Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
11-10-2011, 12:20 AM
STO doesn't deserve my vote. I don't want the game to fail, but then again I've never caused a game to fail and die because I didn't fill out a few forms once a year.

Maybe next year if the game gets any better it might deserve votes.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
11-10-2011, 12:47 AM
As for me, they are not getting my vote.
They had their chance to fix the game, way before this, but chose to relocate their personal on other projects. (Neverwinter, and a secret project)
They literally put STO on the back burner knowing very well the game need major bug fixes.

They have failed to live up to the minimum expectation of an MMO.
To provide the game with new content within a reasonable amount of time and I don’t think 7 months and counting, is considered reasonable.

If I wanted to play a game with no new end game content then I would’ve gone out and spent 50 bucks to be a plumber and rescue a damsel in distress, at least, I would know, once I have rescued her, I would not have to pay to rescue her again.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
11-10-2011, 01:05 AM
Sorry, but STO won't get my vote because it does not deserve it.
I won't support Cryptic for their bad service during the last 3/4 of the year. They had their chance to fix the game but decided to make it a cash cow and relocate personal to other endeavours while they knew how bad it is.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
11-10-2011, 01:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik
Will you be voting for STO?

I'm sorry sir , but what you're basically asking from me (and others) is to skew the poll , rig the game , or just plain lie .

I'm sure that you have enough blue words in you to justify this ... -- and if that does not work then I'm sure you'll pull some more Bush/Cheney type "scare tactics" , in an attempt to "guilt" us into voting (or else OMG the game will fail because of us) .

Thanks , but no thanks . Perhaps next year ... , if Cryptic actually earned it .

- Sincerely , someone who does not think he matters anymore to Cryptic .
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
11-10-2011, 01:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik
To use your example, its no use awarding a Nobel prize posthumously either. Look at the value Obama's nobel prize for peace earned him in the short term after getting it without having actually brought peace to anywhere - perhaps that helped earn him enough street cred to pass the healthcare reforms.
Actually they don't award the Nobel Prize posthumously, although arguably sometimes to their detriment. There have only been two notable "exceptions" to this rule in history, one of which happened in 2011.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik


I agree with you. But this poll doesn't take the work of other games into consideration (in general). What will be taken away by its conclusion is the winner and not the competition. What doesn't get the attention in voting, are the various positive efforts those other games made, perhaps moreso than the 'winner'. In general, people are voting against those games without having the knowledge about who truly earned the accolade of best, but who they wish to receive the accolade based on the game they will likely play.
If people vote in this manner, then they openly go against the spirit of the contest, and just because others do it does not make it acceptable for us to join in the same practice as well. Why vote for STO, in the hopes that it might become a better game, when other games have already accomplished that goal, and actually deserve recognition for their efforts?

It is not my responsibility to improve STO's image. Especially when their current image is so justifiably earned. How can anyone objectively argue that Cryptic deserves any kind of recognition? We have not had any new content for almost a full year. There are a slew of bugs and issues that have existed since before the launch of the game, and yet still go unfixed 2 years later. The value of player subscriptions has been vastly eroded in the past few months with the F2P changes. There have been numerous instances of dishonest or outright false statements in Cryptic's promises/claims since the game has been released. Every bit of negative image that Cryptic/STO has was earned and rightfully so.

If they made sweeping positive changes to the game, then their image would improve. The reputation and image of a game or game company always lags it's offering, it does not precede it. Blizzard didn't get to be so popular by being a cool company with no product- they made superior games and then earned that reputation. Bungie didn't win awards and then make Halo, they made Halo first and then reaped the benefits of their efforts.

If STO were to go under, it would be Cryptic's own incompetence that led it there. They have had 2 years to turn this into a workable game. If STO fails, it will be because it was a bad game, not because it didn't win enough awards or have enough public sympathy. And would I be sad? Truthfully, not really. STO will have demonstrated that it is incapable of competing in the marketplace, and as a consumer I ultimately benefit because the standard for new games will be raised as a result. I am a Star Trek fan, not a STO fan. If STO can't make a game deserving of the Star Trek IP, then it needs to go under and another company needs to come forward to take on the challenge.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
11-10-2011, 01:19 AM
Very well said Stormnnorm.
I'M just thinking the same.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
11-10-2011, 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin View Post
Thanks , but no thanks . Perhaps next year ... , if Cryptic actually earned it .
It might be too late by then.

BlueWordsBlueWordsBlueWordsBlueWordsBlueWordsBlueW ordsBlueWordsBlueWords. You believe the poll will be decided by people who have experience in adjudicating all the efforts and positive qualities of each title in whatever category, after weighing the decision by perhaps conducting hours of research and trial play of the games? They will vote according to what game they play and wish to promote. Its nice to think otherwise, but it isn't accurate. By saying STO does not deserve to be, say " best non-fantasy MMO " its saying its best for people not to play this game. How can you be so absolute in this attitude?

