PVP:Yes | Distribution:Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Hybrid | Monthly Fee:n/a
Desktop Client | System Req:
| Out of date info? Let us know!
Star Trek Online Review: Star Trek Online Re-Review - Edit
7.4
| Pros |
 Good Value Improved Customer Service Lush Graphics Solid Sound Effects & Voice Overs |
| Cons |
 A One Faction Game Annoying Mission Bugs Raiding System is Poor |
Few games have had a more contentious release in recent memory than Cryptic Studios' Star Trek Online. It wasn't an extraordinary number of game breaking bugs that plagued the launch of the game and but rather the impossible hype machine built up in part by its own developers.
The reaching ambitions of former executive producer Craig Zinkievich seemed to ignore some players' feelings of broken promises and missed opportunities in a game that sought to combine outer space and ground gameplay in under two years worth of development time and just shy of a year's worth of content development.
Cryptic executive Bill Roper, a lightning rod for controversy after the collapse of the doomed Flagship Studios' Hellgate: London, also made some players wary and the game's business model of combining a monthly subscription fee with a virtual item shop in the form of the “C-Store” continues to be a source of controversy.
Now, seven months later, Roper and Zinkievich are both gone.
Daniel Stahl is the new executive producer in charge of the game. Cryptic has shuffled its team and notably added former Decipher's tabletop Star Trek game lead developer (and one of the architects behind the original Fallout) Jesse Heinig as a designer.
The game recently deployed its third major content patch and began a new initiative of adding weekly missions to advance the storyline.
Let's see how the game stacks up in Season Two: Ancient Enemies.
Graphics
The graphics are lush and the art direction is a pleasant blend of stylization and realism. The heavy use of bloom effects may take some getting used to but this is clearly a stylized take on the future of Star Trek, being set some thirty years after the events of Star Trek: Nemesis. The bloom effects and trailing lights that spew forth from your ship's engines may seem excessive if you were expecting a spot on depiction of life in the world of Star Trek: The Next Generation but are no more pronounced, as deviations go, than J.J. Abrams' use of lens flare in his cinematic revamp of the Star Trek franchise and arguably more successful here, as the “engine trails” are designed to help ultra-casual players orient themselves in three dimensional space.
The game has made significant strides toward both accuracy and quality in its depiction of ships, with the art team taking detailed critiques from the playerbase on its ship models. Many of the iconic ships sported stylized and less accurate takes at launch (particularly the accommodate the ship's modular visual customization approach) and the bulk of these have been corrected, within the limits of constraints like poly-count budgets, into solid recreations of their onscreen counterparts. Beyond the enhanced accuracy and beauty of the ship models, fleets now have access to a fairly robust design tool to create their own unique logos which can be displayed both on the hull of members' starships as well as on shoulder patches of players' human avatars.
The new artist in charge of these improvements, CapnLogan, is now hard at work further expanding Klingon ship options to include Orion, Nausicaan, and Gorn vessels as well as improving the existing Klingon ship options. (The Klingon faction also saw racial uniform options added already in Season Two.)
The ground environments themselves were somewhat repetitive at launch, tending to either toss you out into full fledged outdoor terrain or confine you to high tech, box-shaped corridors. There has been a definite shift away from this trend in the weekly content, with a taste of a mostly outdoor urban environment and improved art for the new indoor mine set piece.
In terms of space, there was a tendency to overdo gridlines and markings on the map screens and to overuse astronomical phenomena such as asteroid belts and nebulae for mission locations. The new areas represent a stylistic shift away from that with subtle, pulsing grids, atmospheric lighting and a decreased reliance on crutches such as the asteroids for reference and orientation as the game's designers have grown more savvy about creating reference points that are less distracting.
The art direction of this game generally received fairly high marks at launch, even from critics of the game's other features, and the quality of the art assets has noticeably improved.
The detailed character customization and built-in machinima tools make this game a solid value in the MMO market for people enthusiastic about eye candy and visual aesthetics.
Sound
Star Trek Online has authentic sound effects which are solid recreations of the sounds found in the television series and films.
The music itself is original to the game and, while it lacks the swell and majesty of Jerry Goldsmith or James Horner's cinematic scores, is suitably reminiscent of the quasi-operatic music of the original Star Trek. Purists may miss the theme music from TNG, DS9, and Voyager but it's probably worth noting that the average episode rarely contained more than hints of these themes and the game itself uses the Alexander Courage score liberally as a coda to missions.
Leonard Nimoy does an admirable (if somewhat tired sounding) performance in his final turn as Spock and while his narration is best described as adequate, he takes a more active role in a memorable mission which players have been praising since launch. Moreover, the fact that he personally congratulates you whenever you level up is a welcome twist.
The remainder of the cast is quite good. The late Majel Barrett-Roddenberry (or an admirable soundalike) and her male Klingon counterpart act as efficient and helpful guides to the game's combat, informing you of status changes. Chase Masterson stands reprising her role as the Deep Space Nine character Leeta, who turns in a zestful voiceover performance in the tutorial for the new Dabo mini-game.
The biggest downside to the audio work is Zachary Quinto's performance in the tutorial, which is drab and perfunctory. However, Daniel Stahl has indicated plans to scrap Quinto's tutorial from the game, which may lend some relief to players who find this sequence a bit underwhelming.
What's notably missing is ambient voiceover from your pet crew and other NPCs. Cryptic recorded a high volume of ambient voiceover prior to launch but realized that much of it was poorly linked to in-game events and has yet to re-enable this feature. This kind of audio immersion is sorely missed by immersion-seeking players used to playing MMOs with the standard sounds enabled.
Role-Playing
The settings are lovingly recreated for the most part, with a wide variety of options out of the box for new players. You'll find a wide variety of bridges available for your ship, both from established Trek lore and original designs. As soon as you complete the tutorial, you have access to player housing aboard your ship with the ability to display trophies unlocked from the game's Accolade system, custom bridges, and three sizes of hallway layout to choose from. Interiors for all ships include a bridge (of your choice), captain's ready room, mess hall, captain's quarters, main engineering, transporter room, science lab, sickbay and more, to provide you with a wealth of private roleplay locations.
Additionally, there are several planets and stations for each faction to use as roleplay hubs, including many iconic locations Federation-side such as: Risa, Deep Space Nine, Vulcan, and Andoria.
The interiors, it should be noted, are at an unfortunately noticeable heightened scale to accommodate a third person camera designed around commanding not one but five members of your crew in ground combat.
Where the game truly excels, as expected, is in its avatar customization. You have the ability to create custom aliens that are beyond the wildest dream of even most sci-fi movie budgets and to have a strong guiding hand in every aspect of how your crew looks, from the length of their nose down to the color scheme and design of their uniforms.
Expand on the ground combat and ground exploration and il concider giving this one another look.
For now its still just a space combat MMO with a weak economy and no crafting system which should i mention is one of the critical areas an MMO should deploy.
