I thought this was going to be a MMORPG

[Archived Post]

To use WoW as an example, STO just needs more factions with content that fleshes out each respective faction. WoW has the Horde and the Alliance; each one of these has different races and classes. The WoW setup lends itself to role playing and socialization. KDF content needs to be beefed up to give an incentive for players to join it. Since the STO storyline pits the Federation in a war with the Klingons than give us a war. Wharhammer does this pretty well with Faction controlled areas. PvP is not enough as STO stands now it is a single player game with some loose multyplayer attached to it. PvP is nothing more than team deathmach no different from any FPS game; there is no substance to it. At some point in time STO has to become an MMORPG, because right now, as I have said before, it is just a singleplayer game with chat attached to it.

STO has all the building blocks it needs to become a decent MMORPG; this forum has had allot of rely great ideas to improve the socialization and other MMORPG elements of the game. What Cryptic needs to do is: stop trying to reinvent the wheel, look at how other MMORPGs work, start listening to the players who pay their salaries, and decide they are going to make a MMORPG not just another Star Trek game. I rely believe if they would concentrate on the MMORPG part of development the rest would just fall into place. I bought this game Because I thought Star Trek MMORPG was a great idea; it is a big universe with lots of stories to be told, worlds to be explored, people to meet. But, it just is not that. Do not get me wrong I do believe this game has potential it just needs some direction, but all I seem to see in Cryptic is that this game is just a temporary fix for their broken financial needs. I do not mean to sound angry, but I thought I was buying a Star Trek MMORPG, and I do not feel like that is what I got. One more thing User Generated Content is not the way to go; all that says to me is lazy development when I have to pay to create my own game.

Two things I would like to see.


1 I would like to see the class structures become more like other MMORPGs. For instance: your Tactical Officers should be your Warrior/Rogue archetypes, Science Officers should be your Mage/Priest/Healer types, and Engineering Officers your Crafting/Explosive types. Now these would not necessarily mean you would have to stick to one of these areas for your character, but it would help create more uses for divergent classes; as the game stands now everybody could be a Tactical Officer and you rely would not even notice to much of a difference. With better defined classes you get better defined roles for players, and which in turn increases the role playing elements of the game.

2 I would also like to see more ways to socialize in the game. Most MMORPGs have guild halls where guild members come together to socialize; as the game stands now Fleets relly do not have anywhere they can go. Now I relies Cryptic has mentioned they are looking into the possibility to implement some form of a Fleet home; they have not demonstrated that it is a priority to them which is a shame. One of the most important aspect of a MMORPG is the social aspect it is what separates it from a standard solo game. Cities are to small with very little to do in them, and there are just not very many places for people to gather in large groups.

[Archived Post]

"1 I would like to see the class structures become more like other MMORPGs. For instance: your Tactical Officers should be your Warrior/Rogue archetypes, Science Officers should be your Mage/Priest/Healer types, and Engineering Officers your Crafting/Explosive types. Now these would not necessarily mean you would have to stick to one of these areas for your character, but it would help create more uses for divergent classes; as the game stands now everybody could be a Tactical Officer and you rely would not even notice to much of a difference. With better defined classes you get better defined roles for players, and which in turn increases the role playing elements of the game. "
There is a lot of things tactical can not what a engineer or a medical can

"2 I would also like to see more ways to socialize in the game. Most MMORPGs have guild halls where guild members come together to socialize; as the game stands now Fleets relly do not have anywhere they can go. Now I relies Cryptic has mentioned they are looking into the possibility to implement some form of a Fleet home; they have not demonstrated that it is a priority to them which is a shame. One of the most important aspect of a MMORPG is the social aspect it is what separates it from a standard solo game. Cities are to small with very little to do in them, and there are just not very many places for people to gather in large groups."
Thats what bridges are for i guess :)

[Archived Post]

To use an example, STO has the same number of factions (and far more races) than WoW.... :D

However, I totally agree that different members cultures should be fleshed out.

[Archived Post]

To use an example, STO has the same number of factions (and far more races) than WoW.... :D

However, I totally agree that different members cultures should be fleshed out.

The fleshing out of the different races is what I was primarily implying. I was just going through the forums today trying to see if I could pick out the direction they are taking this game. This thread is just me venting some frustration with the fact that if I did not no better I would say that Cryptic has no idea what a MMORPG is. So sorry for the general tone of the post:D

[Archived Post]

The fleshing out of the different races is what I was primarily implying. I was just going through the forums today trying to see if I could pick out the direction they are taking this game. This thread is just me venting some frustration with the fact that if I did not no better I would say that Cryptic has no idea what a MMORPG is. So sorry for the general tone of the post:D

Ive always thought it would be nice to start out at different points with different races. Like if your Vulcan and after the initial tutorial you must return to Vulcan for some Vulcan specific quests. All the main races in the character creator could have these. Quests that take you home and help give a back story on where you are from.

[Archived Post]

Er... WoW has two playable factions and soon to be twelve races. I think STO could take notes on WoW in a lot of ways (it defines what most people see an MMO as being, IMHO) but I think, by design, STO is supposed to have more factions with less faction exclusive content each. And it has two factions right now.

So I'm a bit puzzled.

[Archived Post]

1 I would like to see the class structures become more like other MMORPGs. For instance: your Tactical Officers should be your Warrior/Rogue archetypes, Science Officers should be your Mage/Priest/Healer types, and Engineering Officers your Crafting/Explosive types. Now these would not necessarily mean you would have to stick to one of these areas for your character, but it would help create more uses for divergent classes; as the game stands now everybody could be a Tactical Officer and you rely would not even notice to much of a difference. With better defined classes you get better defined roles for players, and which in turn increases the role playing elements of the game.

I realize fantasy MMOs are comfortable. So it's not that surprising to see a suggestion like this.

But I think you need to step out of the box. And accept STO for what it's trying to do with its own class structure. It's trying to stay more faithful to the star trek genre. It's keeping things a bit simpler (overlap in gameplay mechanic role kills every single fantasy based MMORPG because they're all based on a flawed D&D system and that always comes around to bite them in the butt) ... and the way your captain "role" interacts with your ship ... means the traditional square peg won't fit into this game's round hole anyways.

I mean right off the bat, you yourself are mashing warriors and rogues into a single archetype and that's ... not how most fantasy MMOs do it. Asking this game to do that is creating a balance issue. That this game does not need.

I appreciate your desire to play something more comfortable. I do. I get where you're coming from.

But it won't fit this game. It will do more harm than good. This is one instance where I think you just need to buck up and go with Cryptic. They made the right call on how they designed their classes. The foundation is good. The roles are different. The gameplay is different.

Let them build on what they have.

And leave the sword and sorcery tropes for the sword and sorcery games.

[Archived Post]

I realize fantasy MMOs are comfortable. So it's not that surprising to see a suggestion like this.

*snip*

Let them build on what they have.

And leave the sword and sorcery tropes for the sword and sorcery games.

This. Definitely this. Good response.

[Archived Post]

MMO - yes...sort of Massive Multiplayer Online

MMORPG ? - nope Massive Multiplayer Online (Role Playing Game) It is not a RPG, it is a multiplayer
combat simulator.

> no immersion < a requirement for an RPG

[Archived Post]

ST-O is no RPG. Coupled with the highly instanced sectors there is no need to work together to get quests done, exept the Radisodes.

[Archived Post]

It seems to me that the RPG aspect of a game is really, really subjective. If one spends all of one's personal time Roleplaying, then yes, it's an RPG. If you never do, than any MMO is a 'combat simulator'. Especially for those who constantly click through quest texts just to see the next objective and ignore what story is there.

Just because its highly instanced doesn't mean it can't have roleplaying aspect. I don't see the correlation. Does that mean single player RPG's aren't RPG's because there is no cooperation to get quests done? I don't see the logic.

[Archived Post]

1 I would like to see the class structures become more like other MMORPGs. For instance: your Tactical Officers should be your Warrior/Rogue archetypes, Science Officers should be your Mage/Priest/Healer types, and Engineering Officers your Crafting/Explosive types. Now these would not necessarily mean you would have to stick to one of these areas for your character, but it would help create more uses for divergent classes; as the game stands now everybody could be a Tactical Officer and you rely would not even notice to much of a difference. With better defined classes you get better defined roles for players, and which in turn increases the role playing elements of the game.



Using WOW as you said, we're all pretty much paladins, and our ship is the choice of armour we wear, be it healer, tank or dps.
Superchum got it pretty much spot on with his post, though I would agree with you that some class divergence would be nice, but more in a path separation sense of quest lines rather than converting the game to follow the classic trinity.
Priests were hellish to level in wow before shadow was properly implemented. Now imagine playing a science ship that required you to party just to be able to complete missions. Not good.

[Archived Post]

I realize fantasy MMOs are comfortable. So it's not that surprising to see a suggestion like this.

But I think you need to step out of the box. And accept STO for what it's trying to do with its own class structure. It's trying to stay more faithful to the star trek genre. It's keeping things a bit simpler (overlap in gameplay mechanic role kills every single fantasy based MMORPG because they're all based on a flawed D&D system and that always comes around to bite them in the butt) ... and the way your captain "role" interacts with your ship ... means the traditional square peg won't fit into this game's round hole anyways.

I mean right off the bat, you yourself are mashing warriors and rogues into a single archetype and that's ... not how most fantasy MMOs do it. Asking this game to do that is creating a balance issue. That this game does not need.

I appreciate your desire to play something more comfortable. I do. I get where you're coming from.

But it won't fit this game. It will do more harm than good. This is one instance where I think you just need to buck up and go with Cryptic. They made the right call on how they designed their classes. The foundation is good. The roles are different. The gameplay is different.

Let them build on what they have.

And leave the sword and sorcery tropes for the sword and sorcery games.

I am not looking for a sword and sorcery game I am looking For a MMORPG. This game has very little role playing elements, an extremely limited social aspect to it, and PvP is nothing more than team deathmatch. I used the other games to demonstrate what they did right; it was not my goal to "pigeonhole" the developers into making a WoW clone with Star TREK on it. As far as the classes go I am simply looking for more class distinction; there is very little distinction at the moment, and makes playing different classes just a tad pointless. My problem lies with the fact that Cryptic has not made much of an effort to create an imersive MMORPG environment the foundation is there I just want to see more of effort made to make it more of a MMORPG and less of a singleplayer game. And as far as stepping out of the box comment I would just like to point out that Cryptic has yet to prove they can make a good MMORPG let alone an innovative one.

