. One should try to make a purchasing decision as reasonably informed as possible. If you have trouble telling how good a game is by previews, reviews, first-hand accounts, gameplay footage, possibly open beta, and other sources then rather than ignore all that information you should change how you process it.
In my mind, given how Cryptic bungled Champions Online only months ago and how STO was also made in an extremely short amount of time, that is cause for caution regarding buying this game. Given that even some people somewhat positive about the game (Dana for instance) have a large list of flaws in it and have even questioned whether it can be ready in time for release*, I think that is even more reason for caution. Adding the needless IP breaking and incomplete Klingon faction, and I see no reason to buy this game blindly when it comes out. There are other reasons for concern as well. The wiser course is to wait and reevaluate a few months after release (note that such a principle would have worked well for Champions Online, and heck if it works like CO you'd even have plenty of free weekends to try out the game).
*Dana implied this at the beginning of the first part of his preview, though admittedly he didn't go into depth as to why he felt this way.
I am happy to admit that I cannot STOP reading(and in some cases, re-reading) the various articles, reviews, previews and all the information I can find on the game in anticipation of January 12th when I get my hands on the beta. This game is so long in the making for me that I have relatively high hopes and I have a feeling that Cryptic will deliver on them.
I want to feel like a part of that universe. I want to roleplay my character and create stories, I suppose. I want to be able to do most of the things we see in the series and movies, and from what I have read thus far, I think they'll deliver. I realize I won't be able to go play in a Holodeck any time soon(though, expansions and patches? Maybe!) but in general, I want a customizable Star Trek experience and I think Cryptic has me covered.
I can't wait for this game...
"I like persons better than principles, and I like persons with no principles better than anything else in the world." - Oscar Wilde.
I am happy to admit that I cannot STOP reading(and in some cases, re-reading) the various articles, reviews, previews and all the information I can find on the game in anticipation of January 12th when I get my hands on the beta. This game is so long in the making for me that I have relatively high hopes and I have a feeling that Cryptic will deliver on them. I want to feel like a part of that universe. I want to roleplay my character and create stories, I suppose. I want to be able to do most of the things we see in the series and movies, and from what I have read thus far, I think they'll deliver. I realize I won't be able to go play in a Holodeck any time soon(though, expansions and patches? Maybe!) but in general, I want a customizable Star Trek experience and I think Cryptic has me covered.
You want to do most of the things we see in the series and the movies and you think this game will deliver? I don't see how. Heck, the vast, vast majority of what is in the series is completely impossible* in this game which according to numerous reports is largely flying around and blowing things up as well as running around and blowing people up. You sound like you want a sandbox game or at least a highly varied themepark and STO isn't even pretending to be either.
*Seriously, if someone can name one episode of DS9, TNG, or TOS that you can largely "duplicate" in this game, then please tell me. Personally, I can't think of one. Maybe one of the DS9 episodes that was almost entirely combat...but I am not sure such an episode actually existed (as best I recall it was always intermeshed with a lot of other stuff).
I'm going in like every other mmo I try, i'm looking to have fun. The game has potential in my eyes anyways.
I agree with you. Unlike most MMOs that I anxiously await I am not following STO detail by detail as it gets released. I feel like I will have a better assessment of the game if I just go into it without reading all the hype, gossip, and rumors. I will try it and if it feels like a smooth game with enough content to keep me occupied I will likely play for a long time.
Personally I don't see the virtue in spending money mostly blindly. One should try to make a purchasing decision as reasonably informed as possible. If you have trouble telling how good a game is by previews, reviews, first-hand accounts, gameplay footage, possibly open beta, and other sources then rather than ignore all that information you should change how you process it.
In my mind, given how Cryptic bungled Champions Online only months ago and how STO was also made in an extremely short amount of time, that is cause for caution regarding buying this game. Given that even some people somewhat positive about the game (Dana for instance) have a large list of flaws in it and have even questioned whether it can be ready in time for release*, I think that is even more reason for caution. Adding the needless IP breaking and incomplete Klingon faction, and I see no reason to buy this game blindly when it comes out. There are other reasons for concern as well. The wiser course is to wait and reevaluate a few months after release (note that such a principle would have worked well for Champions Online, and heck if it works like CO you'd even have plenty of free weekends to try out the game).
