and vote your game UP. If it even brings in one new player then surely thats good for the game you like to play.
You need to supply an email address, but there is no need to create an account or jump through pages etc.
My final post for this topic:
In conclusion (for me)
After receiving a few ... 'colourful' private messages about all this, the least abusive of which where along the lines of "Was I was just bored and wanted to counter an indefensible position?" - I'll make the point of saying I wanted to create a discussion on the dilemma I felt because of what this potential missed chance in raising STO's profile could mean for the game at this critical time.
So my opening post went about encouraging voting for the following reasons:
- If you enjoy the game, then up rate it
- If you want the game to have the best chances at continuing, up rate it
- If you play the game over others (time) then up rate it,
- If you abstain your saying sto isn't worthy of new player's attention
- If you can put your dissatisfaction with Cryptic to one side and vote it up based on liking the fundamentals of the game, its features that appeal to you, and whatever else appeals to you - such as it being the only trek game, and so on...
and how positive voting will have a net benefit for you by improving STO's image (better chance at secured future etc)
Even though a large number of people who seemingly don't play the game anymore or have had significant gaps in play replied, I do welcome that input. Although, I had expected more discussion from people who play the game, actively, who like myself, know what they like (as they continue to play) and also know what they dislike (Cryptic's management/delays et al.).
I wanted to see if that demographic also felt they faced the same dilemma as I did on this. If they felt that perhaps "this time", out of all times, that STO needs to raise its profile to ensure that it's last card in the deck (f2p) has the best chances.
As after that, if the game dies from lack of content and other issues then at least you did something to help the game for your benefit rather than sit by and hope that the good word of improvements etc (propagated by practically nobody on the outside) will break what has been this game's concrete prison in image since launch (lag, bugs, instance play, optional storyline, fast levelling, broken economy, tedious ground play, no content etc -> generalities for the most part, but also legitimate gripes I'm not denying...)
My conclusion after this, is that while there are people who enjoy the game and who will vote according to that literal interpretation of 'best' (without necessarily having knowledge to weigh the other contenders for that nomination)...
...there are also people who don't see a dilemma, and will stand by their feelings in keeping the game's image down until it 'deserves' to be lifted - regardless of whether the game suffers and shuts down because of this questionably deserved image.
I'm not sure where I fall between the two now (given my dilemma was an anomaly). I fully understand and feel in agreement with the reasons many of you outlined for not voting for STO - but I'm still thinking if this will result in a lost opportunity when the game needed it most, and that the game which I actively play and enjoy particular areas of (community included) risks closure.
This point is a factor, for me, given the game's image will really make or break it come f2p. There will be no second chances when the last card is played - as opposed to blindly supporting cryptic all the time, for such wrong reasons, in such polls.
What is most concerning to me, perhaps because I am part of the minority who decide to take the game beyond the game and into the forums or the wider gaming world, is that whatever Image of Cryptic there is will likely not be contested by the majority of people who replied here because its not their job to promote the game they enjoy, and features they feel deserve that recognition go unaccredited outside reviewer/dev PR articles.
While I can accept it is not the job of anyone, this seems counter to helping maintain the success of the game, most of us continue to actively play, which we take as meaningful enough to come onto these forums and read threads and contribute criticism and suggestion about keeping the energy going.
Although some of the private mails I received these past few hours accuse otherwise, I'm not trying to troll the forums with long winded walls of text, just made to counter any point a person has. lol. I wanted to note that, in making my final post regarding this topic.
I feel I've covered most of what I can say in my combined posts. And it makes for no pleasant thing for me to be perceived as 'apparently always posting to get the last word', lol, with paraphrased replies I feel I have already given. I reply to people because I feel they deserve a response if they made the effort to ask me a question or counter a point I make. Given I started this topic, and have some responsibility for people expressing their opinions, no matter how passionate - I won't be taking action against such mails sent before I posted this note, but will after.
[Continuation of original Post]
Yes the game has flaws. Yes the company is to blame. But if your concerned at all about the future of this game, then good PR (unlike that ludicrous IGN interview - come on marketing team srsly?) then take some time and vote it up. Help it stay alive long enough (by improving its image and attracting new players) so that the flaws, failings and neglect of the past 8 months is not your final memory of Star Trek Online. The only Star Trek game online with a great community to boot.
Vote up for STO in the " Best Non-Fantasy MMO of 2011 " and " Best New F2P MMO " categories as well as other applicable ones and lets try bring home a win.
And if you don't think STO deserves the positive attention (I'm not saying vote best when its been a terrible year - but to vote best to encourage a better year in lifting STO's image) then why continue to play a game you want to fail?
If 1000 people who want the game to go on, stand by and do nothing to help improve its image when its on its last stand for massive public awareness - are they spiting the game (and their desire to keep playing) by not sacrificing their feelings? Is it an ultimate benefit for them that the game they enjoy (or at least enjoy parts of) close?
This is most of what was added this year in STO. If you feel this has added to your enjoyment of the game you play with your time, then do think about voting for STO based on what IS in it and why that makes you log in and still play.
Surely some of this should be recognised and not stop you (if you enjoy this game and these features) from UP voting STO.
- Episode Replay
- Borg Appearance Loot
- Better Sector Space
- Crafting update, with new items and crafting for Klingons
- What few new missions there were from sorties to Red alerts
- Ground combat shooter mode
- Item stats reblance
- SFA, First City, ESD, KA
- Fleet action and STF queuing system (cross groups for fed/kdf)
- All CStore available through dilithium conversion (still in testing, but full-fills Cryptic's goal of access to cstore through game currency)
- CStore ships in general
- Other F2P changes (didn't list too much as many are still very subjective at this point)
**edit, added some paragraphs to original, and also a conlcluding thoughts quote for anyone who desires to see what insights I drew from the thread - but also a notification that I won't extend a courtesy to more abusive private mails beyond giving this notice.