[Archived Post]

Ive always thought it would be nice to start out at different points with different races. Like if your Vulcan and after the initial tutorial you must return to Vulcan for some Vulcan specific quests. All the main races in the character creator could have these. Quests that take you home and help give a back story on where you are from.

An interesting idea, but what do you do with all the player-created aliens? Dump them in Starfleet Academy with the humans?

[Archived Post]

1 I would like to see the class structures become more like other MMORPGs. For instance: your Tactical Officers should be your Warrior/Rogue archetypes, Science Officers should be your Mage/Priest/Healer types, and Engineering Officers your Crafting/Explosive types. Now these would not necessarily mean you would have to stick to one of these areas for your character, but it would help create more uses for divergent classes; as the game stands now everybody could be a Tactical Officer and you rely would not even notice to much of a difference. With better defined classes you get better defined roles for players, and which in turn increases the role playing elements of the game.

I'm not sure what STO you are playing but the classes are very defined. What is missing is the trinity is not hard coded in STO's game play THANK THE FRIK GOD!

Don't you even start wishing a NGE style reformatting on this game. Cryptic should not listen to people with the "trinity" mentality. Listening to them would ruin one of the best parts of this MMORPG... The little bit of freedom we have in character progression.

[Archived Post]

In response to the OP:

1) A MMORPG doesn't need the "Holy Trinity." A MMORPG can be a MMORPG without that.

2) There are plenty of ways that people can socialize in game. And there are plenty of places where guild members can come together to socialize. Just because you don't have a guild hall doesn't mean that you can't get together and meet somewhere else.

And finally, this game is an MMORPG. First it is Massively Multiplayer. One server means that everyone on the entire planet that is playing this game is playing it together. If your guild is having problems socializing together then perhaps you can create your own private channel or take other steps to remain in contact with each other.

And not an RPG? Just like any RPG, the role playing comes from the players that role play. You can role play in STO as much as you want. It's not the devs fault if you choose not to do so.

Just because STO isn't like WoW, and just because you're unable to adapt to a different kind of game doesn't mean that STO isn't an MMORPG.

[Archived Post]

In response to the OP:

1) A MMORPG doesn't need the "Holy Trinity." A MMORPG can be a MMORPG without that.

2) There are plenty of ways that people can socialize in game. And there are plenty of places where guild members can come together to socialize. Just because you don't have a guild hall doesn't mean that you can't get together and meet somewhere else.

And finally, this game is an MMORPG. First it is Massively Multiplayer. One server means that everyone on the entire planet that is playing this game is playing it together. If your guild is having problems socializing together then perhaps you can create your own private channel or take other steps to remain in contact with each other.

And not an RPG? Just like any RPG, the role playing comes from the players that role play. You can role play in STO as much as you want. It's not the devs fault if you choose not to do so.

Just because STO isn't like WoW, and just because you're unable to adapt to a different kind of game doesn't mean that STO isn't an MMORPG.

You're correct on all account except for the roleplaying bit. Technically, a game is considered to be a roleplaying game if it includes a legitimate amount of character customization in terms of skills and abilities. For some odd reason, the gaming industry decided that skill-point allotment was more akin to roleplaying than a diverse, persistent world where your actions effect the game.

[Archived Post]

You're correct on all account except for the roleplaying bit. Technically, a game is considered to be a roleplaying game if it includes a legitimate amount of character customization in terms of skills and abilities. For some odd reason, the gaming industry decided that skill-point allotment was more akin to roleplaying than a diverse, persistent world where your actions effect the game.

Actually the definition of RPG as a game format is all about character progression. The "diverse, persistent world where your actions effect the game" is not part of the traditional definition. This actually has arisen in relation to technologically unreasonable desires of players in single and multiplayer computer/console RPGs over the last few year. It has never been achieved, not really.

The traditional definition first identifies the idea that success and failure are dependent on actions made by a character being resolved through some kind of statistical system of determination. Secondly, the traditional definition identifies the ability for a player to make progression decisions that enhance or advance a character's ability to succeed in that statistical system of determination as well as choose additional capabilities/abilities at benchmarks in the progression, enhancement, or advancement of a character.

It is true that a GM for a pen and paper RPG can make the decision to institute world persistence beyond the character-sheet but, strictly speaking, that is not part of the mechanics or rule-set of any RPG I know of. I was the manager of a game shop for many years. If there was one, I am sure I would have known of it.

[Archived Post]

Actually the definition of RPG as a game format is all about character progression. The "diverse, persistent world where your actions effect the game" is not part of the traditional definition. This actually has arisen in relation to technologically unreasonable desires of players in single and multiplayer computer/console RPGs over the last few year. It has never been achieved, not really.

The traditional definition first identifies the idea that success and failure are dependent on actions made by a character being resolved through some kind of statistical system of determination. Secondly, the traditional definition identifies the ability for a player to make progression decisions that enhance or advance a character's ability to succeed in that statistical system of determination as well as choose additional capabilities/abilities at benchmarks in the progression, enhancement, or advancement of a character.

It is true that a GM for a pen and paper RPG can make the decision to institute world persistence beyond the character-sheet but, strictly speaking, that is not part of the mechanics or rule-set of any RPG I know of. I was the manager of a game shop for many years. If there was one, I am sure I would have known of it.

If progression was all that matters then I could call Sonic the Hedgehog A RPG which it obviously is not. All I have been Saying is this game is considerably lacking in the social and rpg elements when compared to most other MMORPGs

[Archived Post]

I think where people get hung up on is that the mechanics for traditionally defined "roles" in other games are distributed among the three professions in this game. This requires people to be aware of the OTHER things they can do in their ship to help the team.

Yes, escorts cause damage. That is their purpose. But that doesn't mean they can ignore abilities such as emergency power to shields, auxiliary to SIF, or engineering team in their engineering station or ignore polarize hull, tachyon beam, jam sensors, or scramble targeting sensors in their science station. My brother flies an escort and when I got him to start using his other abilities effectively his survivability went up and he no longer "needed" me to keep him alive during STF missions.

The other downfall of this game is that grouping isn't required and although not actively discouraged, there is no reason to group as the content is very easy. So players are used to soloing and then get to STF missions and are forced to group, have NO idea what they are doing. They have no idea how to behave in a group dynamic or what abilities work well for a group and when to use them to help a group out.

This leads to a fairly disastrous endgame where nothing seems to work. Most people take a look at the mechanics and decide that "if it were only like WoW/EQ, we wouldn't have this problem." I can understand that, and they may even have a point, but I think a better approach is to understand how the game mechanics work within the context of the game.

Cryptic needs to be way more open about how this game is radically different from other games. Otherwise, folks play, and without an explanation, it certainly feels like Cryptic "got it wrong". I wonder how much they would be helped by coming out and saying, "Hey guys, we did it this way on purpose, you are supposed to use every ability at your disposal and fill in for other roles at a moments notice in space combat. That is the way this game works and that is the way it was designed to work. if you pigeon-hole yourself, you are gimping yourself."

[Archived Post]

I think where people get hung up on is that the mechanics for traditionally defined "roles" in other games are distributed among the three professions in this game. This requires people to be aware of the OTHER things they can do in their ship to help the team.

Yes, escorts cause damage. That is their purpose. But that doesn't mean they can ignore abilities such as emergency power to shields, auxiliary to SIF, or engineering team in their engineering station or ignore polarize hull, tachyon beam, jam sensors, or scramble targeting sensors in their science station. My brother flies an escort and when I got him to start using his other abilities effectively his survivability went up and he no longer "needed" me to keep him alive during STF missions.

The other downfall of this game is that grouping isn't required and although not actively discouraged, there is no reason to group as the content is very easy. So players are used to soloing and then get to STF missions and are forced to group, have NO idea what they are doing. They have no idea how to behave in a group dynamic or what abilities work well for a group and when to use them to help a group out.

This leads to a fairly disastrous endgame where nothing seems to work. Most people take a look at the mechanics and decide that "if it were only like WoW/EQ, we wouldn't have this problem." I can understand that, and they may even have a point, but I think a better approach is to understand how the game mechanics work within the context of the game.

Cryptic needs to be way more open about how this game is radically different from other games. Otherwise, folks play, and without an explanation, it certainly feels like Cryptic "got it wrong". I wonder how much they would be helped by coming out and saying, "Hey guys, we did it this way on purpose, you are supposed to use every ability at your disposal and fill in for other roles at a moments notice in space combat. That is the way this game works and that is the way it was designed to work. if you pigeon-hole yourself, you are gimping yourself."

Finally somebody who gets it! This is what I have been talking about all along albeit probably a little less elegantly than you did.

[Archived Post]

what is and is not an RPG, good question

it can be subjective to a point.

Best to give an example, lets use pen and paper/table top games as an example

D+D is RPG
Star Fleet Battles is not
Star trek the role playing game is RPG
War Hammer table top minitures is not.

what is the difference?

D+D = interact, fight, fight, interact, fight, interact and such
SFB = set up, fight fight fight, done
ST roleplaying game = interact, interact, fight, interact, fight interact
War hammer table top = set up, fight fight fight, done

so, what pattern is 90+% of STO missions ?

STO = get mission, fight fight fight collect reward.

so what is STO ?

A strategic combat simulator with an mmo/rpg skin UI for setting up the next battle.

is it an MMORPG ? nope.
it is an mmo-combat simulator with multiplayer play.

in an mmorpg...mission combat/questline combat is for a purpose. Get furs to make something,
stop a madman from releasing a deadly virus...whatever

in an MMO/ combat simulator, mission combat has little or no purpose ..kill them, they are enemy
and you get a reward for killing them.

[Archived Post]

ST-O is no RPG. Coupled with the highly instanced sectors there is no need to work together to get quests done, exept the Radisodes.

I think this is a good thing. That is the one thing I always hated about MMO's is that you eventually hit the point where you HAVE to form groups to get things done. Some people just log in to play, not wait around to find enough people to maybe have a chance to complete a quest.