Its hard to imagine what Cryptic were thinking when they released this half baked mess
Agree with celee..
Just spacecombat just gets boring real fast.
Dont get me wrong i really enjoy that, but not over and over and over...
Reminds me of the commercials for "tanks online" about "eve" :p
The kid playing for more than a years, basicly doing the same thing for peanuts.
i feel let down by this,
but i hope stargåte or sw will bring the fun to sci-fi mmos again.
It is still NOT Star Trek. It's an online space shooter with Star Trek Skins.
New review, same game.
Still half an MMO. A terrible adaption of the ST universe to an MMO.
More disappointing is that much of the dev energy goes into more crap for the C-shop. As opposed to finishing the second faction promised at launch.
Even though you can buy this game for around $10 for the box, all the content can still be played through in a month, thus making a sub fee on top of a non-cosmetic cash shop a poor value. (And yes, Cryptic sells significantly game affecting items in the C-store, a big no-no for many.)
Many of the other weaknesses of this game were not addressed in the "re-review". The game is plagued (and will always be) by a lot of lazy design choices (small instances, shallow combat, no real Z axis - yeah yeah, sure it is "coming", pathetically weak exploration system) Cryptic made in order to get this game done in 24 months on a low budget.
I don't care what the rating is, re-review or not, the game is still not worth playing or paying for, on the back of Cryptics broken promises.
Better this game fall and another developer get the IP.
Agreed. It's a pretty terrible space shooter as well.
How a game gets a 7.4 while completely undermining the IP it's built upon is beyond me. Even disregarding the IP, how does the game get a 7.4? You push spacebar and F the entire game. Sure, it looks decent and the sound effects are lifts from the shows and movies but the gameplay is attrocious and there simply is no community (you don't need others and you're sectioned off in instances all the time), to say nothing of how un-Trek this game is.
On a related note: Reviewers (everyone single one on every site) need to stop being so nice. I understand you can't just trash every game because your advertising dollars come from some of the companies whose games you review, but overly nice reviews only help to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
Edit: I had typed 7.3 instead of 7.4. Fixed that.
I gotta be honest, the review was awesome right up until he said, "there are no plans for much in the way of Klingon content for this game and Klingons have been told to expect that the majority of their content will come from faction neutral missions". Yes, they are CURRENTLY not made equal, but saying they never will be is blatantly untrue if you actually go and look at several interviews with Stahl since he took over. He's said flat-out that one of his primary goals is to flesh out the Klingons to a full faction to match the Federation, and he has no interest in adding the fan-coveted other factions until it is & will make new factions as equally fleshed out. The teams at Cryptic are also already hard at work on a persistent PvP system which will likely involve something along the lines of territory battles and holding sectors.
As for the C-Store, with Lifetime Subscriptions still available and more players taking advantage of it, from a financial aspect it makes sense; the fact that Stahl is working hard on making ways to make as much from the C-Store available in game through other means as possible gives me a lot of hope for the future of this game. I look forward to seeing yet another re-review at the 1-year anniversary mark.
I played STO a bit after release with my friends from another MMO game for about a month or so. Then I took a break and tried it a little bit last month to see the new interior layouts.
Unfortunatly for STO.. I am still far to involved in other MMO's to really want to maintain a regular subscription in STO.. as it does not carry enough of the MMO featuers I enjoy to keep me paying a monthly subscription fee.
I really do like the space combat.. particularly in teams.. I find it fun and authentic to what I envision ST combat would look and feel like (in 3rd person). Ground is pretty neat.. I like the NPC team concept.. but the actual missions are teadious right now.
I like how they are maturing the game.. making the ships more alive.. adding more content.. tweaking out bugs.. all these things are good and healthy advancement that I thinki will help maintain the current playerbase a lot longer.
I'd really like to drop in an play STO more often.. but I am thinking a few times a month.. not 3 or 5 times a week. Its a fun game.. but without the larger complexity of a full-features (multi-factioned, less-instanced) MMO.. it simply does not support a community-approach that attracts me to invest my time into it beyond the odd 'drop in' session.
In all fairness.. its going to take a LOT from any MMO to pull me into more than just casual play.. I already invest enough time in my current MMO community (forums/guid management/PvP rank maintenance) that I have very little room for a 2nd and 3rd MMO subscription, even if I can probably afford it.
I will probably keep an eye on STO.. like I do a few other MMOs. I've revisited CoH and LOTRO recently after a year (or longer) of inactivity. I guess I will just keep juggling accounts to suit my interest.. while keeping my main account (SWG) constant as my home base.
If you are a big ST fan and want to invest some time into a game.. STO is not a bad place to do that. Its not perfect.. but its certainly improving and maturing quite well.
The review was a tad harsh toward the Klingon players, so just for a little clarification: There is more Klingon-specific content coming (faction specific missions for both are listed in the Engineering Report), the Klingon story arc is a lot of fun, and the new ships look fantastic.
Far from recommending people avoid it, I'd suggest that if Cryptic sees more people playing Klingons, they'll see that we get more content. And in fact, it certainly appears that more people are active in the Klingon zones than before, and shortly after, Season 2 went live. They've also mentioned that there will be Vet rewards for both factions (again, it's on the Engineering Report) for at least the 200 and 300 day marks.
We're not all raving lunatics over there, and sure, we want more content, but it's not quite the barren landscape that was painted in the article.
While conversation about STO may seem warranted as there are some people who play it - quite a few actually, and a few who enjoy it, I think most of our answers can be derived from the company that developed it: Cryptic Studios. A fitting name for a company that creates MMOs (aside from CoX) that reek of "half-baked" gameplay and content as was mentioned above. I think their design is 'cryptic' in that it doesn't create the fun 'hey I really want to play game x' sentiment. Even people who hate WoW get a twinkle in their eye when they talk about it. CO and STO both scream drab and unimaginitive. Somehow it seems cryptic thought that the franchise would sell itself. That's bad business all the way around.
So I digress. Cryptic's wavering reputation as a game company tells me all I need to know. That, and the fact that the executive producer of STO and Bill Roper left. People don't typically leave successful ventures. Not so soon after launch, at least.
Tell me if you will, what you would think if Chris Taylor left a few months after the launch of Dungeon Siege 3. Two words my friends: "Abandon ship!"
insanex
Space Combat is where STO really does a pretty good job of recreating the feel of Star Trek. Much unlike another space opera that is upcoming, the battles feel much more realistic. The only drawback to space combat is that it does not allow a lot of varitation. NPC ships basically come in one of three generic types with a variety of weapon types thrown in. You either get a 3 ship swarm of smallish ship (frigates), a escort or crusier or a "battleship". While each "set" has some variation on how you deal with them, there is not much difference in the way they deal with you other then the variable weapons types. I for one would like to see ships move around in a zone and not just circle aimlessly around a particular set point in space. While in many missions you may get ships warping in somewhat unexpectantly, most of the time they just set up and fly around those set points in space waiting for you to come to them. So, while space combat IS good it still could be improved.
