Its Atari not Cryptic But, to be fair, every single MMO that has ever come out started out with bugs and missing content and no end game. Even your beloved WoW was nothing at launch, as it is today.
Although to be fair WoW had 5 years of development time which doesn't take a genius to see that it had 3 more years of developing time then STO did. Was the launch of WoW perfect? no way , but guess what it had content that wasn't severely broken. of course there were bugs still but the game was set all the way to cap level with content and quests.
I would give you a guest pass to SWOTR, but then I wouldn't be able to find a way to live with myself afterwards....
Its Atari not Cryptic But, to be fair, every single MMO that has ever come out started out with bugs and missing content and no end game. Even your beloved WoW was nothing at launch, as it is today.
Although to be fair WoW had 5 years of development time which doesn't take a genius to see that it had 3 more years of developing time then STO did. Was the launch of WoW perfect? no way , but guess what it had content that wasn't severely broken. of course there were bugs still but the game was set all the way to cap level with content and quests.
Well, I guess some of that is true.
I was there from day one, actually from open beta, up until the first year. Sure there was more content, quest wise, but there was serious balance issues between classes, the open PvP was totally borked.
I guess its just a matter of what you really want. Personally I am more into the combat and PvP, not concerned at all about missions and other content. I guess the people who are looking for more story should wait a few months after release.
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
If you played WLK at launch, you know that there were plenty of things that were left clearly unfinished. Ulduar, Icecrown, there's a pretty signifigant list.
I just think that the haters should at least hold companies to the same standard; you know, for consistancy.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
I just tried the beta and think that Cryptic has a few cool ideas, especially when it comes to space combat. However, this game screams of the same lack of polish and rushed work that plagued AOC and WAR. Which makes me wonder: why is Cryptic launching STO in Feb instead of letting the project cook a little longer? I can see why AOC and WAR launched prematurely - they needed to beat the WOW expansion coming out only a few months later. From what I'm seeing, STO wouldn't face any real competition till fall 2010 when Cataclysm and possibly the SWTOR is scheduled. I know a number of members of this site keep a close watch on industry trends, so I'm wondering if there's any word on the street about why Cryptic is rushing STO out the door. Finally, I'm a little shocked that Cryptic is launching a big MMOG so soon after launching Champions. I know that two different teams are working on the project, but I'm not 100 percent convinced that a medium-sized company like Cryptic can pull this off.
Cryptic is known for the "shake and bake" type of development they do, and thats why their games are not very good.
Strange thing is... they want us to pay much more for their games than for Modern Warfare 2 or other "super-games", while at the same time only spend a tiny fraction on development of said games...
Hey, it works! People ARE stupid! Its a proven fact if STO sells well.
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
If you played WLK at launch, you know that there were plenty of things that were left clearly unfinished. Ulduar, Icecrown, there's a pretty signifigant list.
I just think that the haters should at least hold companies to the same standard; you know, for consistancy.
The expansion was finished! The instances you mentioned were never to be meant in the expansion in the first place!
Blizzard always has done it that way. Release expansion with only the first tiers of raid content. Then add the follow up tiers later through FREE updates.
I won't say that Blizzard never made any screw ups. But when it comes to high quality standard and polishing. Then Blizzard is at the top.
And no... I don't play WoW.... and haven't done so in a long time. And never will again either.
STO is so unfinished and buggy. It's not even funny anymore. It just makes you cry that they gonna launch it in such a state.
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
If you played WLK at launch, you know that there were plenty of things that were left clearly unfinished. Ulduar, Icecrown, there's a pretty signifigant list.
I just think that the haters should at least hold companies to the same standard; you know, for consistancy.
Yeah, I think not being able to actually fight the Lich King when the title for the expansion is "Wrath of the Lich King" is a pretty big deal. Defintely not a good comparison when trying to claim that a game which hasn't even released yet is "unifinished."
All WOW bashing aside, it seems at least to me that STO is launching without some key features. For example, the Klingon faction having no PVE content, ground combat being a lot less polished than space combat, and no ability to explore the interior of your own ship. IMHO this is WAR all over again - a game that launched without all the promised classes or player cities. It's one thing to not have end-game content, quite another to have gameplay gaps. Which is why I'm surprised this game isn't being shelved for a few more months of development.
