Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
04-12-2012, 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElChup47
<---------------- Wonders how long it will be before the butt kissers show up to declare "If you don'tlike it, stop playing".
And if they do, I will respond, "Okay, enjoy wasting your time/money on this crap while I go spend it on more worthwhile things."

Thank God the SC playoffs are here to occupy my time...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
04-12-2012, 08:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uber1250 View Post
And if they do, I will respond, "Okay, enjoy wasting your time/money on this crap while I go spend it on more worthwhile things."

Thank God the SC playoffs are here to occupy my time...
Exactly right. I recently cancelled my gold membership, and have been boycotting the C-Store. Now I will just play a lot less, at least until the devs decide to get their heads our of their collective @$$es and make some positive changes for once.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
04-12-2012, 08:36 AM
I get the feeling the Tribble Feedback section exists mostly so it can be segregated away from the more travelledparts of the forums, thus making issues like the ridiculous changes to RSP, the consistant hamstringing of science ships, and a slew of other balance related issues far easier to ignore.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
04-12-2012, 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebeneezergoode
I get the feeling the Tribble Feedback section exists mostly so it can be segregated away from the more travelledparts of the forums, thus making issues like the ridiculous changes to RSP, the consistant hamstringing of science ships, and a slew of other balance related issues far easier to ignore.
DING DING DING!! Give that man a prize!!!

Notice that its at the very bottom of the forums? LOL

I also love it when they move feedback posts from General Feedback to Ten Forward or other parts of the forums that get a lot less attention. :p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
04-12-2012, 11:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerritouru View Post
Because I love Star Trek, and I am not going to let them ruin the license with out a fight so at least I can feel good for my self.
I used to answer the same thing, too.

But i think we all should ask ourselves, does STO represent the Star Trek we like?

Or have they changed Star Trek already so much that it isn't the thing we liked so much?
Persoally i have decided that STO isn't the Star trek i liked once. Cryptic changed so much, interpreted so many things wrong, i'm just no longer in the mood to support their version of Star Trek anymore. At least i won't give them my money anymore.


Live long and prosper.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
04-14-2012, 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yreodred

I used to answer the same thing, too.

But i think we all should ask ourselves, does STO represent the Star Trek we like?

Or have they changed Star Trek already so much that it isn't the thing we liked so much?
Persoally i have decided that STO isn't the Star trek i liked once. Cryptic changed so much, interpreted so many things wrong, i'm just no longer in the mood to support their version of Star Trek anymore. At least i won't give them my money anymore.


Live long and prosper.
It wilted on the vine of banality with Enterprise and officially died with J J "Trek is lame" Abrams. That movie was Star Trek in name only. Worse than that, it actively tried to change the franchise's philosophy and tone into a crude copy of Star Wars. It tried to not only exploit Star Trek to make money, it tried to destroy it. After that film, I don't think anyone should be surprised by a lack of coherence in terms of this game or anything Trek-related that has come about recently. If I were a young developer who was mostly familiar with "Trek" from things like that film, I'd be confused as well.

Granted, things were in bad shape with the forgettable Next Gen films (and ST V, VI), but at least they maintained the core ideas, despite dull writing, direction, editing, et cetera. Although Star Trek V was rather a snore-fest, it was Star Trek. There was no mistaking that. And, because it was Trek it was much more interesting than Abrams' mindless shlock. (Personally, I also think VI was worse than V.)

edit: Well, I feel vindicated concerning my opinion of VI:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
Star Trek's creator, Gene Roddenberry, who wielded significant influence despite his ill health, hated the script. Meyer's first meeting with Roddenberry resulted in Meyer storming out of the room within five minutes. As with Meyer's previous Star Trek film (The Wrath of Khan), the script had strong military overtones, with a naval theme present throughout. Far from being idealized, the characters were shown as bigoted and flawed. In contrast to Roddenberry's vision of the future, Meyer thought there was no evidence that bigotry would disappear by the 23rd century. When Roddenberry protested about the villainization of Saavik, Meyer replied that "I created [Saavik]. She was not Gene's. If he doesn't like what I plan on doing with her, maybe he should give back the money he's made off my films. Maybe then I'll care what he has to say." After the stormy first meeting, a group including Meyer, Roddenberry, and producer Ralph Winter discussed the revised draft. Roddenberry would voice his disapproval of elements of the script line by line, and he and Meyer would square off about them while Winter took notes. Overall, the tone of the meeting was conciliatory, but the producers ultimately ignored many of Roddenberry's concerns.
When I saw the film, I didn't like the excessive militarism, the excessively flawed (and dissonant) attitude/behavior of Kirk and such, or the vulcan traitor --- all the things the Wiki article said Roddenberry objected to especially. I'm not big on Trek lore, so it's refreshing to see that my reaction fit with the core philosophy of Trek. It doesn't surprise me at all that the response to his criticism is merely one citing money.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
04-15-2012, 05:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercuriciodide
When I saw the film, I didn't like the excessive militarism, the excessively flawed (and dissonant) attitude/behavior of Kirk and such, or the vulcan traitor --- all the things the Wiki article said Roddenberry objected to especially. I'm not big on Trek lore, so it's refreshing to see that my reaction fit with the core philosophy of Trek. It doesn't surprise me at all that the response to his criticism is merely one citing money.
I think defining Szar Trek is more a emotional thing than a list of facts. STO may (sometimes) look like a Star Trek game but it doesn't have the heart in the right place to be a worthy Star Trek game, similar to JJ's movie IMO.

