Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
For any who havent seen it, the new episode of STOKed is now out. In it they interview the new EP Stephen D'Angelo, who confirms something many have suspect for a long time; Cryptic did not set the launch date:

http://youtu.be/a0tP0YrlJB0#t=11m10s

So Perpetual had STO from 2004 to 2008, and then by the time Cryptic got it they only had 2 years before they had to release. I honestly doubt any other studio, with the possible exception of Blizzard, could have done more with only 2 years of development before a forced release date.

Thats not to say I disagree that the game wasnt ready for release(especially the KDF side), but I'm glad I got what I did rather than nothing at all.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
10-04-2011, 08:23 AM
i knew it from the beginning
but it's just amazing many others didn't... it was fairly obvious that Cryptic was not responible for the forced launch date
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
10-04-2011, 08:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The.Grand.Nagus View Post
For any who havent seen it, the new episode of STOKed is now out. In it they interview the new EP Stephen D'Angelo, who confirms something many have suspect for a long time; Cryptic did not set the launch date:

http://youtu.be/a0tP0YrlJB0#t=11m10s

So Perpetual had STO from 2004 to 2008, and then by the time Cryptic got it they only had 2 years before they had to release. I honestly doubt any other studio, with the possible exception of Blizzard, could have done more with only 2 years of development before a forced release date.

Thats not to say I disagree that the game wasnt ready for release(especially the KDF side), but I'm glad I got what I did rather than nothing at all.
They did not set the launch date, but they took on the work, knowing when the launch date would be?

Is this correct?

As far as I know Cryptic was an indepent studio before they sold themselves to Atari (is this correct?)

So am I correct in assuming that

A: Cryptic sold themselves to Atari

and

B: Cryptic took on STO knowing it had a (very) limited ammount of time to complete the game (whether they set the date or not)

The water is somewhat muddy for me here, so anyone who can clear it up, I would appreciate it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
10-04-2011, 08:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The.Grand.Nagus View Post
For any who havent seen it, the new episode of STOKed is now out. In it the interview the new EP Stephen D'Angelo, who confirms something many have suspect for a long time; Cryptic did not set the launch date:

http://youtu.be/a0tP0YrlJB0#t=11m10s

So Perpetual had STO from 2004 to 2008, and then by the time Cryptic got it they only had 2 years before they had to release. I honestly doubt any other studio, with the possible exception of Blizzard, could have done more with only 2 years of development before a forced release date.

Thats not to say I disagree that the game wasnt ready for release(especially the KDF side), but I'm glad I got what I did rather than nothing at all.
I agree, 2 years and then they launch, that was a very tight schedule.

What I fault cryptic on is its lack of direction in the 1.5 years after launch. It's like finally going out with a cute gal who then turned out to be more ADD than Paris Hilton. We have no sense or direction on where the game wants to go. Does the Klingon and Federation war get resolved or escalate? That was one of the main story points in the original launch afterall.

1. People want 5 mans like any other MMO? Yay STFs! But it felt rushed
2. People want ship interiors! Yay interiors! What do you mean... "ship interior functionality?"
3. People wanted X ship. Ok! C-store cha-ching! Who cares if it's easily one of the best in terms of balance (Intrepid, MVAM)
3b. Who cares if it's nerfed to function horribly? (Gal X 1.0, B'rel cloak) We'll fix it many many months later!

To Cryptic: Look, it will take a LOT of effort to get PvE characters as involved and polished as SWTOR, but you DO have somethings no one else currently has.

You have a war with 2 sides, potentially incredible space battles, territory control and diplomatic negotiations, gorgeous ship visuals, etc.

The featured series was a hit you guys did, and I doubt Bioware would produce them at the rate you guys were doing it, before the long content drought.

Please, focus on a few things and then really polish them and deliver a star trek experience that's very refined and exciting instead of dabbling in a lot and leaving them halfway done.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5 Smell the coffee
10-04-2011, 08:30 AM
I do not doubt that a vast majority of people knwo, let alone appreciate Cryptic's dilemma.

Even with such official confirmation, I doubt many would understand as I would think the second preceding post is typical of most people's attitudes.

Two years is a short period of time.

P.S. To the immediate preceding post, going out with a gal with attention deficit issues can be fun.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
10-04-2011, 08:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gx4th View Post
The featured series was a hit you guys did, and I doubt Bioware would produce them at the rate you guys were doing it, before the long content drought.
And we would probably have 2 more by now if it werent for Atari selling them(and forcing a hiring freeze) and the current transition to F2P. But I agree that once that is done I hope they seriously focus on the FEs.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
10-04-2011, 08:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt_Equinox
They did not set the launch date, but they took on the work, knowing when the launch date would be?
I'm not seeing the difference either.

Besides people work best under pressure and without deadlines we'd have more Duke Nukem Forevers.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
10-04-2011, 08:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitsuneRommel
I'm not seeing the difference either.

Besides people work best under pressure and without deadlines we'd have more Duke Nukem Forevers.
Whenever I accept a contract it is on the basis that I can complete the work to a high degree of quality or I do not accept the contract.

To me this seems they accepted the work knowing they didnt have enough time to complete. So unless I am wrong in my reasoning, I have no sympathy really.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
10-04-2011, 08:44 AM
Its high past time to quit the debate on what got Cryptic and Us in the here and now. Its focus on what needs to be fixed to keep them and us here and ahppy in the game play.

So they got a bad deal of teh cards and did the best they could in short notice. Thats old news, its time for the looking forward only.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
10-04-2011, 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt_Equinox
Whenever I accept a contract it is on the basis that I can complete the work to a high degree of quality or I do not accept the contract.

To me this seems they accepted the work knowing they didnt have enough time to complete. So unless I am wrong in my reasoning, I have no sympathy really.
The difference is, if they hadnt accepted the terms STO wouldnt exist right now. There is literally only so much that can be done in a certain amount of time, and I highly doubt any other studio(except maybe Blizzard) could have done more in the same time. Was it irresponsible of Cryptic to accept the game under those circumstances? Thats debatable, but even if it was I'll take this over nothing.
Closed Thread

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 03:35 PM.