[Archived Post]

now I am not saying that if someone LIKES MMO/combat simulators..that they would not like this game.

They prob would. But if your looking for a sci-fi RPG....this is not it.

[Archived Post]

To use WoW as an example,

I stopped reading right here.

WoW is WoW

STO is STO

Accept it and move on...

Cryptic is making stuff for this game that they feel is right for it, not because of something Blizzard is doing or has done with WoW...

Its really that simple.

[Archived Post]

I stopped reading right here.

WoW is WoW

STO is STO

Accept it and move on...

Cryptic is making stuff for this game that they feel is right for it, not because of something Blizzard is doing or has done with WoW...

Its really that simple.

In order to decide what constitutes good or bad one needs a point of reference. As far as the general gaming community is concerned WoW is the standard for what is expected in a MMORPG; that is why I chose it for the comparison. I at no time said Cryptic needed to copy WoW, but by the comparison I did imply that they needed to look at what Blizzard did to make WoW such a successful and fun game. I would like to see Cryptic emulate more of Blizzards phylosophy; which is start out to make a good game. By Cryptic's own admission they did not start out to make a good MMORPG, but to make a good Star Trek game. I believe that this way of thinking is backwards. In the effort to make a good Star Trek game we got a mediocre MMORPG at best; whereas if they had decided to make a great MMORPG we would have got an excellent Star Trek game.

[Archived Post]

In order to decide what constitutes good or bad one needs a point of reference. As far as the general gaming community is concerned WoW is the standard for what is expected in a MMORPG; that is why I chose it for the comparison.

I understand that. And in all honesty, THAT is the problem... Over the past several years we have been promised "WoW-killers" from varrious MMO developers, many of whom actually turn their games into CLONES of WoW, believing that to be the key to competing with WoW. It's funny that the only WoW-style MMO that is truly successful is WoW.

That's why I am glad that STO is nothing like WoW by design. And because of that it is wrong to use WoW as even a baseline comparrison.

It's apples to oranges.

I at no time said Cryptic needed to copy WoW, but by the comparison I did imply that they needed to look at what Blizzard did to make WoW such a successful and fun game. I would like to see Cryptic emulate more of Blizzards phylosophy; which is start out to make a good game.

It's not like they started out to make a bad game. Most of what they wanted to do and tried to do is excellent from a conceptual standpoint. The were not given enough time to flesh it out and make everything work. They are trying to make ammends for that. But even fully dedicated to new content and features the time requirements are massive, hence why things that were supposed to be in season 1 are likely not going to show up until season 2, with season 2 material likely being pushed back to season 3.

I don't WANT them to follow any other developer's example. I want them to be a developer with the courage to stand on their own and let STO be its own game. Not yet another MMO foreshadowed by World of ********.

By Cryptic's own admission they did not start out to make a good MMORPG, but to make a good Star Trek game. I believe that this way of thinking is backwards. In the effort to make a good Star Trek game we got a mediocre MMORPG at best; whereas if they had decided to make a great MMORPG we would have got an excellent Star Trek game.

No. they got it in the right order. In order to have a great Star Trek MMO, Star Trek needs to be at the core. I'm not talking about adherence to canon so much as adherence to theme. They fell short of the mark on that, again because of the time constraints. I think that had they been given a full development cycle, then the missions they would have written would have been a lot more involved and there would have been a lot more variety. It's almost as if what we got was thrown together with a lick and a promise. Hence all the blow up everything that moves aspect. But combat is a key element in MMOs, so naturally it had to be a priority. But it's all they had time for.

WoW is a great game in its own right. But it is long past time for the industry to get over WoW.

Every time a new MMO is announced, one of the first demands on its official forums is for the game to not be made like WoW. MMO players are tired of WoW and WoW clones. They want something new.

For some of us, STO is that something new. It's rough around the edges, It's got a lot of empty space. But the developers believe in it, and are doing all they can to make it better. It's a different kind of MMO. And that is what interests me most.

[Archived Post]

Well I hate to burst your bubble but WoW has done absolutely nothing in the way of innovation. They've simply taken what its predecessors have done and made it larger.

To be honest, in the decade plus of playing MMO's, I'm bored to tears of the typical fantasy, sword and magic type games that make up the majority of the market. That alone is reason enough for me to find this game more superior than WoW, though there's more to it than that.

Most of the other MMO's, including WoW are nothing but a giant grindfest that you need to put in so many hours that it becomes a job instead of a form of entertainment. STO is pretty much the antithesis of that which I guarantee you is what more and more gamers are looking for these days. You can log in, do a mission or two and not feel like it will take you ages to get anything accomplished.

So instead of asking for something similar, be thankful there's variety.

[Archived Post]

Every time a new MMO is announced, one of the first demands on its official forums is for the game to not be made like WoW. MMO players are tired of WoW and WoW clones. They want something new.



The main problem I have with this quote is if MMORPG players are rely tired of WoW it would not still be the number one subscribed to MMORPG. I also never said WoW was innovative, but it is obvious it took the best parts of other games to make a truly excellent game. For the record I do not want a WoW clone not at all; if I wanted that I would just keep playing WoW. I would just like Cryptic to spend more time on the MMO part and a little less on the singleplayer part.

[Archived Post]

The main problem I have with this quote is if MMORPG players are rely tired of WoW it would not still be the number one subscribed to MMORPG.

There are factors involved that go beyond the simple gameplay. Certain actions taken by the company in regards to turning a blind eye to gold farming and third party selling helps to maintain very large subscriber numbers. Also the game is quite popular in other countries. Some of those countries are also rampantly utilizing third party selling businesses.

Just because WoW has such a huge number, doesn't mean your comparison works. This game actively discourages third party transactions. That does have a negative impact on its subscriber numbers.

[Archived Post]

There are factors involved that go beyond the simple gameplay. Certain actions taken by the company in regards to turning a blind eye to gold farming and third party selling helps to maintain very large subscriber numbers. Also the game is quite popular in other countries. Some of those countries are also rampantly utilizing third party selling businesses.

Just because WoW has such a huge number, doesn't mean your comparison works. This game actively discourages third party transactions. That does have a negative impact on its subscriber numbers.

While I do not doubt the veracity of your claims; I would like to point there would not be gold farmers if there was not a very strong and reletivilly large fan base. As well as the fact they add new subscribers almost daily. To put it plainly as many people who play the game would not play it if it was not for the gameplay mechanics. If gameplay is not the main reason WoW is so successful while all these new supposedly revolutionary MMORPGs are not as successful than what is.

[Archived Post]

This game isn't ever going to approach WoW numbers.

But, if it turned a blind eye to third party sellers, it's sub numbers would be quite a bit higher.

WoW's sub numbers are affected by their treatment of that aspect of the industry. That's all I'm saying.

[Archived Post]

This game isn't ever going to approach WoW numbers.

But, if it turned a blind eye to third party sellers, it's sub numbers would be quite a bit higher.

WoW's sub numbers are affected by their treatment of that aspect of the industry. That's all I'm saying.

Yes but to say it is the main factor for their sub numbers is turning a blind eye to their accomplishments as a game developer period.
I would like to leave WoW behind and try to keep this thread on topic; which is the lack of MMORPG content and the over emphasis of singleplayer experience.

[Archived Post]

Yes but to say it is the main factor for their sub numbers is turning a blind eye to their accomplishments as a game developer period.
I would like to leave WoW behind and try to keep this thread on topic; which is the lack of MMORPG content and the over emphasis of singleplayer experience.

I don't think I said it was the main factor. Just that it was a factor.

To get a better picture of WoW's playerbase for comparison's sake, you need to focus just on the playerbase from your country of origin. And then compare it to whatever other game's playerbase from the same country is. And then you need to choose a number ratio for gold farmers. A conservative number (due to round the clock shifts) might be 3 of them for every 1 person actually playing and raiding and enjoying the game as a game instead of a job.

That's a super conservative path. But it does make my point that the numbers from WoW aren't as impressive as they're always made out to be.

I won't even get into the mental gymnastics required to figure out THIS game's subscriber base, since it's allllll hearsay and conjecture mined from vague statements made by company employees.

[Archived Post]

Yes but to say it is the main factor for their sub numbers is turning a blind eye to their accomplishments as a game developer period.
I would like to leave WoW behind and try to keep this thread on topic; which is the lack of MMORPG content and the over emphasis of singleplayer experience.
So the fact that you're not forced to team is why you don't think that this is a MMORPG?

Once again I'll point out: It IS a Massively Multiplayer Game. Everyone on the entire planet Earth is playing the game on the same server that you are.

And the RPG part comes from you. If you want to role play then role play. I do it all the time.

Like I said, just because this game is different than Wow, and you are unable to cope with that, does NOT mean that it's not a MMORPG.

[Archived Post]

While I do not doubt the veracity of your claims; I would like to point there would not be gold farmers if there was not a very strong and reletivilly large fan base. As well as the fact they add new subscribers almost daily. To put it plainly as many people who play the game would not play it if it was not for the gameplay mechanics. If gameplay is not the main reason WoW is so successful while all these new supposedly revolutionary MMORPGs are not as successful than what is.

You're right, wow's game mechanics are such that anyone with a significant time investment must continue to play in order to remain competitive in order to play. Blizzard created a nice vicious circle with their mechanics. Couple that with the time wow was released, being almost the only decent accessible game in town, and also with a very strong following for ******** 3, and those things make wow what it is.
You can ask yourself then, is it fun game mechanics that now sustain wow, or is it the grind itself? I left wow just before ICC as a tank, and I know now that I couldn't return immediately to that role if I resubcribed

For those that aren't in a raid guild, especially a progressive one, they're left with the repetitive dailies and 5 man grinds which tbh would be no different to what we have in STO. There's just more of them. Is that a fun game mechanic? Some I'm sure say yes, but most clamour for exactly the things people do here....more content.

As for the success or not of new MMOs in the wake of wow, you can see how someone with a significant time investment in wow might be reluctant to leave in favour of a new MMO for more than a cursory glance. Warhammer is a good example (though terrible anyway imo). There was a mass exodus from wow when warhammer was released, but it didn't last more than a couple of weeks, then everyone was back (or most).