Of course, I can totally believe that Atari/Cryptic being pressured by Paramount, or promising an unrealistic deadline to coincide with the new Star Trek movie.
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
That's the point your not supposed to fight the lich king at the beginning. As you know blizzard said they don't want to release the final boss first and to it at the end through free updates. What's the point of releasing the lich king at the beginning of the expansion? what would be the rest of the expansion fly in limbo chat? Seriously think about this.
Back on topic about STO its launching now due to the contract of course although imo 2 years for an mmo doesn't seem like an ideal time frame. I guarantee you with 2 more years of development they can fix ground combat and add more content and then turn this game around. In its current state I predict it will have a player base like lineage 2 did with like 70k to 80k subscribers. As evidence going through forums many people even claim they have bought and are playing this game simply only because it has the " Star Trek" name. To me that doesn't speak good on the game.
I would give you a guest pass to SWOTR, but then I wouldn't be able to find a way to live with myself afterwards....
I doubt the first responder is correct here as I've heard or seen nothing to lead me to think Cryptic is having financial problems leading to the launch, and while I don't know for sure I did see another post on here about STO and a rather informed poster eluded that Atari is forcing this release not Cryptic but again this is just speculation on my part because I don't know the person who posted that nor the source they got it from but I did just read her post today so it may not be too difficult to find on the STO board.
Atari is pushing release because they are/were having financial issues. They were on the verge of bankruptcy for several years, prior to being bought out by Infogames and becoming a privately held company. Atari bought Cryptic. Cryptic is now Atari for all intents and purposes... much in the way that Mythic is EA.
Atari is concerned with one thing.... pushing out new MMOs as fast as possible. Thats precisely why they outbid Ubersoft on Cryptic, because Cryptic has an engine and design philosophy that supports that. Atari has never been concerned with making good games, they are all about the bottom line. They are notorious for pushing games out before development cycles have been completed... even single player games(which is incredibly taboo).
The gaming community would have been much better off if Ubersoft had won the bidding war for Cryptic. Unfortunately thats not the case.
Not sure if people know, but Cryptic/Atari already have another MMO in development for release in 2011(rumored to be a Neverwinter Nights MMO). Yes... thats right. They have a half baked STO and CO game which both are lacking content, polish, and features... and they are dedicating huge portions of thei staff to a new project already. Is it any wonder that Klingons don't have any PvE?...or that the game is still riddled with bugs?
Before Atari had anything to do with Cryptic: Cryptic started CO and STO. Cryptic decided they'd each get done after about two years of Dev time. There's really no evidence Atari has forced Cryptic to rush these games out.
Yes because when a company spends a lot of money buying another company they have little interest in making that money back ASAP...if you think Atari didnt push to make money ASAP after the acquistion your kidding yourself
The new patch definetly helped smooth out some roughness, although logging in is still a hasstle. I would think they would of incorporated a Que by now. I'm beginning to think they want just one Shard/Server for the game, not sure that is going to work out. I see this game as the standard MMO fare with a Star Trek atmosphere. So if you like the WoW's/EQ2/ Vanguards of the world and want a space flavor you should give it a try. It won't appeal to those that want innovation/No or little combat/deep non vilent diplomacy. As most (I would say all) MMO's it appears it will be unfinished and somewhat buggy at release, so if that bothers you I wouldn't pre-order just yet. That said I'm finding it entertaining and enjoy both the space and ground combat as there is some stragety required. If you go into battle just twitching buttons with no reason you will soon be in trouble. Could they use more time before release I would say yes, but than i haven't seen any MMO release that couldn't of used more time. I think the problem is that no matter how much time a developer has, he always ends up with content creep and that effects the games over all polish. I don't see the two years developement as the problem for the Star Trek game as they already had the engine they were going to use developed. If it has a problem its that it couldn't possibly please all the fans with their very different ideas of what needed to be included or not. Reading the boards how do you please these different views?