*Dana implied this at the beginning of the first part of his preview, though admittedly he didn't go into depth as to why he felt this way.
Who said anything about going into it blindly? He didn't say he was ignoring all information. He is just choosing which information he wants to read about. The game has bugs, there is no doubt about it, especially if you read any of the articles that talk about STO. That doesn't mean you shouldn't buy it. You are choosing not to buy it at launch which is well within your rights. You feel the game is not ready for release and your not willing to spend money on something you don't feel is ready to be played. No problem there. What I find strange is that you seem to be trying to convince others not to buy this game at launch and I just can't figure out why. Are you really that concerned about how others spend their money and are trying to keep them from making a mistake or do you have some hidden agenda here to try and kill the game before it launches?
I am pretty sure that by now, most folks who even vaguely follow STO knows that it has many issues that it needs to fix. With that said, many of these folks are willing to give it a go anyway, including myself, Heck I even bought the CE version and I believe it may either be the first or possibly second time I have ever done that. I vaguely remember buying another mmo and it might have been a deluxe version but its been so long ago, I can't remember what it was. I just can't help the feeling that I have that you really don't want this game to release as is and if it is going to, that your going to try your best to ruin it for everyone including cryptic. I can understand you being upset that the game isn't turning out the way you want it, I can understand you not wanting to buy it in its current state, I don't understand why you seem to against it though. I say this as a person who hates SONY with a passion, yet I will not go onto a message board of one of their games and downplay the game or the company at all. My stand is firm, until sony gets rid of a certain person in their games division, I simply will not buy any more of their games. If STO had been in their hands, I simply wouldn't buy it, but I wouldn't be trying to encourage others not to buy it, nor would I be on the message boards slamming their game. But hey, thats just me. I feel everyone has the right to choose freely if they want something or not, regardless of who is making it or even what it is.
I am happy to admit that I cannot STOP reading(and in some cases, re-reading) the various articles, reviews, previews and all the information I can find on the game in anticipation of January 12th when I get my hands on the beta. This game is so long in the making for me that I have relatively high hopes and I have a feeling that Cryptic will deliver on them. I want to feel like a part of that universe. I want to roleplay my character and create stories, I suppose. I want to be able to do most of the things we see in the series and movies, and from what I have read thus far, I think they'll deliver. I realize I won't be able to go play in a Holodeck any time soon(though, expansions and patches? Maybe!) but in general, I want a customizable Star Trek experience and I think Cryptic has me covered.
You want to do most of the things we see in the series and the movies and you think this game will deliver? I don't see how. Heck, the vast, vast majority of what is in the series is completely impossible* in this game which according to numerous reports is largely flying around and blowing things up as well as running around and blowing people up. You sound like you want a sandbox game or at least a highly varied themepark and STO isn't even pretending to be either.
*Seriously, if someone can name one episode of DS9, TNG, or TOS that you can largely "duplicate" in this game, then please tell me. Personally, I can't think of one. Maybe one of the DS9 episodes that was almost entirely combat...but I am not sure such an episode actually existed (as best I recall it was always intermeshed with a lot of other stuff).
A vast majority of what is in the IP would be near impossible to make in any realistic time frame, in my opinion of course. They are trying to make an MMO that is fun and entertaining in the star trek world. That doesn't mean you have to sit there in warp for 18 hours to get to your destination only to find that there was nothing there to begin with. You want to know what MY favorite tng episode was? One that had zero fighting in it. When the probe hit picard and he lived an alternate lifetime in like 20 minutes. But, do I think that would be fun to do in an mmo? No, I don't. And on the same line, I don't want to always be blowing things up either. But lets look at one thing. Several reviews have talked about one of the missions that you do no fighting in. You just have to run around and read a lot of text and answer questions. Do you think that would be "fun" to do, say 50% of the time? I have to say again, No I don't think so. Sure they may have way more battle in here than some people may want, but they have also stated many times, they are going to work with the community to put in content that they want and I think they are sincere in their efforts to do just that.