STO's gameplay mechanics are solid IMO, once you get past the over abundance of killing which is not really what Star Trek is about, and that is being rectified to a degree anyway. The saying goes that the worst thing about any MMO is the players, and that's no different here. We're in the 'I want it now' generation, something Blizzard have catered to more and more as time has gone on in wow. This is a good thing for those that might not reach the harder end game raids, but it also creates a game that seems of little substance. This is shown in STO by the speed of levelling and lack of difficulty in obtaining anything beyond the norm in items, but if it wasn't the case, there'd be just as many threads crying for xp increses to make levelling easier, and alternate ways to obtain special items that hardcore players could get but casuals couldn't.

[Archived Post]

So the fact that you're not forced to team is why you don't think that this is a MMORPG?

Once again I'll point out: It IS a Massively Multiplayer Game. Everyone on the entire planet Earth is playing the game on the same server that you are.

And the RPG part comes from you. If you want to role play then role play. I do it all the time.

Like I said, just because this game is different than Wow, and you are unable to cope with that, does NOT mean that it's not a MMORPG.

People around the world are playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 at this very moment it does not make that game a MMORPG; it is a singleplayer game with some co-op and a team deathmatch mode, and I am saying that is all STO is at the moment as well. And I have said time and again that I was only comparing to WoW because it is considered a MMORPG and if STO is a MMORPG than I should compare it with another one. I do not have a problem with STO being different I just believe it is lacking in the MMORPG department.

[Archived Post]

I do not have a problem with STO being different I just believe it is lacking in the MMORPG department.
Well I definitely agree with you that STO is lacking in content. In fact I'm fairly certain that most people agree with us on that.

As I said, and as you yourself showed with your CoD example, STO is still a MMORPG. Just one that still needs a lot of work.

[Archived Post]

People around the world are playing Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 at this very moment it does not make that game a MMORPG; it is a singleplayer game with some co-op and a team deathmatch mode, and I am saying that is all STO is at the moment as well. And I have said time and again that I was only comparing to WoW because it is considered a MMORPG and if STO is a MMORPG than I should compare it with another one. I do not have a problem with STO being different I just believe it is lacking in the MMORPG department.

Last time I checked, WoW was making the game more casual friendly because the majority of players are tired of the entire raid mentality that many MMO's (most of all, WoW itself) possess. This is the driving force behind MMO's now and by your own logic, that means they are not an MMORPG.

You can level up your WoW character to the cap and not once ever need a single person to help you. Your definition of what makes an MMORPG is very skewed.

[Archived Post]

That's pretty unfair to lump STO in with COD.
However you look at it, COD is not massive multiplayer online, STO is. COD is adversarial match specific pvp, STO is a persistent universe with as many player inhabitants as log on at any one time.

STO may not (yet) as massive (inhabitant-wise) as you or I might like it, but it is still an MMO, and the multiplayer part doesn't mean you must be constantly grouped for this game to qualify. It's there for the choosing or not.

As for rpg, well Falcon was right. That's up to the player's individually. The opportunity is there for RP, you just have to make it happen. In fact, it doesn't even necessarily have to be with another player. If you consider a particular BO of yours to be your first officer as I do, that in a sense is RP.

Ergo: STO is an MMORPG

[Archived Post]

Pro-tip: Grow where you enjoy the scenery and you'll be there a while.

I've seen communities thrive (from RP in SWG on Starsider and Wanderhome), sometimes in the worst circumstances (anyone checked out Vanguard's post-launch development? there are still communities there, I enjoy that game, but the development on that is virtually dead).

[Archived Post]

That's pretty unfair to lump STO in with COD.
However you look at it, COD is not massive multiplayer online, STO is. COD is adversarial match specific pvp, STO is a persistent universe with as many player inhabitants as log on at any one time.

STO may not (yet) as massive (inhabitant-wise) as you or I might like it, but it is still an MMO, and the multiplayer part doesn't mean you must be constantly grouped for this game to qualify. It's there for the choosing or not.

As for rpg, well Falcon was right. That's up to the player's individually. The opportunity is there for RP, you just have to make it happen. In fact, it doesn't even necessarily have to be with another player. If you consider a particular BO of yours to be your first officer as I do, that in a sense is RP.

Ergo: STO is an MMORPG

The point I was trying to make is just because there is a multilayer portion to the game does not necessarily mean it is a MMORPG. Yes I will agree that STO is a MMORPG in the strictest since. What I would like to point out is the lack of defined structure and diversity in the classes, a lack of social areas(ie... guild halls, living breathing cities), as well as the fact that quest rely are not that fleshed out. As far as RPG aspect of the game goes I think a good example would be games like Eve, Diablo, Dungeons and Dragons, Mass Effect, Fallout, Wharhhammer Online, Star Wars Galaxy, Everquest, ****, and Perfect World. All those games give the player the ability to effect the environment around them.

[Archived Post]

The point I was trying to make is just because there is a multilayer portion to the game does not necessarily mean it is a MMORPG. Yes I will agree that STO is a MMORPG in the strictest since. What I would like to point out is the lack of defined structure and diversity in the classes, a lack of social areas(ie... guild halls, living breathing cities), as well as the fact that quest rely are not that fleshed out. As far as RPG aspect of the game goes I think a good example would be games like Eve, Diablo, Dungeons and Dragons, Mass Effect, Fallout, Wharhhammer Online, Star Wars Galaxy, Everquest, ****, and Perfect World. All those games give the player the ability to effect the environment around them.
I think STO does a great job of being a more-or-less classless system. There are class and some would prefer better defined roles (I'd just like more class-specific powers) and others want class to factor less and have access to anything (many skill cap removers are of this mindset).

I think persistence can be achieved in STO - even with the instances. Fleet starbases and team-built ships sound like great ideas in the pipeline, giving a greater emphasis on community (but not necessarily teamwork).

The fleet calendar and event planning features were welcome - they'll go a long way toward giving a sense of time and place (which are a big part of persistence).

[Archived Post]

The point I was trying to make is just because there is a multilayer portion to the game does not necessarily mean it is a MMORPG. Yes I will agree that STO is a MMORPG in the strictest since.
I'm glad that we agree on this.

What I would like to point out is the lack of defined structure and diversity in the classes, a lack of social areas(ie... guild halls, living breathing cities), as well as the fact that quest rely are not that fleshed out.
And as I have pointed out, none of those things are necessary. They do not make a game an MMO. Some MMOs have well defined class structures and roles, others do not. This game is different from the one that you played before. It's not "WoW in space", and many of us are happy that it is not.

If you don't like the fact that STO doesn't have well defined classes then just say that, but claiming that it's not a MMORPG, or that it's not a "real MMORPG" just because it doesn't have the things that you liked in your last game is like me saying, "It's not a real car because it doesn't have a V-8." An 8 cylinder engine is no more a requirement for a car than well defined class roles are for MMORPGs.

[Archived Post]

The point I was trying to make is just because there is a multilayer portion to the game does not necessarily mean it is a MMORPG. Yes I will agree that STO is a MMORPG in the strictest since. What I would like to point out is the lack of defined structure and diversity in the classes, a lack of social areas(ie... guild halls, living breathing cities), as well as the fact that quest rely are not that fleshed out. As far as RPG aspect of the game goes I think a good example would be games like Eve, Diablo, Dungeons and Dragons, Mass Effect, Fallout, Wharhhammer online, Star wars galaxy, Everquest. All those games give the player the ability to effect the environment around them.

On most of that I would agree with you.
I'd like to see a thriving Starfleet headquarters that isn't just functional the way spacedock is. We need quest hubs also, rather than clicking the hail button.

Some improvements could well be made with the addition of UGC. I hope (and probably in vain) that we could do more than just a warp in > start quest > follow quest line > end and warp out.
What if we could actually ake a planet with a community with multiple quest givers where a player could spend a little time instead of getting through it as fast as possible. What about revisits to the same UGC planet with new quest updates? Now add the option to make this an open instance area.
To further explain, and I hate to go back to WOW; when you go to somewhere like westfall, you aren't added into someone else's quest chain at the point they are at the way you are in STO. You pick things up as you go and other people are doing things at their pace too. That's the vibrancy that STO lacks.

[Archived Post]

I think STO does a great job of being a more-or-less classless system.

How to post this without sounding like a complete and total kiss up.

Presbytier ... if you get nothing else out of this discussion/thread you've created, please at least take a moment to click on some of the links in Darren's signature.

He's organized some threads that really delve into some stuff I think you'd be very interested in reading after reading your own posts here.

The potential discussion that could arise out of that, would be good for the forums I'd say.

[Archived Post]

there is no point in comparing STO to wow

wow is an RPG...more or less
STO isn't

2 completely different play styles

STO has more in common with Quake online then wow.

[Archived Post]

wow is an RPG...more or less
STO isn't
Normally I agree with you on most things.

Can you please explain why you think STO isn't an RPG? Is there something about STO that prevents you from role playing?

[Archived Post]

I realize fantasy MMOs are comfortable. So it's not that surprising to see a suggestion like this.

But I think you need to step out of the box. And accept STO for what it's trying to do with its own class structure. It's trying to stay more faithful to the star trek genre. It's keeping things a bit simpler (overlap in gameplay mechanic role kills every single fantasy based MMORPG because they're all based on a flawed D&D system and that always comes around to bite them in the butt) ... and the way your captain "role" interacts with your ship ... means the traditional square peg won't fit into this game's round hole anyways.

I mean right off the bat, you yourself are mashing warriors and rogues into a single archetype and that's ... not how most fantasy MMOs do it. Asking this game to do that is creating a balance issue. That this game does not need.

I appreciate your desire to play something more comfortable. I do. I get where you're coming from.

But it won't fit this game. It will do more harm than good. This is one instance where I think you just need to buck up and go with Cryptic. They made the right call on how they designed their classes. The foundation is good. The roles are different. The gameplay is different.

Let them build on what they have.

And leave the sword and sorcery tropes for the sword and sorcery games.

I say that Cryptic should define thier own archetypes/races and how they interact without being enslaved to prior MMO thinking.

[Archived Post]

Normally I agree with you on most things.