1. Open/ theme/ instant worlds
2. Player Run Crews/ NPC Crews
3. Little or no combat/ WAR
4. Death effects/ Non death Effects
5. Twitch combat/ Standard MMO stragety combat
6. All Captains/ Bridge officiers
7.Skill based/ Level based
8. Crafting/ No crafting
9. PvE/ PvP/ RvR
10. Innovations/ Refined standard fare
11. Grouping/ Solo
I just don't see how it would be possible to please all the people or even maybe most the people because we see each game differently. Of course people on this site in particular seem to be most unhappy with any game produced, I would quess thats because of our experiences with so many MMO's that have let us down in the past. Our expectations for something innovated , bug free at release, full/tons of content honestly hasn't happened or we would be playing that game now. I would suggest you pick a game that has the most things you like and help improve it from within instead of tearing such a game apart for the stuff it lacks at present. You are only hurting yourself destroying a game that could turn into the one that could make you happy, after all who would try that again if it bombs?
Which makes me wonder: why is Cryptic launching STO in Feb instead of letting the project cook a little longer? I can see why AOC and WAR launched prematurely - they needed to beat the WOW expansion coming out only a few months later. From what I'm seeing, STO wouldn't face any real competition till fall 2010 when Cataclysm and possibly the SWTOR is scheduled. I know a number of members of this site keep a close watch on industry trends, so I'm wondering if there's any word on the street about why Cryptic is rushing STO out the door. Finally, I'm a little shocked that Cryptic is launching a big MMOG so soon after launching Champions. I know that two different teams are working on the project, but I'm not 100 percent convinced that a medium-sized company like Cryptic can pull this off.
My guess is, one, they really can't afford to. I don't imagine CO is performing to expectations, and STO has likely used every bit of the budget allocated to it(games almost always go over budget), and hey, the economy is in the tank...
I wasn't part of closed beta, but it's possible that many of the things, like login issues, slow avatar transitions and stuff, weren't an issue when they had a thousand or so players on at once.
Few developers
can afford to hold off on games these days, and there's no reason to think Cryptic an exception.
I think they're banking on the fun factor keeping people playing through the annoying bugs and missing bits. Time will tell if that gamble works.
Before Atari had anything to do with Cryptic: Cryptic started CO and STO. Cryptic decided they'd each get done after about two years of Dev time. There's really no evidence Atari has forced Cryptic to rush these games out.
Yes because when a company spends a lot of money buying another company they have little interest in making that money back ASAP...if you think Atari didnt push to make money ASAP after the acquistion your kidding yourself
Cryptic was already rushing these games out the door. They were advertising how they could do that. Atari likely bought them because they thought a quick profit was possible and they likely thought this because Cryptic talked and talked about how these games would be developed in around 2 years. Hard to push someone in a direction they are already going.
Cryptic was already rushing these games out the door. They were advertising how they could do that. Atari likely bought them because they thought a quick profit was possible and they likely thought this because Cryptic talked and talked about how these games would be developed in around 2 years. Hard to push someone in a direction they are already going.
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine. That's the key to their short development time, of course.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Cryptic was already rushing these games out the door. They were advertising how they could do that. Atari likely bought them because they thought a quick profit was possible and they likely thought this because Cryptic talked and talked about how these games would be developed in around 2 years. Hard to push someone in a direction they are already going.
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine. That's the key to their short development time, of course.
Which is why the game feels so much like CO for many, they had only 2 years (or a bit less) to change and adapt the engine they used making CO for STO use AND develop the game itself, as they only got the license for STO sometime between Jan 2008 when Perpetual went bankrupt and lost the license and July 28, 2008 when Cryptic announced STO.
What annoys me is that Cryptic were openly boasting how they would be able to pull off such a quick development time when the game was announced. They're full of it, as they've needed to postpone content to be able to meet that deadline. Not to mention the amount of bugs and glitches still to go.
Cryptic was already rushing these games out the door. They were advertising how they could do that. Atari likely bought them because they thought a quick profit was possible and they likely thought this because Cryptic talked and talked about how these games would be developed in around 2 years. Hard to push someone in a direction they are already going.
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine. That's the key to their short development time, of course.
Other games have used already developed engines. They still don't make good games in two years. An already existing engine cuts a year, at best, off of development time, it doesn't cut two or three years. That's why CO is a failure and STO will join it.
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine. That's the key to their short development time, of course.