The one major thing that I think you are over looking in this game, compared to the shows/movies/everything else is that a HUGE portion of them are not about the battle at hand, but how the crew handle the situation and the interaction of that crew to the situation at hand. You have computerized bridge officers, just how much communicating between them do you really think is going to go on in this game? What filler you had in the shows during these events has to be replaced with something.
Comments
not sure i have to try it and see how it is
An alternative to free trial is a promise of refund if you choose not to play more than 14 days. This would get rid of the "free" accounts. If a gold spammer uses one of these accounts, you ban him to block the refund.
I won't buy a game unseen. $50 bucks for a month of a game I don't like. Even an offline playable demo wouldn't be too bad. As long as it had enough play time. I usually try to get into beta both to help a game I am looking forward to, as well as see if it's enjoyable to me.
That is your opinion, but your opinion does not invalidate the fact I presented.
Opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
Fact: something that actually exists; reality; truth
Fact: Every MMO has eventually adds a free trial unless they shut down prior to having a chance to do so. The reason is to increase sub's by giving people an opportunity to check the game out with out spending money on it or spending additional money on it making it more likely they will give it a try.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Free trials can be a boon to the consumer and will only impact existing customers if done poorly.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Not having a free trial only benefits the developers as they believe more people will pay to try the game based on the hype surrounding it if they are flying blind.
Which has what to do with your argument below?
Fact: Unless your among those counting on the flying blind box sales for revenue then there is no valid argument against a properly done free trial.
You can keep repeating this nonsense until you're green in the face, but this not fact, it is your opinion.
Fact: If you are among those counting on the flying blind box sales then the only logical arguments to be made are based on taking other peoples money knowing theres a good chance there not going to enjoy your product but counting on them buying it regardless due to the hype surrounding the game initially.
Not a fact. Logical means to draw a general conclusion based on examples. The conclusion you draw will not always be the same for everyone. This is opinion.
This while a valid argument to some is not a valid argument against free trials. The reason why this is not a valid argument?
Simple
Consumer protection laws are designed to ensure fair competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. The laws are designed to prevent businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors and may provide additional protection for the weak and those unable to take care of themselves.
It's not only immoral, it's illegal.
Which has absolutely jack squat to do with free trials being offered. A MMO has no more legal obligation to offer a free trial than a sandwhich maker does to offer a free taste test. As long as you were told what the game is and what the game is about on the box, then the MMO maker has fulfilled his obligation as far as the consumer protection laws go. The company is also fulfilling its obligation to "free flow of information" when it allows previews and reviews to be done of the game. Sorry, but you lose again.
The only forms of valid arguments that could be made are ones that revolve around increasing the developer or publishers revenue and these arguments are solely based on not letting the consumer know what there buying because it's better for our wallets which again is illegal making them all invalid arguments.
If you care to dispute my facts... then by all means do so. Until you have disputed them though, accept that I hold these facts in higher regard than your opinion lol
PS: I actually enjoyed bursting your bubble
The only thing bursting here is your obvious education deficiency. You really need to quit while you're behind as others have tried to tell you exactly the same thing.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
That is your opinion, but your opinion does not invalidate the fact I presented.
Opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
Fact: something that actually exists; reality; truth
Fact: Every MMO has eventually adds a free trial unless they shut down prior to having a chance to do so. The reason is to increase sub's by giving people an opportunity to check the game out with out spending money on it or spending additional money on it making it more likely they will give it a try.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Free trials can be a boon to the consumer and will only impact existing customers if done poorly.
No one is disputing this.
Fact: Not having a free trial only benefits the developers as they believe more people will pay to try the game based on the hype surrounding it if they are flying blind.
Which has what to do with your argument below?