Can you please explain why you think STO isn't an RPG? Is there something about STO that prevents you from role playing?

well I did on another post but can do the short form

RPGs generally play out

interact, fight, interact, interact, fight ect..

non-RPG strategic games generally go

prep, fight, fight, fight, reward.....rinse and repeat


so why is STO a strategic game and not an RPG ?
90+% of missions fall under the second model

so what STO is = a interactive 'chat room' with RPG elements, but the game play itself is
almost pure strategy game

.... basically a multiplayer strategy game...pretending to be an RPG

I cannot call a MMO thats 90-95% strategy game and 5% rpg...an rpg game, it isn't
It is a strategy game, pure and simple.

a more humorus view

If you order a diet coke with your 3000 cal. piece of creme pie ---just because you got the
diet coke in there doesn't make it a low fat meal :p

[Archived Post]

well I did on another post but can do the short form

RPGs generally play out

interact, fight, interact, interact, fight ect..

non-RPG strategic games generally go

prep, fight, fight, fight, reward.....rinse and repeat


so why is STO a strategic game and not an RPG ?
90+% of missions fall under the second model

so what STO is = a interactive 'chat room' with RPG elements, but the game play itself is
almost pure strategy game

.... basically a multiplayer strategy game...pretending to be an RPG

I cannot call a MMO thats 90-95% strategy game and 5% rpg...an rpg game, it isn't
It is a strategy game, pure and simple.

a more humorus view

If you order a diet coke with your 3000 cal. piece of creme pie ---just because you got the
diet coke in there doesn't make it a low fat meal :p


Im still not seeing the part where you are prevented from RP'ing.

[Archived Post]

I've read this thread and I really don't agree much with the OP. I also won't argue as to what RPG means. To those of us like myself, the RPG aspect has a certain meaning. To people who have no concept as to what the roleplay playstyle is, RPG elements mean something totally dissimilar.

I think STO has a lot of great RPG elements. Could it have more? Yes. However, if this game -EVER- tries to implement the whole tank/healer/DPS class system.... I will unsub so fast my router will catch on fire.

I left WoW, many years ago, for a good reason. Those types of MMOs are in massive decline. WoW is an exception, not a rule. Look around the MMO world. ***, declining. LotRO, going f2p. DDO, small and F2P. ****, nearly dead on arrival. RF Online... dead, ****...dead. EQ2, alive but very declined from a year ago even.

When you have nearly every MMO in the fantasy genre basically using the same game mechanics... in the end, underneath all the big shoulderpads... they're all the same game. They are all competing with themselves for the same slice of pie. There's a good reason why myself and many others like games like STO. They're mold breaking to an extent and they do not involve cookie-cutter limited class definitions.

WoW is a good game for what it is. However, I do not like games like WoW anymore. I've been doing MMOs since 1993 and I've had my fill of the same game with updated graphics and sound. The same can also be said for a lot of us.

[Archived Post]

I've read this thread and I really don't agree much with the OP. I also won't argue as to what RPG means. To those of us like myself, the RPG aspect has a certain meaning. To people who have no concept as to what the roleplay playstyle is, RPG elements mean something totally dissimilar.

I think STO has a lot of great RPG elements. Could it have more? Yes. However, if this game -EVER- tries to implement the whole tank/healer/DPS class system.... I will unsub so fast my router will catch on fire.

I left WoW, many years ago, for a good reason. Those types of MMOs are in massive decline. WoW is an exception, not a rule. Look around the MMO world. ***, declining. LotRO, going f2p. DDO, small and F2P. ****, nearly dead on arrival. RF Online... dead, ****...dead. EQ2, alive but very declined from a year ago even.

When you have nearly every MMO in the fantasy genre basically using the same game mechanics... in the end, underneath all the big shoulderpads... they're all the same game. They are all competing with themselves for the same slice of pie. There's a good reason why myself and many others like games like STO. They're mold breaking to an extent and they do not involve cookie-cutter limited class definitions.

WoW is a good game for what it is. However, I do not like games like WoW anymore. I've been doing MMOs since 1993 and I've had my fill of the same game with updated graphics and sound. The same can also be said for a lot of us.

Quoted for truth.

[Archived Post]

First of all ... one of the great aspects in STO is, that it is NOT like other MMORPGs. Many things are different here and that is good. There are enough WoW-Clones and rip-offs out there.

You want more classes/roles?
Take a close look into the game-mechanics and the skill system. In my opinion STO has the most complex skill system of all Online Games in the market. The point is, that you need to take a second look. It is more than captain/ship-combination. The whole fitting and skill-template affects your playstyle. The key is, to know your role and find the right combination for it.

More factions?
Absolutely. After all I am sure there will be more than just Federation and Klingons. There have to be. But I guess they ran out of time and had to release after the first studio working on the licence screw it all up. Polls were made. Response has been given - it is a matter of time untill Romulans will be available.

[Archived Post]

I've read this thread and I really don't agree much with the OP. I also won't argue as to what RPG means. To those of us like myself, the RPG aspect has a certain meaning. To people who have no concept as to what the roleplay playstyle is, RPG elements mean something totally dissimilar.

I think STO has a lot of great RPG elements. Could it have more? Yes. However, if this game -EVER- tries to implement the whole tank/healer/DPS class system.... I will unsub so fast my router will catch on fire.

I left WoW, many years ago, for a good reason. Those types of MMOs are in massive decline. WoW is an exception, not a rule. Look around the MMO world. ***, declining. LotRO, going f2p. DDO, small and F2P. ****, nearly dead on arrival. RF Online... dead, ****...dead. EQ2, alive but very declined from a year ago even.

When you have nearly every MMO in the fantasy genre basically using the same game mechanics... in the end, underneath all the big shoulderpads... they're all the same game. They are all competing with themselves for the same slice of pie. There's a good reason why myself and many others like games like STO. They're mold breaking to an extent and they do not involve cookie-cutter limited class definitions.

WoW is a good game for what it is. However, I do not like games like WoW anymore. I've been doing MMOs since 1993 and I've had my fill of the same game with updated graphics and sound. The same can also be said for a lot of us.

I believe allot of people have missed my point, and I will admit that may be do to the fact I may not have been clear enough; so right know I would like to clarify myself.

1. Star Trek online is a MMORPG; that being said I do feel that the MMO part is lacking. There rely is not much in regards to social content: the game is overly instanced, the cities are relatively dead with little to do or see in them, fleets have nowhere to meet( and if you suggest the cities I have already pointed out they are just to small), and PvP is just team deathmatch.

2. Star Trek Online is a RPG, but the problem is without more class specific traits there is very little reason to partner up with others to flesh out the role playing experience. There are also no role-playing servers, and role-playing is a pain with all the spammers calling you a nerd. I do not want to see class structure like WoW either, but I do want to see a more defined class structure with more exclusive traits respectively. Also there is no real content for Klingons except PvP, which does not lend itself to role-playing. I would also like to see the Neutral Zone become a persistent war-ground where if I take my ship in there I have to keep my guard up for Klingon ambushes; that would make some excellent role-playing opportunities.

3. I will stick to my guns when pointing out the fact that Cryptic has put more emphasis on the single-player game than they have on the MMO part.

[Archived Post]

The reason why the game is so instanced is because like other games similar to STO in quality, the more stunning the graphics, the more taxing it is on system resources.

I'll use WoW again here. It is not instanced, rather threaded with easy to pass through zone boundaries. The reason that this architecture works is because WoW's system uses low polygon models and rather simple special lighting effects and other low-quality design features. Although the game is not bad looking, it is simply designed on the principle that quantity is > quality.

STO, **** and other heavily instanced games go the opposite. They use hi-polygon models, enhanced 3d effects, detailed lighting, etc. This produces high quality visuals that far surpass programs that use less intensive designs. The result is the need to instance the content. The reason is because of the users' PCs. It is not an issue of a designer not being able to produce an instance-free environment. It is an issue where users could not possibly run a game without it. As polygons increase and more avatars are loaded onto the screen, eventually, for lack of better words, critical mass is reached. It is a point where the rendering cannot be rendered fast enough and the result is terrible lag and eventually OOM errors and CTD.

So, in MMOs, designers have to decide if they want the game to look cutting edge or if they would rather be able to have a hundred people on the same screen. It is simply not possible to bring massive numbers of people together in a game like STO without instancing or without visible avatar limits.

As a gamer, your decision comes down to this: Do you want to play games that look like WoW or Warhammer? Or, do you want to play games that look like STO, ***, or LotRO? You cannot have a WoW with STO or LotRO quality graphics. It is impossible, and likely won't change anytime soon. Not until the majority of gamers are playing with PCs that cost about 20 thousand USD.

[Archived Post]

The instancing was only one of the problems I mentioned, and rely is not on the top of my priority of problems I have with the game. Even so LOTRO cities are still a lot more vibrant and lively with a strong community feel compared with STOs small claustrophobic starbases with little to do on them. The introduction of mini-games will help somewhat, but until they invest in fleshing out the planets and other locations and give a reason for people to visit them; the solo feel of the game will still persist.

[Archived Post]

Don't know what you're talking about? I see plenty of social interaction on STO. Plus i think it's a good thing that grouping isn't required to move forward in the game.

[Archived Post]

I too would like more social content, however you have to think about where this game is coming from. This is Star Trek. 90% of Star Trek took place on a starship or a major station. The other elements of the Star Trek universe just weren't fleshed out.

[Archived Post]

Don't know what you're talking about? I see plenty of social interaction on STO. Plus i think it's a good thing that grouping isn't required to move forward in the game.

I do understand that social interacting is very relative to the point of view of the individual, but there are dozens of threads pointing out the lack of social content, so based upon that observation I think I can fairly say there are a great many others who feel the same as I do. As far as the necessity of grouping goes, part of what makes a MMORPG is the teaming up with others to achieve a common goal; the way the class system currently works it neither penalizes or rewards you for working with or without a team, and whether that is good or bad is certainly left for debate.

I do like and enjoy STO; I just want to see it become a very vibrant and lively community. I have simply made suggestion that I feel would help make STO a better MMORPG. And as far as there not being much more to Star Trek than just people on a spaceship going it alone all I have to say is DS9 which had allot going on; also in TOS and TNG they where constantly interacting with different societies. I am going to list some of the things again because I know people are not going to be interested in reading past posts.