If the poll were to ask your thoughts on each game, how you feel the game has done on pvp, or crafting etc, and then combined the results to see what people classed as the best mmo to have done pvp in 2011 - then sure, I would fully understand why you rate others above the game you play and want to survive - but it doesn't - the poll is not trying to find the best, its trying to find the perceived best. And by saying you'd rather this game suffer than upvote STO is saying you'd rather STO continue as not being perceived well. Yet you expect it to be around next year.

I am glad to see so many people who share my convictions about right and wrong, and companies earning respect by demonstrating results - but as I have pointed out I'm not trying to argue against that, I'm asking why you feel letting the game suffer on its last shot at staying online benefits your continued play of the things you enjoy in STO.

Nobody is answering that. Which may suggest I already have my answer. You'd rather let it suffer and die in spite of your enjoyment of things in the game than give it its best, last, chance at living long enough for the bad things to be fixed and secure your continued fun. To me, thats very strange.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
11-10-2011, 02:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik

By saying STO does not deserve to be, say " best non-fantasy MMO " its saying its best for people not to play this game. How can you be so absolute in this attitude?
I'll try again one last time ... and since my words are apparently inadequate to get through your shields , allow me to quote a little known fictional character who goes by the name of Capt. Picard :

"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based. And if you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform!"

And I'm sorry , but no matter how you try to bend it , the truth is that Cryptic deserves no "awards" for this years fiascos with STO .

Quote:
I'm asking why you feel letting the game suffer on its last shot at staying online benefits your continued play of the things you enjoy in STO.Nobody is answering that.
While I can't answer for "everybody" , I will answer for myself :
For a long time now I have NOT been enjoying the game , for a multiple of reasons .
Add to that the feeling of :
- Being lied to (new content just around the corner)
- Being cheated (emblem/merit/medals F2P conversion rate being skewed)
- Being mugged (250 emblem vet award , Excelsoir transwarp , VA token) -- and yes , I know some of those came back

All that's missing is the proverbial pie being thrown in my face , just before they shove me out an airlock .
I'm sorry , but I don't have to carry the Cryptic flag after all that .
Plus , I'm old enough to have a life outside STO , just like I had a life before I came to STO .
As for you , IMHO the way you turn around and blame the victims (player base) for not supporting Cryptic is just bad form .

As others have said before me -- STO will swim or sink on it's own merits , and by the PAID ADVERTS / BANNERS -- if Cryptic / PW choose to advertise the game . So far I have not seen such adverts , and frankly that worries me .
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
11-10-2011, 02:29 AM

Sorry, I am trying to keep my replies brief (if you want a reply).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormnnorm
Actually they don't award the Nobel Prize posthumously, although arguably sometimes to their detriment. There have only been two notable "exceptions" to this rule in history, one of which happened in 2011.
Not to nitpick, but.. it wasn't "something they don't do" until it was made a rule in the early '70s and posthumous prizes were awarded '31 and '61 before exceptions like Vickrey & recently Steinman.

Just because its no longer permitted, doesn't mean it didn't happen and doesn't invalidate my point that its of little use awarding such a prize posthumously, when the Laureate (devs) can't continue to fix the world (game, as its offline). The Nobel Foundation seem to agree, for the most part.

Quote:
.. when other games have already accomplished that goal, and actually deserve recognition for their efforts?
I agree, but the poll doesn't seek judges that are knowledgeable about other game's achievements. Your at least knowledgeable about STO, and surely its had merits in a year or why would you still be playing.

The poll seeks not to compare, but to question perception. Furthermore, there is no oath to be taken that you are prevented from making an impartial or ill-informed decision. So labelling people reprehensible (not that you did per se) for voting how they may wish to vote, for whatever motivations encouraged them, is surely ignoring these points.

Quote:
It is not my responsibility to improve STO's image. Especially when their current image is so justifiably earned. How can anyone objectively argue that Cryptic deserves any kind of recognition?
It is precisely because of trying to be objective that I am making the point that STO has had worthy improvements within 2011 which should equally be commended as much as faults are being rightfully deplored.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin
Cryptic deserves no "awards" for this years fiascos with STO
Quote:
Every bit of negative image that Cryptic/STO has was earned and rightfully so.
So, you essentially find nothing worth promoting a positive image about the following things of 2011 because of various fiasco in spite of added features like:

- Foundry
- 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
- Vivox
- Fleet action and STF queuing system (cross groups for fed/kdf)
- DOff
- 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)

These are things you interact with everyday now. Its the game you play. And you continue to pay to play because of these points.

If you have not noticed, they are not the subject of the majority of topics about this game on other sites. Things like launch issues, instanced play, tech issues, Cstore p2w, easy leveling, optional storyline, bugs, no new content etc take up far more discussion (and rightly so ofc), but directed at keeping STO down. Its harder for positive additions to be spread in this manner, because people are motivated by what they dislike or critique rather than perform a job and spread what they like about the game in proportion to what people don't like.