Ground combat? Back in closed/open beta and beyond, many people warned that ground combat was a weak point. In fact, some suggested that Cyrptic should delay the game if for nothing else then to improve ground combat. While that did not happen for various reasons, Cryptic has improved (somewhat) what was the ground combat experience from what it was. No longer do your NPC Bridge Officers get stuck on walls and doorways. Unfortunately, that is the only major thing some might notice that was changed. Yes, some minor areas of combat have been tweaked but those are so minor and trivial that they would not be noticed.
Cryptic has promised that they are looking to totally revamp ground combat. No details have be released yet but everyone is hoping that the clunkiness that ground combat is will be greatly improved.
Overall, I would endorse STO to play.....if nothing else just for the space combat. But, if you are looking for a rich ground experience in the STO universe, look elsewhere...for now.
The game has definitely improved. Its still not where it should be, but its getting there. In the end, it all boils down to this: if you enjoy the game; great. If you dont, hopefully you'll be able to enjoy it at some point in the future, and if not find another one that you do. Either way, ranting about the past and the mistakes that have already been made isnt going to change them.
Nice review, but sad that the Klingons are not meant to be a full faction any time in the future.
Would be better to rename the game to Starfleet Online if all other factions are designed to serv the Federation.
I played CBT, OBT and the real game for 1 month from the opening and at that time i found the game to be like you said "Mediocre".
Since then i played another 2 months after a couple of months of break and the game is still the same nice looking, but very flawed game based on Star Trek.
The simple fact that everyone can be an Admiral make me wanna...
This part:
The first month of play, at least, is absolutely a bargain at the (just under) $20 price tag and well worth several months of subscription for the uber-casual gamer.
Pretty well sums up the game. If you are more than a very casual gamer, then you will most likely still not enjoy the game for much over a month or 2.
But if you can get the game on the cheap that includes the 30 days, not out much in the end. Would not recomend anyone get the extended sub and never the life time sub unless and until they had spent several months in game and really like it. Each to their own as they say, some will like this casual game, and lets hope that they do continue to add to, and fix, the game as much as they possibly can.
This must be the fastest re-review MMORPG.com have ever done. Some games didn't get their FIRST review a long time after launch (AoC and WAR)... Seems wierd, especially since not much have happened with STO since release (other than all the drama)
It is also strange that "Good value" is one of the pros. How can one of the cheapest MMOs ever made (took 18 month to make), but still one of the most expensive MMO for the consumer be considered good value? Pay more to get less is good value now?
And this part: "It wasn't an extraordinary number of game breaking bugs that plagued the launch of the game and but rather the impossible hype machine built up in part by its own developers."
STO was hyped?? Where and by who? Most people seemed to think it would be CO but with a Star trek skin, and we were right, only it was worse. STO had a bad launch because alot of people realized it was just a cheap attempt to make some fast money out of fans of the Star trek franshise. Disgusting!
I still find it humerous that the mmorpg.com staff are insistent on giving this game a passing grade.
STO is a perfect example of the dumbing-down of massively-multiplayer Online Games. The majority know it, which is why the majority left very quickly following its' release, and will not return; unless there is an act of God, and I hear He's too busy.
In any event, thanks for showing support for the less than mediocre.
More like around $10 if you go to amazon or look on the cheap rack.
One thing that even the most ardent supporter can not deny, is that the game is so content light, that a "normal" gamer can play through all the content in a month or less. Even calling it an MMO is somewhat stretching the truth. This makes having/paying a sub fee: 1. superfluous and 2. dumb.
Cryptic is not a charity, and do not deserve to be paid for not doing their job. (Up to most people's standards, at any rate).
Since Roper and Zinkievich have been gone and David Stahl has been in charge, the game has vastly improved. The game is far from perfect, but it has become an enjoyable game. I personally enjoy it myself.
BTW, one correction to the article about Klingon content. They are actually working to improve it, and when the next faction is released (I hope Romulan), they wont make the same mistake of weak content.
http://startrekonline.com/node/2089
7.4?! LOL. That's almost an 8! Do you have any idea how highly you just rated this piece of utter trash? Call me a troll all you like, hell, im happy to don that title, i will troll this game to my grave. Cryptic took the Star Trek IP and sodomised it, 'Star Trek' Online is a mere shell of what it could have been. It is an atrocity, it really is plain terrible. It's a sham of an MMO and i don't even need to re-iterate why, because everyone knows and 80% of the population abandoned this fail-boat the minute they saw it had an ice-berg sized hole in its deck. As a trekkie, and long time MMO veteran, im surprised even this game caught me off guard, i'm just glad i got out of my head-start and cancelled my pre-order in time before being charged for this utter joke.
The only reason STO is still going is because Cryptic is poor, they were on the edge of bankruptcy before STO went live, they stole money from loyal fans with life-time subscription offers (when it took players less than 2 weeks to get through all the content this game had to provide) and the biggest in-game store in MMO history, they even had to refund hundreds of life-time subscriptions because people were that disappointed. They took all the money they could before sentencing this p.o.s to life-support on a shoe-string budget while they retreated to their dark, dingy development office concucting their next failboat MMO. Which IP will Cryptic rape next?
Down with cowboy development teams! We've had enough!
I would tihnk if you were gonna re-review any cryptic game it would be the one that just had it's one year anniversary but maybe that's just me.
A very well written interesting re-review. Thank you.
This i will dispute with you:P They did not HAVE to refund anything. Just to be clear, i was one of the ones that asked for and got a refund for a 6 month sub pre order while closed beta was still going on.
They did not have to refund mine or anyone elses pre-orders. They did however, and the vast majority of them that were asked for before launch were given with no hassles.
Lot of folks do not like Cryptic, nor their games, some do but a lot do not. But i can not fault them for how they handled the refunds.
But how they handled the refunds on both CO and STO were to Cryptics credit.
Legally they did. Their T&Cs at that point didn't abide by the law, since then they amended them.
Look like the unlucky IP is - Never Winter Nights
I have said it before and I will say it again....this game will get better with time. I would play it If I had a machine to play it on. And When I do get one I plan on a life time sub.
With all the new episodes added, and fixes and other stuff, ur (PROBABLY) gonna have a great time with STO for a couple of months until you run out of content.
And yes, STO is more like a semi-MMO than a full fledged-MMO, but i usually see so many people around me (players) at any given time it doesnt really bother me, AT LEAST not as much as the lack of content.....
To sum it up; buy the game and enjoy it while it lasts, just dont expect it to last you for months like other mmorpg's do:)
Cheers
Two comment I take exception to and suggest the writer brush up on his info on the game:
By and large, the Klingon faction seems driven by a focused group of malcontent separatists who want their own game and are clinging on to promises broken a year or more ago when the vision presented was for a radically different game than the (actually promising, albeit effectively single faction) game we have now.