1. There rely is not much in regards to social content: the game is overly instanced, the cities are relatively dead with little to do or see in them, fleets have nowhere to meet( and if you suggest the cities I have already pointed out they are just to small), and PvP is just team deathmatch.

2. The problem with roleplaying is without more class specific traits there is very little reason to partner up with others to flesh out the role playing experience. There are also no role-playing servers, and role-playing is a pain with all the spammers calling you a nerd. I do not want to see class structure like WoW either, but I do want to see a more defined class structure with more exclusive traits respectively. Also there is no real content for Klingons except PvP, which does not lend itself to role-playing. I would also like to see the Neutral Zone become a persistent war-ground where if I take my ship in there I have to keep my guard up for Klingon ambushes; that would make some excellent role-playing opportunities.

3. More side-quests STO rely does not have side-quest unless you count exploration missions and patrol sector missions, and the problem with them is that they are overly monotonous.

[Archived Post]

Im still not seeing the part where you are prevented from RP'ing.

the fact some people can roleplay in it, does not make it a RPG.

You can roleplay in a game of chess...that does not make chess a RPG.

a RPG is a game where you HAVE TO roleplay to some extent, it is a game where
STORY > combat

[Archived Post]

ST-O is no RPG. Coupled with the highly instanced sectors there is no need to work together to get quests done, exept the Radisodes.

Roleplaying Game does not mean to me a forced requirement to group. Consider other games that have such, the forums then have the reciprocal argument of players wanting to be be able to solo content. When doing non-STF content, my Fleetmates and I group because we want to. Freedom to choose is a better option to me than being railroaded.

[Archived Post]

the fact some people can roleplay in it, does not make it a RPG.

You can roleplay in a game of chess...that does not make chess a RPG.

a RPG is a game where you HAVE TO roleplay to some extent, it is a game where
STORY > combat
By that definition none of the RPGs on the market are RPGs then.

I've played a number of different RPGs, and there are times when I'll role play, and times when I don't. But I've never even seen or heard of a video game that requires you to role play. In not one single video game have I ever been required to role play in order to advance. That video game doesn't exist.

And simply having a good story doesn't make a game an RPG either. Both Diablos 1 and 2 had pretty good and detailed story lines, but I don't think that anyone here is going to try to argue that they're RPGs.

Perhaps we're getting our terminology mixed up a bit here. Role playing is not knowing your role, it's not being a warrior, a wizard or a priest. It's not being a Tank, a DPSer or a healer. Role playing is what you see actors do when they're on stage. Role playing is putting your soda down, standing up and giving a speech that convinces the Elven King that perhaps not all humans are as bad as he'd heard. That's what role playing is.

Forced teaming is not role playing. Clicking through a boring story written by a hack at a game company isn't role playing either. Currently the only way to role play in video games is to do so with other players.

So I'll ask again. What is it about STO that is preventing you from role playing?

[Archived Post]

Conversely Falcon, if you follow fatherfungus' chess argument, then every game is an rpg, so saying STO is not is a non sequitur.

[Archived Post]

grouping, not grouping really has nothing to do with a game being an RPG
There are lots of stand alone computer games (1 player) that is an rpg.

The argument that any game that has any rpg element is an rpg is false.

--> advance math class

If set A has a 9.0 in it AND
Set B has a 9.0 in it, that must mean that Set A is part of set B .........false

you shouldn't classifiy anything based on the presence of a single element

If you want to call a game an RPG, then that element must represent MOST of the game, because
if it does not, then you are ignoring the majority, and labling it based on the minority

EASIER way to see it

if you have a bucket of apples and there happened to be a couple of leaves in it.

Is it a bucket of apples, or a bucket of leaves ?

In STO what is the nature of MOST of the playable content?
strategic combat (space and ground) simulator.

There is more story in the first hour of baldur's gate than there is in the entire MMO.


but I can discuss this for hours, it doesn't matter...a large portion of the folks against this classification
are under the impression that if you believe hard enuff and click your heels 3 times it will
become an RPG of thier dreams. sorry it isn't

Though the strategic combat crowd that likes star trek should love the game.

[Archived Post]

Really, does this boring classification change anything? No? Oh, what a surprise :P Who the hell cares if it is or isn't a RPG. It's what it is, a MMO about Star Trek (and you can't argue the MMO part).

Concerning the "have to roleplay" part making a game a RPG. That's not true. I've played every major RPG out there (and some action adventures that would like to be RPGs, too) and I can tell you that this can't be a fitting description. I've played Baldur's Gate and once, after playing through it several times roleplaying, I decided to have some fun. I made a highly efficient min/maxed team and basically steamrolled through the whole game without paying any attention to texts. It was quite easily possible (had I not known most of the stuff already :P).
Point being: You can play Baldur's Gate like a strategic action game, yet it's considered an RPG. The hell? ;)

[Archived Post]

grouping, not grouping really has nothing to do with a game being an RPG
There are lots of stand alone computer games (1 player) that is an rpg.

The argument that any game that has any rpg element is an rpg is false.

--> advance math class

If set A has a 9.0 in it AND
Set B has a 9.0 in it, that must mean that Set A is part of set B .........false

you shouldn't classifiy anything based on the presence of a single element

If you want to call a game an RPG, then that element must represent MOST of the game, because
if it does not, then you are ignoring the majority, and labling it based on the minority

EASIER way to see it

if you have a bucket of apples and there happened to be a couple of leaves in it.

Is it a bucket of apples, or a bucket of leaves ?

In STO what is the nature of MOST of the playable content?
strategic combat (space and ground) simulator.

There is more story in the first hour of baldur's gate than there is in the entire MMO.


but I can discuss this for hours, it doesn't matter...a large portion of the folks against this classification
are under the impression that if you believe hard enuff and click your heels 3 times it will
become an RPG of thier dreams. sorry it isn't

Though the strategic combat crowd that likes star trek should love the game.


Now you're just rambling.

[Archived Post]

grouping, not grouping really has nothing to do with a game being an RPG
There are lots of stand alone computer games (1 player) that is an rpg.

I absolutely agree.

The argument that any game that has any rpg element is an rpg is false.

--> advance math class

If set A has a 9.0 in it AND
Set B has a 9.0 in it, that must mean that Set A is part of set B .........false

you shouldn't classifiy anything based on the presence of a single element

Again I absolutely agree, and you just negated your previous post.

If you want to call a game an RPG, then that element must represent MOST of the game, because
if it does not, then you are ignoring the majority, and labling it based on the minority

EASIER way to see it

if you have a bucket of apples and there happened to be a couple of leaves in it.

Is it a bucket of apples, or a bucket of leaves ?

In STO what is the nature of MOST of the playable content?
strategic combat (space and ground) simulator.

^ composition fallacy

Combat used to facilitate the story. The fact you find the story lacking (and I do too to a certain extent) is irrelevant.
You create and avatar that assumes a role. As the player, you directly affect that role through your game play.
Elements become apparent such as BOs and advancement through rank, which enahnce the immersion (which you may or may not find lacking) which lead to your own imaginative input to associate with your avatar throughout the game, otherwise known as role play.
Is there enough of that? Possibly not. Is it there? Yes.
Other players inhabit this same universe, also with an interest in association through imagination within this fanatsy creation. You may or may not converse and interact with these other players in the guise and imagined attitude of your avatar, thereby creating a role play interaction on a new level outside of your own small corner of the game world.

There is more story in the first hour of baldur's gate than there is in the entire MMO.

This is almost a bandwagon fallacy. That Balders gate has story does not remove story from STO. Could STO use more story? Of course, and so could Balders gate I'm sure, or any game for that matter.


but I can discuss this for hours, it doesn't matter...a large portion of the folks against this classification
are under the impression that if you believe hard enuff and click your heels 3 times it will
become an RPG of thier dreams. sorry it isn't

We can also turn this around. I won't change your mind, and you won't change mine (probably). All I'd say is, if I can find roleplay in STO, does that not mean that it's there? If you feel the immersion is not good enough, that's one thing, but to categorically state that your personal view makes the game devoid of something others perceive, is another.

Though the strategic combat crowd that likes star trek should love the game.

I'm sure they do.

[Archived Post]

World of ******** is a HUGE failure. If you insist on posting in these forums please NEVER mention that aweful POS game. WoW has NO depth. The actual gameplay, a monkey could master. You are FAIL if you think this game is worse. Blizzard makes me angry.

[Archived Post]

I remember when I first played a MO (Multi-player Online) game. Back then they were called MUD's (Multiple User Dungeons) and completely text based. I was amazed at how different a game could be when played with hundreds of strangers. I loved not knowing what what kind of person I would meet just over the next hill.

With advances in graphics, I headed into MMORPG's. I found them to be MUD's with pretty pictures. They promised me some RPG and as an old school D&D fan I tried for many years to get RPG value out of them. I tried very hard to put RPG into those games because it seemed extremely rare and even ridiculed. I stayed for the socialization and basically gave up on RPG and just started grinding.

Over time companies started dropping the RPG off of MMORPG. It seemed like they wanted to run away from the player expectations in an RPG. STO is a game that did just this recently. I guess it is far easier/cheaper/more profitable to make an MMO than a MMORPG. So I think it is offically just an MMO.

But, given Heavy Instancing it is anything but Massively Multi-player. Perhaps we should drop the MM part too and just call STO an O (Online)? Imho, MMORPG's have risen to tempt my expectations then fallen sadly short of their massive potential. I guess I will keep playing STO in the hopes that the MM and RPG come back into the MMORPG genre someday...

[Archived Post]

World of ******** is a HUGE failure. If you insist on posting in these forums please NEVER mention that aweful POS game. WoW has NO depth. The actual gameplay, a monkey could master. You are FAIL if you think this game is worse. Blizzard makes me angry.

You need to learn what a success is. To even think WOW is a failed game shows a complete lack of knowledge on the subject your talking about. Try telling investors and Blizzard that its a fail and we'd hear them laughing at you all the way over here in the UK.

Yes the game play is simplistic in wow, just as simple as it is in STO. Yes its a shallow game with grinding quests, just like STO. Its so simple and grindy that 11 million people pay to play it.... not like STO.