Fact: Unless your among those counting on the flying blind box sales for revenue then there is no valid argument against a properly done free trial.
You can keep repeating this nonsense until you're green in the face, but this not fact, it is your opinion.
Fact: If you are among those counting on the flying blind box sales then the only logical arguments to be made are based on taking other peoples money knowing theres a good chance there not going to enjoy your product but counting on them buying it regardless due to the hype surrounding the game initially.
Not a fact. Logical means to draw a general conclusion based on examples. The conclusion you draw will not always be the same for everyone. This is opinion.
This while a valid argument to some is not a valid argument against free trials. The reason why this is not a valid argument?
Simple
Consumer protection laws are designed to ensure fair competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. The laws are designed to prevent businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors and may provide additional protection for the weak and those unable to take care of themselves.
It's not only immoral, it's illegal.
Which has absolutely jack squat to do with free trials being offered. A MMO has no more legal obligation to offer a free trial than a sandwhich maker does to offer a free taste test. As long as you were told what the game is and what the game is about on the box, then the MMO maker has fulfilled his obligation as far as the consumer protection laws go. The company is also fulfilling its obligation to "free flow of information" when it allows previews and reviews to be done of the game. Sorry, but you lose again.
The only forms of valid arguments that could be made are ones that revolve around increasing the developer or publishers revenue and these arguments are solely based on not letting the consumer know what there buying because it's better for our wallets which again is illegal making them all invalid arguments.
If you care to dispute my facts... then by all means do so. Until you have disputed them though, accept that I hold these facts in higher regard than your opinion lol
PS: I actually enjoyed bursting your bubble
The only thing bursting here is your obvious education deficiency. You really need to quit while you're behind as others have tried to tell you exactly the same thing.
I didn't bother reading anything but the last line because I've already explained why it was a fact lol. I just intentionally neglected mentioning it was a subjective fact lol. { Mod Edit }
But hey, you tried and that counts for something I guess lol.
If we could try to be civil instead of taking cheap pseudo-intellectual shots at each other, it would improve the functioning of the boards.
If a company produces a good quality product then offering a free trial IS a competitive advantage to them. Look at it this way. If you have a $50 budget to spend on entertainment and there are 5 possible titles that you might be interested in spending that money on .... 4 of them offer free trials...one of them doesn't. All other things being equal what is the most logical choice for the consumer?
Try out the 4 titles that are offering trials and buy the one you like best. It would be illogical for the consumer to even consider purchasing the 5th title, unless they had some other means (like a friend who owns it) of even trying it....and especialy not until they have already tested out the 4 that are giving them the opportunity.
Companies who don't offer free trials are generaly those where the quality of thier hype excedes the quality of thier product.
There are other ways to deal with the spammer/greifer or garbage account aspect of free trials. No one is saying that you can't require that a free trial be secured with a credit card....nor even that a company can't require a small deposit (say $5-$10) that will be forfiet if you violate thier TOS during the trial period. At the end of the trial, if you decide not to purchase the product the company can return your deposit...if you decide to convert to a paid account...they can credit it towards your purchase.
Bottom line is that trials give an opportunity for a company to put thier product in the hands of a consumer. If it's a competitive market and you produce a good quality product then that's actually one of the strongest sales tools that you can provide. Nothing convinces consumer to make a purchase more strongly then a hands on good experience with the product.
Yup, and it would decrease traffic about 80%.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Whatever happened to video game reviewers who are paid to play the game and give us a fair accounting? There's going to be at least an IGN review and a Gamespot review and probably a billion other ones out there.
Why not read reviews and forums after the release and see what real people not involved with the company think? whether they do or don't offer a trial version, there will be thousands of screenshots, videos, reviews and walkthroughs about the game within a month of its release. I doubt any self respecting video game reviewer with so much as a blog is going to sit out on a Star Trek MMO. And they have the potential to go into more depth about the game than a trial account might give access to.