I'd suggest the author review the game and the announcement made with regards to the game from the beginning and up to the present. Statement number one is pure fiction , as Cryptic never publicly stated this , but made it a self fulfilling prophecy. The CEO promised a fully fleshed out faction . Even today they promise more faction specific content.
Point number two is largely a subjective statement based on an obvious lack of experience playing or experiencing the content. The editior need to bring this person to task for the lack professionalism that is on display here. The suggestion that the game should be a single player game is mentioned nowhere in Cryptics discription of the game . The so called malcontents are only guilty of holding Cryptics feet to the fire in an attempt to get Cryptic to fulfill it's own statements and game design , most being Lifetime subscribers upset with the state of the game.
MMORPG's credibility is to be severly questioned based on this article and the authors ineptitude. The lack of research and the inability to even properly research the Klingon faction tell the entire story.
Yep..no diplomacy,Real exploration= fail imo. Space combat WAS hella fun though.
All MMOs in history have become better after a while ('cept maybe SWG) so it doesn't say much.
They shouldn't have made it in 2 years, MMOs releasing too early will never catch up, only exception so far is Eve and I doubt this will be the second.
1 year more in development and adding more diplomacy to the game so it would be truer to the IP and the game might have done fine but now it will be another Vanguard.
STO sure is cheap, huh? You get to pay up to $20 for a ship, that you cant even aqcuire by playing the damn game. I admit, it's improving, but very very slowly. Giving it a re-review like 8 months after it was released sounds rubbish, the main thing that has been added was weekly episodes like 3 weeks ago. There's nothing other than that really. Perhaps you should've re-reviewed Cryptics other piece of crap game, Champion Online.
This game is barely worth a 6 and you give it 7.4 and have the balls to say its "good value".
Lol this reviewer seems to have been playing a compleatly diffrent game to the one ive tried.
To me this game is unfixable, there engine just does not make good MMOs.
If they do add Romulan as a seperate faction - and properly, not just another half ar$ed Klingon type Faction, then i'd give it some serious thought about trying the game, though the heavy instancing and lack of social aspects does give me some concerns too. I think this game is still one to keep an eye on, but i dont know that i would recommend it to anyone, at least.. not yet.
Heres a newsflash for you: you dont have to have anything in the C-store. I havent bought anything myself, and I dont plan to.
I have to agree with most here. It's half a game at best... Sadly, a typical cryptic cash-grab game :(
I was thinking about trying this game again. However, I would want to play a Klingon, and well that is obviously out the question....so I will go back to EvE Online, and wait for GWII or one of the other new MMOs coming out in the next year.
LOL at people believing those incompetent fools at Cryptic will finish fleshing out the Klingons. They said they'd do it at the 45 day patch. Well, Season 2 came and went. How's the Klingon gameplay going? Are there more KDF players now? Did they improve the KDF faction lineup of ships like they did with the Federation? (hahaha) Did they give the KDF faction a worthy variety of uniforms?
Those fools have no real intention on fleshing out the Klingons. They've been blowing smoke for months now.
And for you guys hoping for the Romulans? Not gonna happen. Unless they release them in a completely backwards, half-a**ed, incomplete way like they did with the Klingons.
Because the Federation is where all their attention goes.
Unless they're busy trying to find ways to fleece their customers with new stuff in the C-Store.
That will be Neverwinter Nights. The news about that has been out here for a little while now, and it's an unfortunate turn of events.
I haven't played STO since the disaster that was so wishfully named 'beta' so I can't comment on the accuracy of the re-review, but I will say this. Games that so royally screw the pooch and so blatently rip people off DO NOT DESERVE A SECOND CHANCE.
STO was designed and launched in such a catastrophic state because Cryptic was counting on that second chance. It's re-reviews like this that cause publishers to green light shit like what Cryptic pulled.
I don't know about other people, but I want to play a good, solid, FINISHED MMO... ON LAUNCH DAY. People who've played MMO's for a few years will probably agree that's become wishful thinking at best. Why? Because websites like this one looking out for the publishers advertising buck instead of the players best interest.
Thanks!
Edit: doesn't matter.
This is the kind of review that will cause MMORPG.com reviewers/reviews to loose credibility... this game, to pretty much anybody I talk to about it, is a 100 hour offline game that they plopped online instead. I have a rating posted months ago so I wont repeat myself...
This game is not at all that good for more than a drive by... unless they did a TOTAL overhaul, expanded space, expanded ground, scrapped the "lobby" of galaxies... I respect any developers attempt at creativity... but not every effort is going to be good... you have to have an eye for mediocrity... this is just that...
I'm currently leveling a Klingon and having fun. However, I'm alternating between my Fed and my Klingon, so I cant say I wouldnt get bored if I was ONLY playing my Klingon.
Where is the discussion on game play? You just seem to gloss over it. Basically it does not resemble Star Trek in any shape or form beyond the fancy graphics. Star Trek was all about exploration and there is zero, zip, nada of that in this game.
Giving this game a 5 is being kind, your 7.4 is absolutely absurd. Don't try to tell me they are improving it, the basic game design is a complete failure, you just can't fix that.
Not a bad looking game but not one I would ever pay a sub fee to again. It's not out of any particular venom at Cryptic either as some will probably respond I just realize that as it stands now the game could provide a player like myself with a few weeks fun at the most making it never worth the monthly sub fee. I must admit though if it were free like during the welcome back weekend I made it to I would probably log in to see what new things they added but not much more than that still.
While I'm not willing to disagree with the review score I can definitely say it couldn't rate that high from me (and would also still rate lower than the original score it got here).
Are you kidding me 7.4 really?!!!! Did Cryptic just buy advertising and this re-review a throw in bonus for them?
As one poster already said it is reviews like this makes this site lose all credibility.
I suppose you would give APB a 7 then.........
"The Klingon faction also saw racial uniform options added already in Season Two."
Really? Well, I guess it can be considered 'radical' when you look at how awful it was at launch; when something starts out at rock bottom, the only direction it can go is up. My god, the Klingon players just recently were begging for a frikking coat! Also, in regards to the comment in the article about Cryptic breaking their promise on the Klingons a year ago, that comment is false. Cryptic was promising that the Klingons would be a fully fleshed out faction at launch, and afterwards; the 45 day patch was supposed to focus on them initially, as Cryptic stated they needed time to make a Klingon version of the Genesis system.
Try reading again. The word was raCial, not raDical.
I believe that your score of 7.x is FAR too nice for an incomplete product. How is it possible, then, for your staff for rate any finished product lower than an 8?
I understand STO has given MMORPG.com revenue for advertising on your front page, ran multiple contests on your site, and had an interview or two with your staff. However, you are an MMO news reporting site. Your stance and your staff's should be impartial to any development studio.
This "re-review" is obviously very much influenced by the site's relationship with the game's development company, painting the game and the development studio in good light. Standing by this article's score, and missing significant areas for review, causes you to lose creditability among the player base and other note-worthy MMO industry sites.