[Archived Post]

World of ******** is a HUGE failure. If you insist on posting in these forums please NEVER mention that aweful POS game. WoW has NO depth. The actual gameplay, a monkey could master. You are FAIL if you think this game is worse. Blizzard makes me angry.


And a chimp with a complex could master sto AND level cap in a week and a half.

STO isn't a RPG or a MMO...it's a money grab wrapped in the Trek universe.

[Archived Post]

Having never played WoW, I don't care.

[Archived Post]

World of ******** is a HUGE failure.
Yes. You're absolutely right! It most certainly is! I sure hope that STO never becomes a huge failure like WoW is.

Let's see... millions of subscribers, a company that makes billions of dollars, thousands of missions, tons of content.

Yeah. I sure hope that STO never becomes a huge failure like WoW is!

And just in case you haven't figured it out, my words above are a textbook example of a peculiar speaking style known as sarcasm.

[Archived Post]

Yes. You're absolutely right! It most certainly is! I sure hope that STO never becomes a huge failure like WoW is.

Let's see... millions of subscribers, a company that makes billions of dollars, thousands of missions, tons of content.

Yeah. I sure hope that STO never becomes a huge failure like WoW is!

And just in case you haven't figured it out, my words above are a textbook example of a peculiar speaking style known as sarcasm.

I wish STO were failing like WoW is... I mean, those massive coke piles that Blizzard keeps aren't going to shovel themselves. :rolleyes:

[Archived Post]

1 I would like to see the class structures become more like other MMORPGs. For instance: your Tactical Officers should be your Warrior/Rogue archetypes, Science Officers should be your Mage/Priest/Healer types, and Engineering Officers your Crafting/Explosive types.

Picard and Janeway both had a Science background, yet were extremely effective in the "warrior" role. Please leave these trinity dynamics to the sword and sorcery MMOs.

[Archived Post]

I feel like it's a very touchy debate over whether or not STO is an RPG because of the fact that the video game industry definition of an RPG is a game where your stats can grow, or in which you gain exp. The video game industry's definition is certainly different than the empirical definition where it's a game that focuses on role-playing (this is the definiton I prefer). Using the industry's definition, STO would be an RPG, but at the same time, Devil May Cry and Call of Duty are also. I don't really have an opinion on this issue, I'm just saying.

However, on whether or not STO is Massively-Multiplayer, I think that it is not:
But, given Heavy Instancing it is anything but Massively Multi-player. Perhaps we should drop the MM part too and just call STO an O (Online)? Imho, MMORPG's have risen to tempt my expectations then fallen sadly short of their massive potential. I guess I will keep playing STO in the hopes that the MM and RPG come back into the MMORPG genre someday...
This I agree with. I don't think there's anything really MM (massively-multiplayer) about STO. Massively multiplayer implies that there is a persistent world that hundreds of people take part in simultaneously. Nothing about STO's world is persistent, and you can only ever play with 4 other people at a time (okay, there are fleet actions, which support a lot more players, but those are so few and embody maybe 1-2% of gameplay in STO.) I personally never considered Guild Wars an MMORPG (just an Online RPG or RPG), because it has the same restrictive instancing as STO.

Sure, both STO and GW create the illusion that you're playing with hundreds of people, but 90% of the time, you're only with your party of 5 (or 8, in GW). Guild Wars, at least, is based off of Battle.net technology, it just jazzes it up so it doesn't appear so small. In essence, it's as massively-multiplay as Diablo II: there are social hubs (starbases in STO, towns in GW, the Battle.net lobby in D2), but when you leave town, it's always an instance (DSE's or missions in STO, the wilderness in GW, games in D2).

Does this sound familiar? CoD, or any FPS with a quick-match option is just like the above: you click on quick-match, you go through a loading screen, then you enter the game. In STO, you click on "beam up to ship", you also go through a loading screen, then you enter the instance. It's In that sense, I do think that STO is no more Massively-Multiplayer than CoD is.

[Archived Post]

In the future I think I will be a little more careful in the threads I start. It was never my intention to start all this Bickering. I was merely pointing out how I personally feel about this game, and some things I thought would make this a better MMORPG. And, just to clarify again how I think. I do like and enjoy STO; I just want to see it become a very vibrant and lively community. I have simply made suggestion that I feel would help make STO a better MMORPG. And as far as there not being much more to Star Trek than just people on a spaceship going it alone all I have to say is DS9 which had allot going on; also in TOS and TNG they where constantly interacting with different societies. I am going to list some of the things again because I know people are not going to be interested in reading past posts.

1. Star Trek online is a MMORPG; that being said I do feel that the MMO part is lacking. There rely is not much in regards to social content: the game is overly instanced, the cities are relatively dead with little to do or see in them, fleets have nowhere to meet( and if you suggest the cities I have already pointed out they are just to small), and PvP is just team deathmatch.

2. Star Trek Online is a RPG, but the problem is without more class specific traits there is very little reason to partner up with others to flesh out the role playing experience. There are also no role-playing servers, and role-playing is a pain with all the spammers calling you a nerd. I do not want to see class structure like WoW either, but I do want to see a more defined class structure with more exclusive traits respectively. Also there is no real content for Klingons except PvP, which does not lend itself to role-playing. I would also like to see the Neutral Zone become a persistent war-ground where if I take my ship in there I have to keep my guard up for Klingon ambushes; that would make some excellent role-playing opportunities.

3. More side-quests STO rely does not have side-quest unless you count exploration missions and patrol sector missions, and the problem with them is that they are overly monotonous.

4. I will stick to my guns when pointing out the fact that Cryptic has put more emphasis on the single-player game than they have on the MMO part.

[Archived Post]

1. Star Trek online is a MMORPG; that being said I do feel that the MMO part is lacking. There rely is not much in regards to social content: the game is overly instanced, the cities are relatively dead with little to do or see in them, fleets have nowhere to meet( and if you suggest the cities I have already pointed out they are just to small), and PvP is just team deathmatch.
I agree with you that these are all problems, and just some of the things that I dislike about STO.

2. Star Trek Online is a RPG, but the problem is without more class specific traits there is very little reason to partner up with others to flesh out the role playing experience. There are also no role-playing servers, and role-playing is a pain with all the spammers calling you a nerd. I do not want to see class structure like WoW either, but I do want to see a more defined class structure with more exclusive traits respectively. Also there is no real content for Klingons except PvP, which does not lend itself to role-playing. I would also like to see the Neutral Zone become a persistent war-ground where if I take my ship in there I have to keep my guard up for Klingon ambushes; that would make some excellent role-playing opportunities.
You can ignore the spammers. I don't mean just ignore them, I mean use the in-game ignore function so that you never see their spew ever again. So no need for a role playing server.

You may dislike that the classes in STO aren't more traditionally defined, some people like that a lot. Perhaps STO just isn't the game for you? I'm not being sarcastic when I say this, but maybe you should go back to WoW. (or whatever MMO you like and played before)

3. More side-quests STO rely does not have side-quest unless you count exploration missions and patrol sector missions, and the problem with them is that they are overly monotonous.
Yes, I think we all agree that STO needs more content.

4. I will stick to my guns when pointing out the fact that Cryptic has put more emphasis on the single-player game than they have on the MMO part.

I completely agree with you on this and I would also like to see more missions that require teaming.

See if you'd made this as your initial post and gave the thread a better title I doubt you'd have had nearly as much bickering.

[Archived Post]

on wow....why is it the king of games ?

They did something no other MMO developer has done well since.

They created a quality MMO, they took all the time needed, and spent a lot of money doing it.
It was a big financial risk, and it paid off.

At launch

2 factions
many races, all with thier own tutorials and many racially base story lines
fairly well developed classes
a large amount of quests at launch...story based
HUGE open play areas
well organized
nice graphics <for thier time>
What they promised WAS delivered
quick replies to problems
solid ip
GREAT WRITING

and they were rewarded for thier efforts

I personally do not compare STO with wow...it is like comparing a motor skooter to a race car.
Cryptic really never had the resources, money or otherwise that blizzard had.

[Archived Post]

The main problem I have with this quote is if MMORPG players are rely tired of WoW it would not still be the number one subscribed to MMORPG. I also never said WoW was innovative, but it is obvious it took the best parts of other games to make a truly excellent game. For the record I do not want a WoW clone not at all; if I wanted that I would just keep playing WoW. I would just like Cryptic to spend more time on the MMO part and a little less on the singleplayer part.

WoW's numbers are also gimmicked because they include their numbers in China. In terms of U.S. and Canada subscribers, WoW peaked at 1.5 million and has been steadily, and sharply, declining for the last two years. When asked about the numbers recently, Blizzard replied that they're gearing up to release WotLK in China, and that should give them a boost. Notice, how the U.S. isn't being discussed?

And if we're actually fair, and we compare WoW's Asian numbers to other MMO's in Asia, it isn't doing that well. Hell, Starcraft has better Asian numbers than WoW.

That said, I think Cryptic has done a good job on making the levelling experience one in which grouping is encouraged and beneficial, but not required. More group content would be a good thing, though.

[Archived Post]

Sto is not wow. Nore should it be. It is a theme park MMO that is running close with the big dogs This is cyptics first time at running on mmo. Please give them a break. there are over 358 mmos out there in TTH sto is #12 they have to be doing some stuff right. I for one think they are doing there best, and up most.

reguards
kayna

[Archived Post]

on wow....why is it the king of games ?

They did something no other MMO developer has done well since.

They created a quality MMO, they took all the time needed, and spent a lot of money doing it.
It was a big financial risk, and it paid off.

What?!

Well, I didn't join right from the start, but when I played, the service sucked majorly, the servers lagged and they constantly tried fixing bugs desperately, some of which were nearly game breaking. On top of that, you constantly got whispered by gold spammers. Recieving one gold spam tell at least every 2 minutes wasn't unusual.

@Sayatrist

Cryptic made City of Heroes/Villains and something with Champions, no?

[Archived Post]

What?!

Well, I didn't join right from the start, but when I played, the service sucked majorly, the servers lagged and they constantly tried fixing bugs desperately, some of which were nearly game breaking. On top of that, you constantly got whispered by gold spammers. Recieving one gold spam tell at least every 2 minutes wasn't unusual.