Other games have used already developed engines. They still don't make good games in two years. An already existing engine cuts a year, at best, off of development time, it doesn't cut two or three years. That's why CO is a failure and STO will join it.
Really? Would you care to tell us how you came up with these numbers? I'm sure with such specific information you must have been part of the STO dev team. Can you provide us with some dates and sources for your information?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Really? Would you care to tell us how you came up with these numbers? I'm sure with such specific information you must have been part of the STO dev team. Can you provide us with some dates and sources for your information?
It's not hard. You examine other MMOs that have been made and what other devs team have said. Then you compare that to the failure that is CO and how Cryptic has applied the exact same dev system to STO. The last decent MMO that was made in 2 years was created about a DECADE ago, when less was expected. Then again, I don't really expect you to follow my reasoning Blurr. You seem 100% happy with anything and everything Cryptic does. Heck, even though you said you'd be upset if Klingons weren't in the game, you don't bat an eye at the fact their only half-implemented. I'm sure you'll be happy with STO regardless of its problems and how rushed it is, just like you think CO is great. Your opinion is in the minority, however.
Oh, so you're not a major game developer and these are just guesses and opinions?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Comments
The game is as ready as it needs to be for launch. I would guess the specific reason though is that they want to get paid.
Was mentioned a while back on forums about a rather large bonus if the game was released first quarter 2010.
So release early and get large bonus and try to fix it later. Or lose bonus and release a better game.
We see which way it is going:) Who got to make the final call on that Atari, Cryptic, or the owner of the IP? No idea.
Although to be fair WoW had 5 years of development time which doesn't take a genius to see that it had 3 more years of developing time then STO did. Was the launch of WoW perfect? no way , but guess what it had content that wasn't severely broken. of course there were bugs still but the game was set all the way to cap level with content and quests.
I would give you a guest pass to SWOTR, but then I wouldn't be able to find a way to live with myself afterwards....
Although to be fair WoW had 5 years of development time which doesn't take a genius to see that it had 3 more years of developing time then STO did. Was the launch of WoW perfect? no way , but guess what it had content that wasn't severely broken. of course there were bugs still but the game was set all the way to cap level with content and quests.
Well, I guess some of that is true.
I was there from day one, actually from open beta, up until the first year. Sure there was more content, quest wise, but there was serious balance issues between classes, the open PvP was totally borked.
I guess its just a matter of what you really want. Personally I am more into the combat and PvP, not concerned at all about missions and other content. I guess the people who are looking for more story should wait a few months after release.
Don't forget, Blizzard releases things unfinished but the community just glosses it over. WotLK launched over a year ago and you still can't fight the Lich King at this point.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
If you played WLK at launch, you know that there were plenty of things that were left clearly unfinished. Ulduar, Icecrown, there's a pretty signifigant list.
I just think that the haters should at least hold companies to the same standard; you know, for consistancy.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Cryptic is known for the "shake and bake" type of development they do, and thats why their games are not very good.
Strange thing is... they want us to pay much more for their games than for Modern Warfare 2 or other "super-games", while at the same time only spend a tiny fraction on development of said games...
Hey, it works! People ARE stupid! Its a proven fact if STO sells well.
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
If you played WLK at launch, you know that there were plenty of things that were left clearly unfinished. Ulduar, Icecrown, there's a pretty signifigant list.
I just think that the haters should at least hold companies to the same standard; you know, for consistancy.
The expansion was finished! The instances you mentioned were never to be meant in the expansion in the first place!
Blizzard always has done it that way. Release expansion with only the first tiers of raid content. Then add the follow up tiers later through FREE updates.
I won't say that Blizzard never made any screw ups. But when it comes to high quality standard and polishing. Then Blizzard is at the top.
And no... I don't play WoW.... and haven't done so in a long time. And never will again either.
STO is so unfinished and buggy. It's not even funny anymore. It just makes you cry that they gonna launch it in such a state.
Cheers
You should be careful not to make your attempts at irony not seem like trolling, I think. That is, I assume you are trying to make the tired "an MMO is never finished" argument. Doesn't quite work here since all major content Blizzard promised with WotLK at launch was there (some cosmetics weren't and that's it). Not really the same with STO considering Klingons were originally promised comparable PvE content to the Federation. Of course, we'll have to wait until launch day for bug confirmation, but I'm pretty darn sure STO isn't going to be cleaning up the large number of bugs still left in the game in the next 10 days or so.