Non-sequitor. No such thing.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Like I said, I am not opposed to trials. They do help people in deciding if they want to play a game or not, its just right now, there are so many bad side effects to offering free trials that I feel it just is not worth it. The bigger thing that I was against is that people are demanding a free trial right at launch in which they think they are entitled to have, but I feel they are not. Not even dealing with the extra coding time it would take to make the free trial, But me as a paying customer that actually bought the game, along with the fact that this is at launch, and as we all know, there are not many mmo's that ever get a launch right. Why should I, someone who has payed the 50 or 80 bucks for the game, have to deal with others who are playing for free, sucking up bandwidth, taking up server time, during a time that we already know can be very sketchy to start with. Call me greedy if you want, but I dont think I/we, the paying customers, should have to deal with already burdened servers at launch and a whole slew of people that are playing for free.
As for secured trials, I dont know how well that would work. The game companies already don't have enough people to deal with spammers/gold sellers, yet having secured trials would almost require them to have folks dedicated just for that, which we already know is almost to difficult for them to do with gold sellers anyways. Although, the more that I see and hear about STO and its economy, the less I feel that we would really be dealing a lot with gold spammers, but I felt the same way about when DDO came out and I was wrong there. I guess Aion just left a very bad taste for me as that was the absolute worst I have ever seen a game over run with gold sellers and bots. After that, I am almost at the point that I think trials should just be abolished altogether.
Well there's a fourth poster with valid arguments against free trials at launch. This is all too easy.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Eh, for an MMO a "demo" is just something like a 7 day free trial. As far as I know no MMO makes separate zones for their free trials. Just have a free trial let people play the main game or a short period and follow how Blizzard does it to reduce spammers (which also requires hiring some people, but Blizzard does a phenomenal job).
Anyhow, I don't see how a free trial for an MMO costs much money to make. It's a tiny bit of programming for the subscription and free trial id bit and then you are done.
I do understand why they don't have them though. MMOs tend to be very grindy compared to normal games. A free trial is more likely to cause people to not want to play it, I'd think, compared to a free trial for a standard game. Also, initial box sales might get tremendously reduced by a free trial. This naturally lowers the initial amount of money a company gets for a game (though potentially not in a significant way), and after spending years on the product that probably isn't too appealing of a prospect. That said, it might just be industry fears that keep them from launching with a free trial. I certainly don't know of any MMO that decided to try launching with a free trial....then again, I hardly know any MMOs that had good launches and it would definitely be stupid financially to have a free trial at launch for a game with lots of problems.
Eh, for an MMO a "demo" is just something like a 7 day free trial. As far as I know no MMO makes separate zones for their free trials. Just have a free trial let people play the main game or a short period and follow how Blizzard does it to reduce spammers (which also requires hiring some people, but Blizzard does a phenomenal job).
Some games use a limited area like an island to control the size and down load time of the demo. Requiring people to download 5 - 20 gb to try a game has a tendancy to lower the usefulness of the option. There have been occasional whines about the download times required for MMO demos on the main forum. Blizzard has a fairly complex download on demand option for their demo which allows someone to start playing quickly.
Anyhow, I don't see how a free trial for an MMO costs much money to make. It's a tiny bit of programming for the subscription and free trial id bit and then you are done.
A tiny amount of programming often becomes much more difficult once you actually look at all that is involved. When a manager says those words you know you are in trouble.
I do understand why they don't have them though. MMOs tend to be very grindy compared to normal games. A free trial is more likely to cause people to not want to play it, I'd think, compared to a free trial for a standard game. Also, initial box sales might get tremendously reduced by a free trial. This naturally lowers the initial amount of money a company gets for a game (though potentially not in a significant way), and after spending years on the product that probably isn't too appealing of a prospect. That said, it might just be industry fears that keep them from launching with a free trial. I certainly don't know of any MMO that decided to try launching with a free trial....then again, I hardly know any MMOs that had good launches and it would definitely be stupid financially to have a free trial at launch for a game with lots of problems.