Even the most prolific and content rich game in the mmo industry finds it harder to spread the additions which grew the game (without the spin - like the list above).

Its not your requirement to spread the good you believe in, but you can surely see how it doesn't help that you don't. Earning that recognition for doing a good job is harder to show when people are still talking about launch issues nearly two years down the road.

Quote:
If they made sweeping positive changes to the game, then their image would improve. The reputation and image of a game or game company always lags it's offering, it does not precede it. Blizzard didn't get to be so popular by being a cool company with no product- they made superior games and then earned that reputation.
Sweeping changes like those I've listed? Blizzard grew their mmo when the industry had little competition. They, like Trion, utilized many positive aspects of that emerging mmo genre in their game. And are still adapting to that genre by adding in features that modern day mmo gamers expect to be there. Superior is subjective, which is exactly what that poll is looking for, perception of those polled not fact.

Is it that bad to ask that we promote STO based on that list? Or are we denying it a chance, when needed, because we'd rather punish Cryptic on their failings rather than support what have been additions we use daily?

Quote:
If STO were to go under, it would be Cryptic's own incompetence that led it there. They have had 2 years to turn this into a workable game. If STO fails, it will be because it was a bad game, not because it didn't win enough awards or have enough public sympathy. [snip] If STO can't make a game deserving of the Star Trek IP, then it needs to go under and another company needs to come forward to take on the challenge.
Indeed, I agree, except for you leaving out the point that it was clearly a good enough game for us to continue playing all this time - isn't that what matters most? Your perception of what was the BEST use of your time? And isn't that what the poll is asking for? Your perceived BEST game. If another game meets that point, then why could your STO time be larger in proportion (an example for those I am aiming this at who play STO as their primary game, or who like it enough to spend more time in it than others). I'm only asking that those who think their time playing STO is well spent to vote to improve its image.

To use an example, Star Trek Enterprise wasn't good enough to survive, and its been nearly 7 years now, and still no sign of a revival on the horizon. Like I said before, Is it spiting oneself to hold back on supporting what you LOVE in this game, the only ST mmo, during this pivotal time in determining if it will be around until's next year's awards... were you can vote on its merits on merit alone and not just my question on whether you will deny your feelings against Cryptic and vote for the the game.

Perhaps you'll have grand kids before Star Trek returns to the small screen - and theres no guarantee it will have half the quality of what some would argue were the good points about ST:Enterprise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aelfwin
While I can't answer for "everybody" , I will answer for myself :
Thanks for giving your opinion on this. Not to be blunt, but your not the demographic I'm trying to ask. You have decided that your not enjoying this game. I'm not trying to make you vote for something and ask you to do it based on feigned enjoyment. And I've clarified that one person won't have the impact needed, nor has the responsibility to 'carry the flag' as you say. I've repeatedly made that point of 'what a person enjoys'.

I'm asking those who still find enjoyment in the game they play, to vote not on the literal meaning but the impact of such a vote and how it would translate in benefiting the game's future. Sorry to make you feel like I'm doing otherwise.

Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
11-10-2011, 02:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nynik


It might be too late by then.

BlueWordsBlueWordsBlueWordsBlueWordsBlueWordsBlueW ordsBlueWordsBlueWords. You believe the poll will be decided by people who have experience in adjudicating all the efforts and positive qualities of each title in whatever category, after weighing the decision by perhaps conducting hours of research and trial play of the games? They will vote according to what game they play and wish to promote. Its nice to think otherwise, but it isn't accurate. By saying STO does not deserve to be, say " best non-fantasy MMO " its saying its best for people not to play this game. How can you be so absolute in this attitude?

If the poll were to ask your thoughts on each game, how you feel the game has done on pvp, or crafting etc, and then combined the results to see what people classed as the best mmo to have done pvp in 2011 - then sure, I would fully understand why you rate others above the game you play and want to survive - but it doesn't - the poll is not trying to find the best, its trying to find the perceived best. And by saying you'd rather this game suffer than upvote STO is saying you'd rather STO continue as not being perceived well. Yet you expect it to be around next year.

I am glad to see so many people who share my convictions about right and wrong, and companies earning respect by demonstrating results - but as I have pointed out I'm not trying to argue against that, I'm asking why you feel letting the game suffer on its last shot at staying online benefits your continued play of the things you enjoy in STO.

Nobody is answering that. Which may suggest I already have my answer. You'd rather let it suffer and die in spite of your enjoyment of things in the game than give it its best, last, chance at living long enough for the bad things to be fixed and secure your continued fun. To me, thats very strange.
The community has argued,pleaded,begged even for improvements to the game....we gave them our money,we subbed and bought out the C-store on the premise of 'the more money you spend,the more money we have for content and gameplay improvements'.....we got nothing but more C-store items and the message 'spend spend spend'.

I do not blame people like Heretic and CapnLogan,I do blame the people at the top making all the abysmal decisions.These people fail to see that they are not running a country but a business,unpopular changes will effect their bottom line.
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 04:02 PM.