@Sayatrist

Cryptic made City of Heroes/Villains and something with Champions, no?

They wrote the code for it Nc soft west ran the game told them what they wanted.

[Archived Post]

They wrote the code for it Nc soft west ran the game told them what they wanted.

Champions Online pre-dates Star Trek Online. The company runs two MMORPGs.

[Archived Post]

Champions Online pre-dates Star Trek Online. The company runs two MMORPGs.

sorry my error,
2 mmos

I am currently writting about some of the big dogs on the block IE WOW EQ **** etc, some times I forget
hehehe.

[Archived Post]

No worries. :)

Champions is a pretty small game. It's a niche market ... super heroes and MMORPG all at the same time.

[Archived Post]

Sto is not wow. Nore should it be. It is a theme park MMO that is running close with the big dogs This is cyptics first time at running on mmo. Please give them a break. there are over 358 mmos out there in TTH sto is #12 they have to be doing some stuff right. I for one think they are doing there best, and up most.

reguards
kayna

sorry this is not, by far cryptics first dance...or should say MMO

They made City of Heros
then
City of Villians
then Champions online

THEN...sto or were finishing CO while starting STO

They got more experience then most mmo companies

[Archived Post]

...Let them build on what they have.

And leave the sword and sorcery tropes for the sword and sorcery games.

Agreed without reservation.

[Archived Post]

It is true that a GM for a pen and paper RPG can make the decision to institute world persistence beyond the character-sheet but, strictly speaking, that is not part of the mechanics or rule-set of any RPG I know of. I was the manager of a game shop for many years. If there was one, I am sure I would have known of it.

Heck, even D&D has backed away from it directly. In 3.x they tried to have the world run mostly on PC rules so players and DMs had mechanical tools to integrate the PCs into roles in society other than dungeon looter. That very much went out the window in 4.

[Archived Post]

Heck, even D&D has backed away from it directly. In 3.x they tried to have the world run mostly on PC rules so players and DMs had mechanical tools to integrate the PCs into roles in society other than dungeon looter. That very much went out the window in 4.

Oh, how so? My last information was about 3.5. What did they change in 4 regarding that?

[Archived Post]

Oh, how so? My last information was about 3.5. What did they change in 4 regarding that?

Classes and levels are basically just an adventurer thing, crafting costs an item's full value, max resale value you can get on items is set at 20% (and same for breaking down old items for components). Those and the massive abstraction of non-combat skill use along with nothing not related to dungeoneering being included as parts of classes...

[Archived Post]

Normally I agree with you on most things.

Can you please explain why you think STO isn't an RPG? Is there something about STO that prevents you from role playing?

I believe (hope) s/he meant fantasy instead of RPG...lots of people do.

STO is as much an RPG as any other MMO....pretty much as long as you can customize your char., it's an RPG (you can make your "own" charactor essentially). The rest is up to the people involved....seriously, people were doing *Chompo sits on the floor* instead of emotes a long time ago. Nothing here prevents RP in any way...though it is not as RP friendly as say LotRO.

As for the MMO part..well I think it is. Then again, I also believe Guild Wars is.
Single world persistant MMO's? No, no question on that..... I think that's where most people break away into the "it's not an mmo" camp.

[Archived Post]

Single world persistant MMO's? No, no question on that..... I think that's where most people break away into the "it's not an mmo" camp.

The lack of anything remotely near a persistent single world experience is my main complaint about this game. A real MMO is supposed to be about playing a game with others while always feeling like a part of a larger community. STO is a single player game that lets you chat with other people who happen to be playing the same single player game. This needs to change. Get rid of the instancing of social zones. Go ahead and instance the missions, but why instance places like Spacedock and K7 and all of the places where we could view and interact with a sea of our fellow players and form an actual in-game community and culture?

[Archived Post]

I think I get some of what the OP is saying here.

DIfferent starting zones for diferent races. Humans start on earth, Vulcans on Vulcan, Andorians on Andor, Nausicaans on their homeworld..etc.

I betcha that if cryptic had had all the time and money in the world to develop this game they would have done such a thing.

I also believe that if they had the time and money they would have done more for the klingon faction at release.

What I see, as someone who has played MMOs since 2000, is that cryptic didn't have the time to put in the effort they wanted so they released what they did.

Also something that I know from my MMO experience is that I am not one of the great pleyers. I didn't reach endgame in WoW and I didn't reach endgame in EQ. However in my fleet (which is just made up of a group of RL friends) I am a GREAT player. I've reached endgame. I've got all purple mk x gear. And I did all this playing casually.

I admit, its great that casual players can have fun too, but I feel that my experience has been cheapened.

I'm going to use a hockey analogy to explain my point. If you're not a hockey fan and you don't "get it" then I'm sorry.


WHen I was playing other MMOs I felt like the weak link on an NHL team, a fourth line center maybe. I wasn't the best by any stretch but I was playing in the big leagues.

When playing STO I feel like I've been sent down to the ECHL and I'm now a star player.


Should I be proud of myself for doing well in an easy environment?

I don't think so.

All it takes to succeed at STO is time. It takes no skill. I have seen some very unskilled players reach level 45 and it cheapens it for me.


People who knock WoW or other established MMOs are probably casuals or crappy players who couldn't succeed in those games. They love STO because its easy, unchallenging, and they can succeed in these weak environments.


As a 32 year old adult male I would take no pride in winning an elementary school track meet.

[Archived Post]

You don't want to say that WoW is hard, do you? WoW is just a grind fest, it doesn't really take any skill to get anywhere (just to get into the top 1% you need that, plus even MORE time). I've been in the WoW "Endgame" before burning crusade and I can tell you, it was far from hard. Nowadays even more so than before.

[Archived Post]

The lack of anything remotely near a persistent single world experience is my main complaint about this game. A real MMO is supposed to be about playing a game with others while always feeling like a part of a larger community. STO is a single player game that lets you chat with other people who happen to be playing the same single player game. This needs to change. Get rid of the instancing of social zones. Go ahead and instance the missions, but why instance places like Spacedock and K7 and all of the places where we could view and interact with a sea of our fellow players and form an actual in-game community and culture?

Unless I am remembering incorrectly, they started out with fewer instances in the social areas, and the lag was horrible.

That has been an issue with almost every MMO I've ever played. Locations in cities/towns like the banks and bazzars and such have always been crowded to the point where the game slows to a crawl. Even on high-end systems that can eat up all the graphical data and ask for seconds. The server is choking on it. And the fact that it is only one server having to handle everyone from all over the workld, It only makes it worse.

Instancing these areas is the only viable solution. I can't speak for others, but after they added more instances to the social areas, my game quit lagging so much. It wasn't my computer. I'm running an Alienware Aurora with an i7 C2Q processor and a good graphics card with 1GB of video memory. More than enough to handle STO's rendering.

The problem isn't that we can't see enough other players. The problem is that there isn't more of a symbiotic system in place where players need each other. And I don't mean in terms of grouping for raid content.

Let me use Lord of the Rings for a quick example. That game's crafting system is made in such a way that the different crafting professions need each other as much as, if not more than, people need crafted components. You don't need to be in the same room with each other, but when one group needs the goods from another group, and yet another group needs their goods, you've got a symbiotic system that you know people are contributing to and benefitting from. And it works.

STO needs that sort of crafting mechanic. But more important than that, there has to be a need for ALL craftables. This is why dislike MMOs with a heavily loot-oriented system for obtaining gear. At best, we should only be able to loot Mk I gear. The only ways that higher Mk gear should be produced is the crafting system, mission rewards, or being promoted and getting the next tier ship that has the next Mk gear already.

In such a system Every Mk II item and above would be able to be modified by someone, either for personal use or to be put on the exchange for someone else to use... or modify to the next mk level. Just that alone would stimulate a sense of community, because one item would have a different use for different people.

[Archived Post]

So the fact that you're not forced to team is why you don't think that this is a MMORPG?

Once again I'll point out: It IS a Massively Multiplayer Game. Everyone on the entire planet Earth is playing the game on the same server that you are.

And the RPG part comes from you. If you want to role play then role play. I do it all the time.

Like I said, just because this game is different than Wow, and you are unable to cope with that, does NOT mean that it's not a MMORPG.

IT means nothing, if you can't/aren't 'encouraged' to group together.

Like or not, and while I am a major major ST fan, I enjoy grouping, because while I've experienced some nasty players on 'that other MMO', most expereinces are very pleasurable, and I felt a huge amount of immersion as a result and I got through a challenging quest with help < r ead: challenging, I hear easy is the definition for sTO ?>

I am stilll debating things by reading this forum, and if grouping is only 'not discouraged' then I hate to say but Im very leary, given my total enjoyment of that 'other MMO'.

Better or worse Im sorry, but thats where my head is afa enjoying MMO.

Thank you
wamarine

[Archived Post]

thank you for necroing this thread that has been dead for over a month.

[Archived Post]

IT means nothing, if you can't/aren't 'encouraged' to group together.

Like or not, and while I am a major major ST fan, I enjoy grouping, because while I've experienced some nasty players on 'that other MMO', most expereinces are very pleasurable, and I felt a huge amount of immersion as a result and I got through a challenging quest with help < r ead: challenging, I hear easy is the definition for sTO ?>

I am stilll debating things by reading this forum, and if grouping is only 'not discouraged' then I hate to say but Im very leary, given my total enjoyment of that 'other MMO'.

Better or worse Im sorry, but thats where my head is afa enjoying MMO.

Thank you
wamarine

Then by all means, go play that other MMO. This is not that game. And speaking for myself, I am very glad of that fact. This game is slowly becoming one in which those who wish to experience Star Trek can do so. It's come a long way from where it started in a very short time. For us who are looking for that type of experience, it won't be too much longer before we'll have a lot less to complain about.

But YOUR complaint is that this game is not enough like that other game. You are just one of the ones that this game is just not right for. That's just how it is. But that other game will welcome you back as if you were the prodigal son coming home.

* * *

I really wish people would stop begging for this game to become a knock-off of something else. It's finally getting to a point where it doesn't feel like Champions with a Star Trek skin. I hope the devs do not deviate from the course they are presently on. Let those who can't stand the fact that this isn't WoW in Space weep and gnash their teeth. Let STO be an MMO unto itself.