Eh, for an MMO a "demo" is just something like a 7 day free trial. As far as I know no MMO makes separate zones for their free trials. Just have a free trial let people play the main game or a short period and follow how Blizzard does it to reduce spammers (which also requires hiring some people, but Blizzard does a phenomenal job).
Some games use a limited area like an island to control the size and down load time of the demo. Requiring people to download 5 - 20 gb to try a game has a tendancy to lower the usefulness of the option. There have been occasional whines about the download times required for MMO demos on the main forum. Blizzard has a fairly complex download on demand option for their demo which allows someone to start playing quickly.
Anyhow, I don't see how a free trial for an MMO costs much money to make. It's a tiny bit of programming for the subscription and free trial id bit and then you are done.
A tiny amount of programming often becomes much more difficult once you actually look at all that is involved. When a manager says those words you know you are in trouble.
Some SINGLE PLAYER games use limited areas to control size and content. I'm not aware of any MMOs like that. MMOs control time. Hence the only big "problem" is getting the player of the trial the actual program. Considering even F2P games can handle free trial downloads I don't see how it is anything remotely difficult. Heck, worst case scenario one can just toss some money at the problem and have a third party handle the download and bandwidth.
I certainly see how demos are difficult for single-player games. There you don't have an easy time limit to reign people in with. You certainly have to get into the trouble of limiting content and modifying the game heavily. That's not an issue with MMOs though, so making a free trial avoids the vast amount of work required for a "demo."
Hence why I stated it was a subjective fact.
To a developer there are probably half a dozen Valid arguments against a free trial or Demo. Those however will not be valid to a consumer that has regularly dropped $50 on an MMO only to find out it was not what it was advertised to be, it was not enjoyable or they simply could not run it even though they were wll above the recomended system requirements.
Just because it's Valid to a developer does not mean it's valid to the consumer.
Hence why I stated subjective fact
I hope unlike Kntanner3 you are able to understand this.
Some SINGLE PLAYER games use limited areas to control size and content. I'm not aware of any MMOs like that. MMOs control time. Hence the only big "problem" is getting the player of the trial the actual program. Considering even F2P games can handle free trial downloads I don't see how it is anything remotely difficult. Heck, worst case scenario one can just toss some money at the problem and have a third party handle the download and bandwidth.
I certainly see how demos are difficult for single-player games. There you don't have an easy time limit to reign people in with. You certainly have to get into the trouble of limiting content and modifying the game heavily. That's not an issue with MMOs though, so making a free trial avoids the vast amount of work required for a "demo."
EQ2's first demo had a single light weight zone which was used as a starting zone and demo. I believe EQ1 added a similar zone. Vanguard had such a zone added as well but don't know if that required a full download or not.
CO 's current demo limits you to a single zone but is unlimited on time. I believe that game requires a full download.
An MMO can limit on time or space for a demo.
Some SINGLE PLAYER games use limited areas to control size and content. I'm not aware of any MMOs like that. MMOs control time. Hence the only big "problem" is getting the player of the trial the actual program. Considering even F2P games can handle free trial downloads I don't see how it is anything remotely difficult. Heck, worst case scenario one can just toss some money at the problem and have a third party handle the download and bandwidth.
I certainly see how demos are difficult for single-player games. There you don't have an easy time limit to reign people in with. You certainly have to get into the trouble of limiting content and modifying the game heavily. That's not an issue with MMOs though, so making a free trial avoids the vast amount of work required for a "demo."
EQ2's first demo had a single light weight zone which was used as a starting zone and demo. I believe EQ1 added a similar zone. Vanguard had such a zone added as well but don't know if that required a full download or not.
CO 's current demo limits you to a single zone but is unlimited on time. I believe that game requires a full download.
An MMO can limit on time or space for a demo.
Limiting you to one zone isn't that hard. While it seems a bit needlessly difficult compared to a timed trial, the point remains that a timed trial is easy to implement.
None.
That way I won"t be dissappointed if I pick it up.
After years playing MMO's I find this is the best approach for me to get the best enjoyment out of an MMO. I find this way I enjoy the game or not based on it's own merits rather than preconceived notions which I think leads to a lot of dissappointment players feel about a game.