Live long and prosper.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
04-15-2012, 11:52 AM
This forum (indeed this entire site) is not necessarily an accurate cross section of players for STO. I know about a dozen players (a quarter of which I actively recruited myself, all of whom are -loving- the game - and all of whom refuse to set foot anywhere near this community because they expect it to be nothing by tantrums, petty bickering, flame wars, and just out and out rage. They base this on the fact that every MMO they've ever done (and every one I've done myself) has the same problem: An astoundingly hostile segment of the player base that seems to live to howl their grief at a thousand decibles on the public forums. A friend of mine calls MMO forums a human grease trap.

If I were the developer, I wouldn't want to participate in a rage thread either. There's simply nothing to be done. They don't want answers, they want a scapegoat. There is absolutely nothing they can say or do - the mob has assembled with pitchforks and torches to destroy them for everything they put forward. if their every word and explanation is simply going to be twisted into more personal attacks and howling outrage, why -would- they bother answering? I know I wouldn't.

This isn't to say you don't have legit complaints. But nobody on this forum can accurately say that they represent all of us STO players, unconditionally. The people I know who love the game most refuse to come here and mingle with the hostility. Cryptic KNOWS this.

For my part, I'm loving the game and I've kept my sub up since I first tried it last july. I'm still a paying subscriber on a free to play game and I have no complaints. In my eyes, according to the experiences I was looking for in the game, it's only getting better and better and better. By -ALL- means, your mileage may vary - we may all be looking for different things according to different priorities when we boot up the game, after all - but nobody can say they speak for -me- where Cryptic, it's behavior or it execution are concerned.

Not everyone in the player base is as hateful of Cryptic as they same to be on the forums. They just don't want to get into the bickering.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
04-15-2012, 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saboreth
This forum (indeed this entire site) is not necessarily an accurate cross section of players for STO. I know about a dozen players (a quarter of which I actively recruited myself, all of whom are -loving- the game - and all of whom refuse to set foot anywhere near this community because they expect it to be nothing by tantrums, petty bickering, flame wars, and just out and out rage. They base this on the fact that every MMO they've ever done (and every one I've done myself) has the same problem: An astoundingly hostile segment of the player base that seems to live to howl their grief at a thousand decibles on the public forums. A friend of mine calls MMO forums a human grease trap.

If I were the developer, I wouldn't want to participate in a rage thread either. There's simply nothing to be done. They don't want answers, they want a scapegoat. There is absolutely nothing they can say or do - the mob has assembled with pitchforks and torches to destroy them for everything they put forward. if their every word and explanation is simply going to be twisted into more personal attacks and howling outrage, why -would- they bother answering? I know I wouldn't.
Two paragraphs of ad hominem aren't a very compelling way to frame an argument, particularly one about improving civility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saboreth
This isn't to say you don't have legit complaints.
You just said we don't want answers, we want a scapegoat. You can't have it both ways. Also, since you said the game is basically flawless for you and always improving, how can you possibly recognize that complaints are valid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saboreth
But nobody on this forum can accurately say that they represent all of us STO players, unconditionally. The people I know who love the game most refuse to come here and mingle with the hostility. Cryptic KNOWS this.
So, you can speak for Cryptic, but players can't speak for themselves?

I'm trying to understand why someone who is 100% happy with the game would feel the need to come into a topic that's critical of the current state of the game in the first place, rather than simply playing the game since it's so enjoyable and always improving. If those who frequent MMO forums are as bad as your friend's "grease pit" analogy that you site, why are you here?

I happened to suggest greater civility myself (in reference to some posters) in another topic recently, but I did so without needlessly insulting people.
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 10:07 AM.