Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
02-21-2010, 05:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Specineff
......The end game content is SO bad people.. that many players are literally cancelling their subscriptions until they release more stuff. That truly means there is NOTHING to do........
sound familiar ? like another recent Cryptic title perhaps ?


.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
02-21-2010, 05:34 AM
Spot on review. I feel the OP realy wants to like the game (just like myself), but it just fails in everything but the fundamentals, which means it could become awesome, but that requires a crap load of work from cryptic.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
02-21-2010, 05:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by waveslayer View Post
well I disagree with most of this review and Eve might be your king but it bored me to tears, ya the game needs work but I personally have not experianced that many bugs, matter of fact I havn't came across more then a small handfull of bugs, more content and polish will come, game actually brings back memories of DAoCs launch, wasnt much there, but it turned out to be pretty good for awhile...oh well, See ya, enjoy the next big thing or whatever you play.
Difference is that **** had meaninful RvR despite the lack of quality PvE content...STO doesn't have either. I agree on EvE, I find it a huge borefest as well, but you can't knock the depth it has.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
02-21-2010, 05:45 AM
.

I have also noticed the lack of dev interaction as compared to CO.


been 'in the dark' so to speak since beta.


almost feels like the project has been allready scrapped internally, but they wont announce it in order to get as much revenue back as possibe first.


can anyone proove me wrong ? I really hope so.....


I have a cmdr 7 engineer atm ( I have a cmdr 6 science as well, but havent played him since I determined I messed up his skills due to the lack of documentation, and hit-and-miss learning strategies. )

....I'd kinda like to know how much playtime I really have left...lol.

.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
02-21-2010, 05:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Specineff
Starting off.


I don't want to make a super long review...
You failed.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
02-21-2010, 05:49 AM
When I look at all of your basic ratings, it appears your "mediocre" assessment does not match up. For me the game is roughly a high 70's game.

* Graphics and Sound are clearly what shine, agreed.

* Space Combat is better than EVE Online (hands down) and actually more complex than many players give
it credit for. Example: Managing all of your BOs skills in a tier 3+ Escort; at the same time, monitoring your
ship's condition; and then having to put into view, and target your next enemy ship.....is pretty complex.

Then consider the preparation before battle. Your skills, your ship equipment, and your bridge officer'
skills are all tried, trained, replaced, upgraded, reviewed......It is easy to spend an hour or more doing this
with each new ship you earn.

* Content is typical of what you find in all MMOs. Search, Destroy, Gather, Escort...etc, etc.....Name me
one MMO that is different.

* Instancing: My only issue with instancing is when I'm teamed up, not all of the members of my team get in
all of the time. The game should recognize when a team is joining an instance and assign it to an instance
where the entire team will fit. If it can not fit, then it will create a new instance for them.

Instancing of space sectors is not a big deal, and I honestly don't see why it would be. The arguement
that it makes the game feel small is in your head. I've never said to myself, when warping to another
sector, "gee this makes space feel small and confined." Suspending reality is what gaming is all about,
just ignore the 10 seconds it takes to warp to next sector.

* Lack of Fleet Tags and tools: This is my biggest complaint on the Federation / Klingon side. Cryptic needs
to understand that in order to create a sense of community, it needs to support Fleet / Guild identification
and intra-Fleet interactions.

STO is the first MMO I have ever seen that launched without Fleet Tags. This makes absolutely no
sense, considering that all of Cryptics previous MMOs have this.

My final Score: 77 - 80 (C+ or B-), definately a good deal to improve on. Not what I would call "mediocre", which in my mind is a game in the 60's btw.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
02-21-2010, 05:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by viresanimi View Post
Good and accurate review. Appart from the graphics, there's not much depth in the game.
.

Even the graphics suck. Flickering wavy shadows on my ship at all times for no apparent reason in space, despite there being no light source for it. Asteroids not fully loading in detail despite all my things being maxed in graphics settings until you're within a certain range. Mind you that second one is common in all Cryptic games. I remember City of heroes doing that too. Infact, that's what this game looks, feels, and plays like. A slightly improved, slightly more ****** COX engine.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
02-21-2010, 06:01 AM
Best review i have read to date, better than most of the website reviews I have read as well.

Very detailed and I for one agree with the verdict. However 4.5/10 would be my score personally.

Have to disagree with the graphics though, they are really not that good.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
02-21-2010, 06:03 AM
There's a lot to read there, but it's not a bad read and at least it's been thought out and considered rather than just a rant. It's a shame that a lot of people will just skim past it and dismiss it as a wall of text, most of those text walls are the well reasoned posts.

Pretty graphics and sounds cannot make up for an almost total lack of content. Whilst the space combat feels well put together and the ships handle like I feel they should, there's so much similar space combat in game that even that starts to wear thin.


As things stand it's maybe a 5/10, I wouldn't, indeed couldn't, recommend it to anyone I knew right now. It doesn't matter how good the presentation is if the underlying product is as shallow as STO.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
02-21-2010, 06:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blodveard View Post
When I look at all of your basic ratings, it appears your "mediocre" assessment does not match up. For me the game is roughly a high 70's game.

....

* Content is typical of what you find in all MMOs. Search, Destroy, Gather, Escort...etc, etc.....Name me
one MMO that is different.

....

My final Score: 77 - 80 (C+ or B-), definately a good deal to improve on. Not what I would call "mediocre", which in my mind is a game in the 60's btw.
I just picked out the score you would give and the content part as this is where I believe the main problem lies with this game. You see, while you are correct that the quests are of the same standard as those of basically all other MMOs, yet other MMOs offernot only more of them, they also for the most part offer other things you can spend your time on (meaningful crafting, harvesting/economy, special group content, meningful PvP, etc.) which seems to be lacking here. This is not a problem that can't be fixed in the long run, but given the repetitive content that is in game atm it certainly warants a low score imo.

Now if you don't playce emphasis on the actual state of the game with your scoring but on the potential of the fundamental system, I can agree with you that the score would be a lot higher. However I wouldn't score like this and I believe the number of customers that would sit and wait with an active subscription for the the game to realize it's potentila is quite limited.
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 07:58 AM.