Einherjar_LC says: WTB the true successor to UO or Asheron's Call pst!
I agree with you. Unlike most MMOs that I anxiously await I am not following STO detail by detail as it gets released. I feel like I will have a better assessment of the game if I just go into it without reading all the hype, gossip, and rumors. I will try it and if it feels like a smooth game with enough content to keep me occupied I will likely play for a long time.
I agree with you. Unlike most MMOs that I anxiously await I am not following STO detail by detail as it gets released. I feel like I will have a better assessment of the game if I just go into it without reading all the hype, gossip, and rumors. I will try it and if it feels like a smooth game with enough content to keep me occupied I will likely play for a long time.
Personally I don't see the virtue in spending money mostly blindly. One should try to make a purchasing decision as reasonably informed as possible. If you have trouble telling how good a game is by previews, reviews, first-hand accounts, gameplay footage, possibly open beta, and other sources then rather than ignore all that information you should change how you process it.
In my mind, given how Cryptic bungled Champions Online only months ago and how STO was also made in an extremely short amount of time, that is cause for caution regarding buying this game. Given that even some people somewhat positive about the game (Dana for instance) have a large list of flaws in it and have even questioned whether it can be ready in time for release*, I think that is even more reason for caution. Adding the needless IP breaking and incomplete Klingon faction, and I see no reason to buy this game blindly when it comes out. There are other reasons for concern as well. The wiser course is to wait and reevaluate a few months after release (note that such a principle would have worked well for Champions Online, and heck if it works like CO you'd even have plenty of free weekends to try out the game).
*Dana implied this at the beginning of the first part of his preview, though admittedly he didn't go into depth as to why he felt this way.
I am happy to admit that I cannot STOP reading(and in some cases, re-reading) the various articles, reviews, previews and all the information I can find on the game in anticipation of January 12th when I get my hands on the beta. This game is so long in the making for me that I have relatively high hopes and I have a feeling that Cryptic will deliver on them.
I want to feel like a part of that universe. I want to roleplay my character and create stories, I suppose. I want to be able to do most of the things we see in the series and movies, and from what I have read thus far, I think they'll deliver. I realize I won't be able to go play in a Holodeck any time soon(though, expansions and patches? Maybe!) but in general, I want a customizable Star Trek experience and I think Cryptic has me covered.
I can't wait for this game...
"I like persons better than principles, and I like persons with no principles better than anything else in the world."
- Oscar Wilde.
You want to do most of the things we see in the series and the movies and you think this game will deliver? I don't see how. Heck, the vast, vast majority of what is in the series is completely impossible* in this game which according to numerous reports is largely flying around and blowing things up as well as running around and blowing people up. You sound like you want a sandbox game or at least a highly varied themepark and STO isn't even pretending to be either.
*Seriously, if someone can name one episode of DS9, TNG, or TOS that you can largely "duplicate" in this game, then please tell me. Personally, I can't think of one. Maybe one of the DS9 episodes that was almost entirely combat...but I am not sure such an episode actually existed (as best I recall it was always intermeshed with a lot of other stuff).
I agree with you. Unlike most MMOs that I anxiously await I am not following STO detail by detail as it gets released. I feel like I will have a better assessment of the game if I just go into it without reading all the hype, gossip, and rumors. I will try it and if it feels like a smooth game with enough content to keep me occupied I will likely play for a long time.
Personally I don't see the virtue in spending money mostly blindly. One should try to make a purchasing decision as reasonably informed as possible. If you have trouble telling how good a game is by previews, reviews, first-hand accounts, gameplay footage, possibly open beta, and other sources then rather than ignore all that information you should change how you process it.