7.4???
so does that mean that mmorpg is now rating games on a scale that goes to 20?
if sto is a 7.4 i can think of half a dozen games that are above 10.
just viewed the review. It does a nice review of the things we have recently viewed in STO.
Its nice to view that there are some who view the need of re-viewing sto to make a rereview of previous reviews..
And i must say that, right now, in retrospect i do believe that Star Trek Online will soar high in the years to come. The devs DO hear us, and Daniel Stahl is as good a executive producer as we could ever desire. Most executives these days seem to think that they are far too important to debate ideas with the community, but dstahl, rekhan and others are so in touch with the community that we sometimes forget who we are talking to.
All in all, i surprisingly found myself playing STO every single day again since last week, and only after reading this re-review i noticed that i was once more having fun. STO future does looks brighter and brighter from where we stand
And another thing i must say is.. most people in here who are complaining and whining should be a little more involved in STO's community before saying that this game sucks. The thing is that STO was plagued by bad decisions in the past, and now it is entirely under new management. In the past 3 months, dStahl managed to turn water into wine regarding some aspects of the game, and there still is much more to come. Just wait until the new ground-combat system hits the main server...
review was a good read. Haven't played this game but watched a friend play it for a few hours once and in all honesty I was tempted to have a look at it (especially as there was an offer at that point in time) until he said that the space combat was all it really had and he showed me the games problems.
Like I said I dont play this game nor probably ever will because that first view of the game destroyed it for me, but I am glad to see that the developers got shifted around and they are now taking the game in a good direction. Just a shame that they never spent more time getting the game right before release... although how many games can this statement be applied to nowadays?
Yea it could have been.... What ever, I know a bunch of people that could have made a success when othes didn't . Thing is... they never did a thing but talk.
So... i can not say where Criptic is short but, maybe not at all. who knows? The games graphics are killer, the missions are good as any mmorpg.
Space is a hard one to make mmorpg casual maybe? EVE online players if you are HardCore, don't get going please. I understand Eve and it's incredible theory, i agree with it all the way. But mmorpg's are not a Life Sacrificing event. Eve is great but.... Not enought room for another.
In the mean time, STO is good. What else can you do in space?
Will Tell Ya how this GAME wuD ROCK !!! Its not What do ya do in Space, duh, iT is WTF can ya do TO the planet!!! Allow STO to attack CO. A new expansion. Aliens vs CO, Like War of the Worlds or Mars Attack. Anything. The work put into this program could kick ass if unleashed on the other. Cryptic let your products go to war!!! Hell make it a third product if the co and sto world wanna be left alone. the scenerio could bring on as much as the box office did if done right.
7.4 is an overrating. I would say it's more alike a 4.0, but I suppose it all comes down to prospective. STO still isn't a very good game and never will be as long as they stay to Cryptic's original concept.
Still the community's coming out with some good stuff too, one player created an iPad app whereby you can fly your ship using a star trek console,not exactly a necessity but certainly good fun
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/tap-play-mmo-controller/id387723212?mt=8
Interesting article. If the game fails for you on the first go around trying it, why would you want to come back to it?
Great review, spot on. A lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth on the official forum from the Klingons about this review, I guess some people just can't handle the truth.
Eh, that happens from time to time; I'm dyslexic and although I do try to make sure I read everything correctly, things sometimes slip by. Still I find the fact that the klingon players are begging for a coat to be quite telling; Cryptic's reputation for customization was clearly lacking for the Klingons at launch, both in characters and ship options.
No. Oh god no. Please tell me this isn't true. Not Neverwiner Nights, probaby the most deep, beautifully crafted RPG i have ever played. I hate you Cryptic, with a passion. Cash-grabbing scum of the MMO industry. WHO allows them the reigns to such powerful IP's? This industry is doomed to fail so long as failboat producer's are getting hold of rich, deep IP's and then sh*tting in a box and selling it for $60. This really is a bad turn for the MMO industry, and i thought STO was the pinnacle.
Cryptic needs to be stopped.
How does Cryptic's STO justify a re-review score of 7.4 from the original score of 6.6? STO is not where it should be for a seven month old MMO that is so shallow - it is about where it should have been at release and it still would have had ssues. A box price of $19.99 does not make a shallow MMO that commands a premium sunscription fee with a cash shop full of 'content' a good value either. It takes a lot more than pretty graphics and sound effects to make a solid, enjoyable MMO.
Why am I surprised? Mmorpg.com gave Cryptic's Champions Online a score of 7.5.
The almighty advertising dollar does indeed rule.
How can people be surprised about this game. It's Cryptic! The modern day representation of failure.
So Cryptic hows Champion Online doing? Hows Hellgate doing? And now Star Trek? A legendary franchise, a fully realized world and lore, and yet you manage to crap all over this game. Do you really think the space mmo crowd will move from Eve to this game? No they wont.
It's sad really.
Hey, at least their crying gives you something to cry about. I guess you should be grateful :D
Who is Patrick Gerard? Does he work for Cryptic/Atari?
'Good value' is one of the pros? I checked some other MMO reviews, so apparently STO is better value for the buck then other MMO's that dont have this listed in pros. Is this some kind of joke? Compared to other major releases and including the improvements, STO is still a shallow MMO if it comes down to variety in offered features and amount of content. How can this be turned into a pro for this specific game?
Then the overall score. 7.4 for a 'mediocre release that is shaping up to be promising entry in the MMO market,'. So basically this game gets a 7.4 for nice graphics, sound, customer service and the meaningless 'potential' . Its as if the reviewer couldnt think of one more point in the pros list, but 3 were to few to warrant a 7.4 score.
To me this re-review seems more like an attempt to get rid of the original way too positive review of the STO release. Its also surprisingly fast after release, as others already have mentioned. This makes me wonder where the initiative came from.
I also find it strange that a game like this can get away with lack of content, still has plenty of bugs in that limited content after this long and gets a good rate. While other MMOs, that offer a lot more features and even try to be innovating in certain ways, get mainly critised for trying to do too much and for that reason having too many bugs (not more relatively speaking then STO for that matter).
Fallen Earth (just as example), offers more content, a richer variety of features and is a lot more daring from terms of development. But its as if that is seen as a bad thing by this website. Its original score was lower then current STO score, and if you compare what both games have to offer, it doesnt make sense at all.
I really cant understand how Cryptics run of the mill MMO's get rated so forgivingly, especially considering their overpriced payment models (C-store released together with a content lacking MMO that requires AAA priced sub).
So, have they fixed the idiotic "zone in from space and remain a space ship while you walk in the space station" bug?
And this game was NEVER about the old Star Trek. Right down to the voice over by Leonard Nimoy, it talked about the destruction of Vulcan which meant to me that it was about the new Star Trek and screw the old. So if this game has things like missions with Worf, and yet voice overs by Leonard Nimoy, it doesn't even know what it wanted to be.
