View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
11-09-2011, 10:55 PM
Originally Posted by Stormnnorm
Can't say I agree with this either. It's like asking for a nobel prize ahead of time, so that you get "street cred" and can then conduct leading scientific research. It doesn't work that way.

Giving the game awards that it doesn't deserve just justifies the current behavior of the company/devs, and indicates to them that they should continue on their current track.

Make the game better first, then get the awards.
I do agree with you, but given the change in the game's financial model, street cred is what will bring in new players, the more players the more potential for profit. So it does go against my own feelings to do this. Not much point (motivation to expend money) changing the game for the better when its dying (population on sharp decline), and f2p is the last trick in the book.

As we've seen since launch, no matter how much the game changes for the better, clawing back street cred is the hardest thing of all. Every opportunity should be taken.

Would you be satisfied that STO failed and have no Star Trek game and no prospect of another one either and be happy in knowing that they were thought a lesson that only effects us negatively (once things are free)


try and support the game in this small way by helping to lift the game's image and thus giving the Devs the opportunity to fix the issues. Having them still around to be accountable.

To use your example, its no use awarding a Nobel prize posthumously either. Look at the value Obama's nobel prize for peace earned him in the short term after getting it without having actually brought peace to anywhere - perhaps that helped earn him enough street cred to pass the healthcare reforms.

(PR isn't forever ofc)