In my mind, given how Cryptic bungled Champions Online only months ago and how STO was also made in an extremely short amount of time, that is cause for caution regarding buying this game. Given that even some people somewhat positive about the game (Dana for instance) have a large list of flaws in it and have even questioned whether it can be ready in time for release*, I think that is even more reason for caution. Adding the needless IP breaking and incomplete Klingon faction, and I see no reason to buy this game blindly when it comes out. There are other reasons for concern as well. The wiser course is to wait and reevaluate a few months after release (note that such a principle would have worked well for Champions Online, and heck if it works like CO you'd even have plenty of free weekends to try out the game).
*Dana implied this at the beginning of the first part of his preview, though admittedly he didn't go into depth as to why he felt this way.
Who said anything about going into it blindly? He didn't say he was ignoring all information. He is just choosing which information he wants to read about. The game has bugs, there is no doubt about it, especially if you read any of the articles that talk about STO. That doesn't mean you shouldn't buy it. You are choosing not to buy it at launch which is well within your rights. You feel the game is not ready for release and your not willing to spend money on something you don't feel is ready to be played. No problem there. What I find strange is that you seem to be trying to convince others not to buy this game at launch and I just can't figure out why. Are you really that concerned about how others spend their money and are trying to keep them from making a mistake or do you have some hidden agenda here to try and kill the game before it launches?
I am pretty sure that by now, most folks who even vaguely follow STO knows that it has many issues that it needs to fix. With that said, many of these folks are willing to give it a go anyway, including myself, Heck I even bought the CE version and I believe it may either be the first or possibly second time I have ever done that. I vaguely remember buying another mmo and it might have been a deluxe version but its been so long ago, I can't remember what it was. I just can't help the feeling that I have that you really don't want this game to release as is and if it is going to, that your going to try your best to ruin it for everyone including cryptic. I can understand you being upset that the game isn't turning out the way you want it, I can understand you not wanting to buy it in its current state, I don't understand why you seem to against it though. I say this as a person who hates SONY with a passion, yet I will not go onto a message board of one of their games and downplay the game or the company at all. My stand is firm, until sony gets rid of a certain person in their games division, I simply will not buy any more of their games. If STO had been in their hands, I simply wouldn't buy it, but I wouldn't be trying to encourage others not to buy it, nor would I be on the message boards slamming their game. But hey, thats just me. I feel everyone has the right to choose freely if they want something or not, regardless of who is making it or even what it is.
You want to do most of the things we see in the series and the movies and you think this game will deliver? I don't see how. Heck, the vast, vast majority of what is in the series is completely impossible* in this game which according to numerous reports is largely flying around and blowing things up as well as running around and blowing people up. You sound like you want a sandbox game or at least a highly varied themepark and STO isn't even pretending to be either.
*Seriously, if someone can name one episode of DS9, TNG, or TOS that you can largely "duplicate" in this game, then please tell me. Personally, I can't think of one. Maybe one of the DS9 episodes that was almost entirely combat...but I am not sure such an episode actually existed (as best I recall it was always intermeshed with a lot of other stuff).
A vast majority of what is in the IP would be near impossible to make in any realistic time frame, in my opinion of course. They are trying to make an MMO that is fun and entertaining in the star trek world. That doesn't mean you have to sit there in warp for 18 hours to get to your destination only to find that there was nothing there to begin with. You want to know what MY favorite tng episode was? One that had zero fighting in it. When the probe hit picard and he lived an alternate lifetime in like 20 minutes. But, do I think that would be fun to do in an mmo? No, I don't. And on the same line, I don't want to always be blowing things up either. But lets look at one thing. Several reviews have talked about one of the missions that you do no fighting in. You just have to run around and read a lot of text and answer questions. Do you think that would be "fun" to do, say 50% of the time? I have to say again, No I don't think so. Sure they may have way more battle in here than some people may want, but they have also stated many times, they are going to work with the community to put in content that they want and I think they are sincere in their efforts to do just that.
The one major thing that I think you are over looking in this game, compared to the shows/movies/everything else is that a HUGE portion of them are not about the battle at hand, but how the crew handle the situation and the interaction of that crew to the situation at hand. You have computerized bridge officers, just how much communicating between them do you really think is going to go on in this game? What filler you had in the shows during these events has to be replaced with something.