If you played WLK at launch, you know that there were plenty of things that were left clearly unfinished. Ulduar, Icecrown, there's a pretty signifigant list.
I just think that the haters should at least hold companies to the same standard; you know, for consistancy.
Yeah, I think not being able to actually fight the Lich King when the title for the expansion is "Wrath of the Lich King" is a pretty big deal. Defintely not a good comparison when trying to claim that a game which hasn't even released yet is "unifinished."
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
All WOW bashing aside, it seems at least to me that STO is launching without some key features. For example, the Klingon faction having no PVE content, ground combat being a lot less polished than space combat, and no ability to explore the interior of your own ship. IMHO this is WAR all over again - a game that launched without all the promised classes or player cities. It's one thing to not have end-game content, quite another to have gameplay gaps. Which is why I'm surprised this game isn't being shelved for a few more months of development.
Of course, I can totally believe that Atari/Cryptic being pressured by Paramount, or promising an unrealistic deadline to coincide with the new Star Trek movie.
D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium
That's the point your not supposed to fight the lich king at the beginning. As you know blizzard said they don't want to release the final boss first and to it at the end through free updates. What's the point of releasing the lich king at the beginning of the expansion? what would be the rest of the expansion fly in limbo chat? Seriously think about this.
Back on topic about STO its launching now due to the contract of course although imo 2 years for an mmo doesn't seem like an ideal time frame. I guarantee you with 2 more years of development they can fix ground combat and add more content and then turn this game around. In its current state I predict it will have a player base like lineage 2 did with like 70k to 80k subscribers. As evidence going through forums many people even claim they have bought and are playing this game simply only because it has the " Star Trek" name. To me that doesn't speak good on the game.
I would give you a guest pass to SWOTR, but then I wouldn't be able to find a way to live with myself afterwards....
<peeks head in>
Star Wars TOR scheduled spring 2011
<pulls head out>
Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions.
Atari is pushing release because they are/were having financial issues. They were on the verge of bankruptcy for several years, prior to being bought out by Infogames and becoming a privately held company. Atari bought Cryptic. Cryptic is now Atari for all intents and purposes... much in the way that Mythic is EA.
Atari is concerned with one thing.... pushing out new MMOs as fast as possible. Thats precisely why they outbid Ubersoft on Cryptic, because Cryptic has an engine and design philosophy that supports that. Atari has never been concerned with making good games, they are all about the bottom line. They are notorious for pushing games out before development cycles have been completed... even single player games(which is incredibly taboo).
The gaming community would have been much better off if Ubersoft had won the bidding war for Cryptic. Unfortunately thats not the case.
Not sure if people know, but Cryptic/Atari already have another MMO in development for release in 2011(rumored to be a Neverwinter Nights MMO). Yes... thats right. They have a half baked STO and CO game which both are lacking content, polish, and features... and they are dedicating huge portions of thei staff to a new project already. Is it any wonder that Klingons don't have any PvE?...or that the game is still riddled with bugs?
Before Atari had anything to do with Cryptic:
Cryptic started CO and STO. Cryptic decided they'd each get done after about two years of Dev time.
There's really no evidence Atari has forced Cryptic to rush these games out.
Yes because when a company spends a lot of money buying another company they have little interest in making that money back ASAP...if you think Atari didnt push to make money ASAP after the acquistion your kidding yourself
The new patch definetly helped smooth out some roughness, although logging in is still a hasstle. I would think they would of incorporated a Que by now. I'm beginning to think they want just one Shard/Server for the game, not sure that is going to work out. I see this game as the standard MMO fare with a Star Trek atmosphere. So if you like the WoW's/EQ2/ Vanguards of the world and want a space flavor you should give it a try. It won't appeal to those that want innovation/No or little combat/deep non vilent diplomacy. As most (I would say all) MMO's it appears it will be unfinished and somewhat buggy at release, so if that bothers you I wouldn't pre-order just yet. That said I'm finding it entertaining and enjoy both the space and ground combat as there is some stragety required. If you go into battle just twitching buttons with no reason you will soon be in trouble. Could they use more time before release I would say yes, but than i haven't seen any MMO release that couldn't of used more time. I think the problem is that no matter how much time a developer has, he always ends up with content creep and that effects the games over all polish. I don't see the two years developement as the problem for the Star Trek game as they already had the engine they were going to use developed. If it has a problem its that it couldn't possibly please all the fans with their very different ideas of what needed to be included or not. Reading the boards how do you please these different views?
