Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
12-31-2011, 11:45 PM
Well, it's an interesting angle that I would be interested to read more about.

but I can't really see how the suits at Paramount/CBS trying to micromange Cryptic would really do anything good for STO?


Now Paramount/CBS trying to micromanage PWEs influence on STO? That may have some facenating results.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
12-31-2011, 11:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searcher-Soldier
Hi Fire, nice to talk to you again.

// snip, really, really, really long post ;-)
Nice to talk to you again, too! I don't disagree with anything you said at all. Although I think that apologizing can be suicidal to a business (just look at Netflix right now). And, really, I just think that Yoda is awesome (I mean, c'mon, it's Yoda!) and it seems like such a little thing to get so bothered over. But from the way you describe it, it's more about misdirected anger than Yoda himself. I can appreciate that.

What is this thing about Voledmort though? I keep seeing it in the threads but I have no knowledge of this...

And P.S., there's nothing wrong with being a fan(atical) fan. One of the many, many jobs/roles/functions I have in life is as publisher of popstar.com (you'll find plenty of fanatics there!)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
12-31-2011, 11:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searcher-Soldier
Well, it's an interesting angle that I would be interested to read more about.

but I can't really see how the suits at Paramount/CBS trying to micromange Cryptic would really do anything good for STO?


Now Paramount/CBS trying to micromanage PWEs influence on STO? That may have some facenating results.
I tend to agree. Why should Paramount/CBS micro-manage STO? That's not their function. It's not even their strong suit. And like I just happened to reveal, I'm the publisher/manager of PopStar.com, so I have a lot of dealings with studios regularly. I really don't think it would be beneficial to have them hands-on in the game.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
01-01-2012, 12:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searcher-Soldier
Well, it's an interesting angle that I would be interested to read more about.

but I can't really see how the suits at Paramount/CBS trying to micromange Cryptic would really do anything good for STO?


Now Paramount/CBS trying to micromanage PWEs influence on STO? That may have some facenating results.
Hey Searcher

Read your previous post. i wished i could express my opinions as well as you do 8P and it just makes it so much better to see that you and i do agree on so many things. might have to hire you as my ghost writer some time 8P

Rayven
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
01-01-2012, 12:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rswfire View Post
What is this thing about Voledmort though? I keep seeing it in the threads but I have no knowledge of this...

From what I have managed to gather, there was a bug with one of the Shields. Namely, it gained the Shield Regeneration Rate of every Shield that was in your inventory and add them all collectively to its own. So if you had multiple Shields in your inventory, it could regenerate thousands or more points of Shield Strength each cycle. Hence it was dubbed the Voldemort, the cursed shield that could not be stopped.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
01-01-2012, 12:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeslyn
From what I have managed to gather, there was a bug with one of the Shields. Namely, it gained the Shield Regeneration Rate of every Shield that was in your inventory and add them all collectively to its own. So if you had multiple Shields in your inventory, it could regenerate thousands or more points of Shield Strength each cycle. Hence it was dubbed the Voldemort, the cursed shield that could not be stopped.
That's a pretty strange bug. And an odd name for it, lol...

Thanks for explaining!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
01-01-2012, 12:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rswfire View Post
That's a pretty strange bug. And an odd name for it, lol...

Thanks for explaining!

Don't thank me for it. I am just relaying the information as it was explained to me. I cannot even speak to its accuracy. Consider it gossip.

I have also heard that it involved being able to gain Bridge Officer abilities that a ship should not normally get, like high-end Commander Engineering skills on Science vessel.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
01-01-2012, 01:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rswfire View Post
If I were managing Cryptic, I would have employees monitoring the forums for trends and then I would give those trends careful consideration and I would release an official press release on the subject matter at hand.
Agreed , but what happens when what we want gets splintered between individual desires of the fans ?
When we say that "we" want PVP , not all of us really want that , as not all players enjoy PVP . Same goes for STF's , KDF content and UGC .
I myself want all of the above .
The only thing that seems to have a consensus are FE's , and as I've said in a previous thread , STF's are played more than FE's at endgame (replayable content) , while FE's are played more by the whole player population (but only a few times = not replayable content) .
Thus the equation becomes : FE's enrich player experience and draws back players , and STF's keep endgame players around . Which do you choose ?
All in all Cryptic can cater to us only up till a certain point .


Quote:
But I would have been doing that from the beginning. But because of whatever reason (there's no point in passing blame or casting judgement), Cryptic has lost credibility with a lot of people.
Agreed .

Quote:
As a manger, the way I would handle this now is to put forth an official statement or series of posts on the direction STO is heading in. It is not good to keep us in the dark on this topic, because many of us are contemplating just how much longer we're willing to invest in STO. At least we'd always have a sense of where the game is heading. Because right now, it doesn't seem to be heading anywhere.
Agreed , with reservations .
I call for a more balanced approach . DStahl seemed to be "living in the future" (excuse the bad pun) , and sorta made promises (via the Engineering Reports) that were ... way out there , as far as development goes .
OTOTH D'Angelo keeps the cards so tight to his chest , that if they were any tighter they would be under his skin .
Both approaches are flawed , and both bring misery to the forum going fandom , and more importantly both approaches perhaps even hurt the game . DStahl set expectations too high , D'Angelo made us have zero expectations (and ppl usually drop things they have zero expectations of) .

Thus , I want a ballanced approach -- and I like your thoughts about a release of a general quarterly plan for STO (that is as always "subject to change") .
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
01-01-2012, 01:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin View Post
Agreed, but what happens when what we want gets splintered between individual desires of the fans?
That's why I said "give careful consideration to." That doesn't mean you should do everything the fans want. That just wouldn't be practical. And even very popular ideas among players may not actually be good ideas when looked at from a larger context. So all I'm really expressing there is that if something garners a fair amount of attention on the forums, it shouldn't be ignored. There's an obvious reason why it's being discussed, so it should be discussed and considered internally as well, followed by a response from the company so the players feel acknowledged. As far as splintering, then during the consideration process, it can be prioritized. Even if the company doesn't wish to pursue something (and of course some people would get upset and cry about it), in the long run, the larger player base would have a great deal more respect with this type of policy than the one they have now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin View Post
Agreed, with reservations. I call for a more balanced approach.
And I'd second it. That's really what I'm calling for too. Quite a few times in recent days I've reiterated these points and generally expressed that I don't want false claims. Really, I just want realism. Internally, they must set realistic goals for themselves (unless they're just terribly managed) so they should be able to tell us what's realistic too. There's no reason to "hype it up" because that's just going to create backlash, mistrust, and a lack of confidence in the end.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin View Post
Both approaches are flawed, and both bring misery to the forum going fandom, and more importantly both approaches perhaps even hurt the game.
I particularly like what you've said here, and agree.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin View Post
Thus , I want a ballanced approach -- and I like your thoughts about a release of a general quarterly plan for STO (that is as always "subject to change") .
Balance is always a good thing. And thank you.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
01-01-2012, 01:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin View Post

/snip

DStahl set expectations too high , D'Angelo made us have zero expectations (and ppl usually drop things they have zero expectations of) .

Thus , I want a ballanced approach -- and I like your thoughts about a release of a general quarterly plan for STO (that is as always "subject to change") .
This. Direct hit.

Especially the parts about people 'dropping things' (as I have been logging in less) and people being understanding about info that is tagged as 'subject to change' which is perfectly reasonable all around.
(although I was happier while my expectations were high.:p)
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:37 AM.