They said "there's not going to be any money" and yet instituted "energy credits" which, lets face it... ARE MONEY BY ANOTHER NAME. Star Trek never even mentioned "energy credits" in any of the shows, the books, the games, or anything else. Everyone had access to everything provided the area they were in had access to the technology and the clearance to use it. The travel system was horrific and annoying. And the completely idiotic idea that you're the captain of your own ship BUT YOU CAN'T WALK AROUND INSIDE IT is probably the dumbest thing I've ever seen in a space MMO, especially one where the ip its taken from is focused mostly on stories from the inside of a ship, NOT on missions from space stations or planets. And this is only the tiniest fraction of the problems with this game. They had a gem in their hands that they could have made one of the biggest MMO's ever seen but they chose to create crap because they wanted to rush it out the door.
During beta this game sucked really bad in almost every possible way. I seriously doubt its changed that much.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Bravo.
I actually agree. However, no amount of crying is going to change the mistakes they have already made. I actually want the game to improve, regardless of the problems it has. That being the case, ranting about things that have already been done isnt going to accomplish anything.
Not without a complete rewrite of the ground game engine or the ability to completely skip over (and still progress) all ground content. Graphically, its ok. It has all the bells and whistles you would expect. Unfortunately, and this is going off of my experience in the past couple weeks when they invited folks to come back in, everything else about the ground game/engine is subpar for a title that expects subscription fees. The animations are complete and utter crap, the AI is on par with the original doom release, textures are ugly, skills are boring and not at all creative, not to mention completely un trekkie. For example show me the episode of any series, or movie, where crewmates start dropping turrets and put up mass effect 2/Halo type shield generators etc. The entire ground game would, maybe, be acceptable for some third rate IP or something they created themselves, but what they have in STO is not acceptable from a Trek game.
This is why reviews mean NOTHING. They, like what I wrote in the previous paragraph, are nothing more than an individual's opinion. You re-rate the game at the same level that you did originally, it would seem unless I am missing something. So, with about a year under their belt and all their "improvements" they have managed to sit at about the same level? Look, I understand most reviews are little more than a marketing tool, and paid reviewers/columnists that survive on ad revenue that is generated by community click-throughs (of the very same products that are being reviewed) should be viewed with skepticism because it is in the best interest of the "authors" to generate buzz and click-throughs. It's like expecting criticism of the American Government, when controlled by the left, by MSNBC or (when controlled by the right) from FOX.
This site really is going downhill.
Cryptic did not make a Star Trek game, they made a space shooter with Trek skins and look and feel.
In Star Trek, every effort is made to avoid combat, violence is the last resort. In STO, violence is the only resort. STO is not Star Trek.
On top of that, STO is a poor MMO, with little social interacton, extreme instancing leading to small play spaces, and little or no exploration and crafting.
Cryptic should not be allowed to think that they developed a good Star Trek MMO. They did not.
edit: So, as a Star Trek game -- rated a 2.0. As an MMO, it's a 4.0.
7.8 is so wrong !, this pile of poo is not worth more than 4.5 in my opinion. Cryptics Greed for money in releasing this so called game early has cost them any future income i might have spent with them. Yup i was one of those people that actually payed for this pos.
Your right, it is. You actually increased the rating.
I afficially do not trust MMORPG.com reviews when this game gets 7.4 and user rating 6.6 and Darkfall Online (funnest game I've ever played) gets 6.0 rating from this site yet users gave it rating 7.7 even with all of the trolls and hate . .. how does that work?
I'm not gonna tell them what they should have rated this game, but it does not deserve even a decent rating (in my opinion). Frankly, I'd be a tad pissed if I knew little about the game and visited this site and made a purchase based off of this review.
Space combat is fun for a very brief amount of time, but the rest of this game is simply atrocious. It's common knowledge that the game is beyond lackluster and is nothing short of a molestation of the IP.
I'm going to refrain from any detailed discussions about my article. It generated a range of opinions. I knew it would. If Cryptic can make good on Klingons, I'll happily reverse my assessment. They've previewed some nice content in the past few days.
This review is a six month re-review. All games are eligible for one if someone is interested in re-reviewing one.
I based my score on the numeric breakdown for MMOs this site has reviewed in the past. Here's my score breakdown, for those interested:
Oh... And regarding value, I think $20 is a great value if you complete the content inside a month, it's worth $35 over two months ($20 box and one month fee) and that the weekly episodes being added (and daily episodes) are well worth $3.50 a week in a world where a fast food combo meal is over $5 and a comic book is $4.
So can you explain how a MMO that took 18 month to make and has very little content but yet is one of the most expensive MMOs to play get 9 for value??? I think maybe 2/10 for value seems more accurate.
Graphics and role-playing seems extremly high aswell.
Thanks for posting though!
It works pretty much the same way as everything else in RL where the "professionals" and average joes dont usually agree.
Another review at the one year mark? How many chances do you think STO deserves?The difference between an MMO and a single player game is that the MMO is always changing. If you want proof of that, look at SWG 6 months before the NGE and 6 months after. Dont you think the game deserved a different rating AFTER the NGE than it had before? And if a game's rating can change because of foolish decisions like the NGE, the other side of the coin means that it should also be able to change because of improvements after the last review.
Most subscription MMO's offer the first month free, so that is no big deal. You seem to forget the game has a cash shop that has many items that cannot be attained in game (which represents alot of potential content up for sale), so many players end up spending more than the $15 per month subscription fee - not a great value in my book. STO is not doing anything extraordinary, especially compared to other current MMO's that offer so much more bang for the buck.
Well good point, I'll give you that.Although I'd be first in line to say that this game has glaring problems I don' think your being entirely realistic or fair here. Tell me one MMO or other video game based on Star Trek that isn't almost entirely about combat??
I don't think there has been another MMORPG based on Star Trek. There have, of course, been ship-based shooters, like STO, based on the Star Trek look and feel.
In RPG games, you get to pick the role you want to play. I spent last night on Lotro just exploring ruins, clicking hidden spots for deeds, and harvesting and crafting. The world is immersive, and fun to explore.
You don't get to pick a role in STO, you are forced to be a ship captain in battle.
Value? Good lord... Are you aware that you're reviewing a MMO and not a single player game? You say it's a good value that for the month it takes you to get through the content, it won't cost y much. So the value is saving on a subscription? All you did was take their lack of content and somehow turn that into a pro by saying they'll save you money unlike those other pesky MMO's with their fancy content that keeps you paying for years... Real slick, dude.
The review has the numbers flipped around this game is a 4 at best. The fact that "two are now gone" is not a defense of the company's plan to milk every easy cent out of the true StarTrek fan's wallets. This game was never built to be a good MMO or even a good game. It was made specifically to display ST universe models in a 3d environment which can be bought and enhanced through micropayments over time. Even calling this charade a decent game is a stretch but to infer it is a decent StarTrek game is downright ludicrus. It's all the fans have atm so they'll have to live with it, but if another was available there's no doubt most of the people would jump ship. I had to give the game a try when it hit 20 bux but I was disgusted at what I found. There's my opinion as a true ST fan. If you want to play a good startrek game go play Voyager Elite Force that was the first and last good ST game ever made.