1. Open/ theme/ instant worlds
2. Player Run Crews/ NPC Crews
3. Little or no combat/ WAR
4. Death effects/ Non death Effects
5. Twitch combat/ Standard MMO stragety combat
6. All Captains/ Bridge officiers
7.Skill based/ Level based
8. Crafting/ No crafting
9. PvE/ PvP/ RvR
10. Innovations/ Refined standard fare
11. Grouping/ Solo
I just don't see how it would be possible to please all the people or even maybe most the people because we see each game differently. Of course people on this site in particular seem to be most unhappy with any game produced, I would quess thats because of our experiences with so many MMO's that have let us down in the past. Our expectations for something innovated , bug free at release, full/tons of content honestly hasn't happened or we would be playing that game now. I would suggest you pick a game that has the most things you like and help improve it from within instead of tearing such a game apart for the stuff it lacks at present. You are only hurting yourself destroying a game that could turn into the one that could make you happy, after all who would try that again if it bombs?
My guess is, one, they really can't afford to. I don't imagine CO is performing to expectations, and STO has likely used every bit of the budget allocated to it(games almost always go over budget), and hey, the economy is in the tank...
I wasn't part of closed beta, but it's possible that many of the things, like login issues, slow avatar transitions and stuff, weren't an issue when they had a thousand or so players on at once.
Few developers
can afford to hold off on games these days, and there's no reason to think Cryptic an exception.
I think they're banking on the fun factor keeping people playing through the annoying bugs and missing bits. Time will tell if that gamble works.
Yes because when a company spends a lot of money buying another company they have little interest in making that money back ASAP...if you think Atari didnt push to make money ASAP after the acquistion your kidding yourself
Cryptic was already rushing these games out the door. They were advertising how they could do that. Atari likely bought them because they thought a quick profit was possible and they likely thought this because Cryptic talked and talked about how these games would be developed in around 2 years. Hard to push someone in a direction they are already going.
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine.
That's the key to their short development time, of course.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine.
That's the key to their short development time, of course.
Which is why the game feels so much like CO for many, they had only 2 years (or a bit less) to change and adapt the engine they used making CO for STO use AND develop the game itself, as they only got the license for STO sometime between Jan 2008 when Perpetual went bankrupt and lost the license and July 28, 2008 when Cryptic announced STO.
What annoys me is that Cryptic were openly boasting how they would be able to pull off such a quick development time when the game was announced. They're full of it, as they've needed to postpone content to be able to meet that deadline. Not to mention the amount of bugs and glitches still to go.
Currently Playing: The Game
Don't forget to add the 2 years they took to develop their engine.
That's the key to their short development time, of course.
Other games have used already developed engines. They still don't make good games in two years. An already existing engine cuts a year, at best, off of development time, it doesn't cut two or three years. That's why CO is a failure and STO will join it.
Other games have used already developed engines. They still don't make good games in two years. An already existing engine cuts a year, at best, off of development time, it doesn't cut two or three years. That's why CO is a failure and STO will join it.
Really? Would you care to tell us how you came up with these numbers? I'm sure with such specific information you must have been part of the STO dev team. Can you provide us with some dates and sources for your information?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
It's not hard. You examine other MMOs that have been made and what other devs team have said. Then you compare that to the failure that is CO and how Cryptic has applied the exact same dev system to STO. The last decent MMO that was made in 2 years was created about a DECADE ago, when less was expected. Then again, I don't really expect you to follow my reasoning Blurr. You seem 100% happy with anything and everything Cryptic does. Heck, even though you said you'd be upset if Klingons weren't in the game, you don't bat an eye at the fact their only half-implemented. I'm sure you'll be happy with STO regardless of its problems and how rushed it is, just like you think CO is great. Your opinion is in the minority, however.
Oh, so you're not a major game developer and these are just guesses and opinions?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000