Roleplaying: 9
Value: 9
Yeah... seems like a noob review to me. Well, seems the reviewer just joined the site so it's predictable that he will be soft as pillow. Everyone's a Vice Admiral sure seems to capture Star Trek and Starfleet awesomely. I remember in the shows where you had 300 Vice Admiral's per ship fighting Borg, it was just awesome! Giving Roleplaying 9 when you just command your own ship full of NPC's in an empty universe with instances and maybe around 20 other players (ships with their kazillion NPC's in it) is rubbish. You can't even roleplay the sole purpose of Star Trek; "To boldly go where no man has gone before". Planets are barren wastelands when you get there and your away team does nothing, but hinder your progress.
Saying the game's good value, because you can buy the box cheap also completely bypasses the whole idea of having a MMORPG. Well, not that you can call STO MMORPG, but still. STO even has a C-Store and I believe some lifetimers even say STO is C-Store Online, you pay monthly fee to access their nickle and dime store.
Honestly, I can accept cash stores.. adding stuff like uniforms I can live with, but I will not accept adding ships and even simple things like emotes to them with no way of obtaining equal items in-game. It's just robbery and I see how Cryptic is paying for their greed nicely. Hope they burn.
Thanks for the review and the follow-up. Interesting stuff. I'm one of these whimpy casuals, so I may give this game a looksee one day, esp now that I've read about weekly missions. Sounds fun.
re: All the people who say "another review? Why?"
I can't believe you're complaining about a new review of an MMO. There's nothing wrong with a second look, esp of something that's changed. If your complaint is that <your favorite game> hasn't gotten a second chance, then write up a review yourself. I don't mean that as a challenge either - these things are interesting to a lot of people.
re: "In Star Trek, every effort is made to avoid combat, violence is the last resort. In STO, violence is the only resort. STO is not Star Trek."
Huh? Yes, there was diplomacy and dialogue, but there was plenty of fighting too. Kirk certainly loved to fight, and DS9 featured a war for a number of seasons.
Meanwhile, how do you represent diplomacy meaningfully in an MMO? Take the episode in which Picard rescues the earth boy captured by <whatever bumpy-head race> - what exactly are you going to do in an MMO? Click lots of dialogue buttons, then choose the one that says "don't fight, give the boy back", and that's the end?
You need to think this through. The only interesting diplomacy I've ever seen in MMOs involves players, not the game.
-Jeff
People don't realize that an MMO with no combat, just diplomacy text will get boring extremely fast.
And an MMO with nothing but space ship combat will get boring just as fast.
Though I agree just combat DOES it get boring, I dont agree it gets boring "just" as fast. Just non-combat gets boring faster than just combat.
Well STO got 7.4 that felt really biased.
Whats next, give a guy money and he will write a review on hellokitty online and give it a perfect 10?
A couple of things firstly , value ? Really ? The game goes from $ 50 to $ 20 , basically bargin bin. Which means they have to drop it to rock bottom to get to sell. Not a good sign if you are a Distributor, worse if you're a developer.
Customer Service has been the bain of this game, GM ticket anyone , bug anything lately ? Not to mention the unresponsive issues with account services. LOL, you obviously used them a great deal. Lag and rubberbanding were pretty frequent as of late , more then I can recall.
As for your comments about Klingons , first to comment on them, I'd suggest you actually play the faction . You still persist on forwarding your false subjective opinions about the game design and multi faction game this was designed to be. The execution of the Klingon faction was horrible and hurt the game. This is acceptible language, what you stated was the a line meant to deflect criticism off of Cryptic. As a reporter you've forgotten the number one rule :
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/objectivity
Especially where 3 a. is applied. Learn it.
This game isn't worthy of a re-review. If you want to re-review something, review Darkfall
I dont know how you can rate the fun and role-playing factors so high. Do you have a high level char at all? All you get is one new episode a week, other than that you do a daily. That is not fun. If the game were so much fun, why is it a ghosttown? How many AAA titles lauch and fall below 100k in subs in less than 6 months? Can you jump in as a new person and have fun for a few weeks, YES. Can you continue to have fun after you max one char, not really unless you enjoy doing the EXACT same missions over and over again. Unlike other MMO's with different content for different classes, STO only has one track to follow for ALL chars. And dont get me started on the fun factor for klingons. I dare you to start one and see what life is like for them and then come back here and back up your claim of rating this game a 7 for fun.
What role-playing? You cant even join a task force in a group and there is NO purpose to having fleets in game. They give no benefit other than a shared bank. You can invite others to your bridge to stare at the upside down textures on the walls but good luck sitting down or doing ANYTHING except enjoying the view. What did you do, role play by yourself? Did you pretent you were a ship captain and talk to yourself while playing? Thats not really what most people consider roleplaying content in a game.
This game does not deserve a score above 6.9 at best. I really wonder what the motivation was for your re-review.
i am a die hard trek fan and morg player. Was very much looking forward to sto but the platform disappointed me and so i did not buy it. I was hoping for a trek game where you could choose to be an engineer, doctor or bridge officer, when i read everyone was a capt, and you had a bunch of npc pets, was not what i was hoping for, i wondered then and speculated that the community aspect of the game might not be too strong and seeing some of the posts that appears to be the case
I respect your point of view but you do not understand our point of view at all it seems. What is acceptable to you is not acceptable to most.
The Game Engine itself... is substandard and never should have been considered for use with anything but a cheap console game. It is not suitable for use for a online multiplayer game and no amount of fixes can fix this one... the whole game needs to be scrapped software wise and remade from scratch.
How space was done in STO is horrible to most players that bought and played the game... I am talking not only space combat with no Z axis but also how the ship classes were designed, Sector space itself, even the lay out of the galaxy is wrong. Note I am not talking about walking in ships... even running the game as a "ship character" space in so many ways is substandard.
Ground combat misses the mark because it SHOULD be ground SURVEY, EXPLORATION, CONTACT, and DIPLOMACY first and then combat if necessary, which means ground CONTENT needs a complete re-create. Planet zones need to have many times more area than they do not, environment needs serious work, LOS issues, collision issues, character animations need serious work, Missions... oh man where do I start with that mess...
Factions... this is Star Trek for god's sake, Klingons get worse treatment than my mother in law, no Romulans? seriously? We fight Borg from day one and kick their tails? Give me a break. Note I am a Federation all the way and even I think the Klingon faction got screwed.... Gene is turning over in his grave I would imagine...
Philosophy of game content and Missions relative to the Intellectual Property... Blatant disregard for the IP in both subtle and gross fashion. I am going to stop right there... either you know what I speak of or you never will understand that STO is NOT Star Trek, only an insulting joke of what it should be.
And you say it is getting better?
OF COURSE IT'S GETTING BETTER.... IT WAS SO BAD IT HAD NO WHERE TO GO BUT UP!
If you like STO fine, but please be advised that many, many Players feel that Cryptic should have lost the IP as soon as STO's release was public because of the horrible job they did with it. No amount of encouragement from Players that still play will ever fix that to many of us.
The only way to fix this mess to to abandon the software, shut down the servers, refund the customers what they have paid, and sell off the IP to a Dev Team that will do it right the second time.
Now for MMORPG.COM and it's re-review of STO...
7.4?
You, the staff of MMORPG.COM, have sold your loyalty shamelessly. You have lost what respect I had for you as a MMO news site.
I will not be reading anymore of the reviews posted by MMORPG.COM.
IF you are a star trek fan AND don't care much about how much potential is wasted in this game ... i guess you cold possibly like STO. Personally, if anyone cares, i'd very much like to sell my lifer account. I expected someting at least as good as EvE ... since STO made a LOT more noise about how great this game is going to be before even launching it.
People who are bashing the score haven't played since the first week of launch.
I loled at the mention of 3D space.
@JoBrill- I feel so much sympathy for you lifers. I do. You had every right to think this would be an exceptional Star Trek MMO despite it being made by Craptic...unfortunatly though, it was a gamble that you lost at. :(
SWG's NGE was a monumental change to the entire game, and thus rightly deserved to be given a newer rating based off of what for all intents and purposes was an entirely new game. While STO has made improvements over the past six months, those improvements are nowhere in the same league as improvements made in other MMOs in the same time period, such as AoC. A re-review this overly generous should have waited until the one year mark, at the very least; what improvements they have made do not deserve the overly generous score the author of the article broke down for us. Additionally, a good part of the article seems to be looking at where STO might be at in the future, rather than where it is right now.
That might have been a valid argument, if you didn't still have lifetimers and other players on the official STO forums saying the same things.
7.4.....really.....
i want what you guys are drinking!
It is more about their scale. Average should be 5, not 7.4. As far as I remember have no game gotten lower score than 5 and that is just weird.
If you subtract 5 from the score and make it 1-5 instead you get the true score.
One thing I get from reading this thread is that the review criteria needs a re-think.
Its the weighting that's the real problem there. Graphics, customer service and sound might be dreadful but if the gameplay has you hooked, they will barely factor into your overall assessment. Putting asside disagreements over "value", this is one reason why all the posters here get pissed off with such a high final grade.
Reviews of other mediums rarely base their grade on an average of various catagories because a sensible reviewer knows that maths can't magically produce a number that reflects their feelings towards it. Its a nerdy mind that expects otherwise.
Company that buys advertising space on mmorpg.com + amature reviewer that was a member of the STO community and Cryptic fanboi before being a "contributer" here = game gets 7.4 rating when it should get maybe a 3.0.
Nice re-review! This game is getting better theres no question about that. I still can't believe that people want so bad for this game to fail just so they can say "I told you so". There's been a lot of arguments and opinions on why this game started out bad, is still bad, and how and why it will always be bad. It's nice to see someone look beyond the games awful state at launch.
Ummm this article is so transparent. The author was scratching and clawing his way to find "pros". This game is far below average for an MMO today. VAlue? Are you kidding me? Initial purchase+ SUb + Shop with one faction and no PvP. Terrible terrible article. "Please send us more advertising dollars. We are nice to you." Ack, I spit you out of my mouth. Ack!
Another Low Budget game.....The monthy sub for these games should be reduced, but it wont happnen. All the tools are in place to make it a great hame, Why not have a space zone that is large as an entire star system? and you can beam down to each planet. Why not have some planets have zones as large as zones you usually see in WoW or even multiple zones on one planet, Why not have the space combat system as complex and involved as Star Fleet Command......why? Low Budget........
My angle is make something great or dont make it at all.....having a market flooded with low quality choices is worse that have less choice with better quality
jack emmeret (cryptic ceo) from aug 24
But the reviews - and these boards - differed. Instead, they said the game was unpolished.
As I said in one of my interviews (I've forgotten which one), I'm not going to be self serving and say "well, the reviewers are wrong" or "the players don't know what they're talking about". That's silly at best. We at Cryptic read you loud and clear. We need to up our quality.
dstahl (executive producer of sto) from aug 24
So from where I'm sitting, Cryptic is not throwing STO under the bus, but instead listening to the concerns of the team, and giving us the time and resources we need to begin addressing some of the bigger issues like Ground Combat, Sector Space, Exploration, PVP, and any other big issue that has been clearly called out in reviews.
http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=177070&page=2
7.4????? ummm considering this is what the ceo and executive producer have said about the game less than a month ago.... i really think your massively over-rating sto.
I won't touch the review itself as most of questioned/critiqued it enough. My wonder is....7 months out and this qualifies for a re-review? Hmmmm. Yet another reason why mmorpg.com is not part of the MetaCritic panel.
I am still waiting for my Klingon Scaners to work, they been broke since BETA. I find it funny that they can pump out Fed Starships every couple of weeks to put in the C-Store but fail to fix something as small as a scanner. I realy believe that within 12 months, just long enough for the Lifers to get their monies worth to go F2P that way Cryptic dosen't have to justify any thing they do with the game.
Theyre not broken. Scanners only detect non-combat interractable objects, and Klingons simply have none. That said, I do want them to detect combat groups as well, but as it currently stands the scanner works exactly like it was made to, and is therefore not broken.
Brilliant post and correct in every way. The only way you'd be satisfied with this game is if you aren't even remotely a Star Trek fan and are looking for nothing but a casual friendly space shooter with extremely limited options. Contrary to popular opinion, Star Trek fans will not just buy anything so long as its labelled as Star Trek. You NEED to get the IP right to keep them.
I gree with you its awesome post :)
Re-reviewing STO after 7 months and just a few relatively minor content/bug-fix patches is like re-reviewing WoW after going from X.0 to X.1. If you're going to re-review, at least wait until something has changed.
Kirk threw more punches than any of the other captains, yes, but he wasn't doing it all that often. Also, on DS9 that war arc didn't feature a whole lot of combat screentime-wise. Now, did it have more combat than the other series? Yes, but it was still a very small percentage of screen time.
First, it's not the player's job to create X or Y. Second, STO's community has offered a number of pretty solid ideas on diplomacy.
Absolutely fantastic review.
I agree wholeheartedly.
The new team has really got their act together cleaning up the mess that pathetic previous team made !
I wont be playing just yet until the new planned revamp (they are going to completely rework ground combat because the curretn system is basically a pet-grind full of horrendously poor gameplay)
I cannot stand ground, so is tay clear for now. I love space combat though!
I look forwards to the future expansions as the games playerbase rises steadily. Its no longer a desert town anymore (i went on recently) like it was, we now have people in each of the social zones and in space, whereas at one point i can honestly say the online counter was below 200 for most of the day, which was utterly depressing.
I would thouroughly reccomend this game to any star trek fan who likes the federation, but if your after other factions stay clear for now. They do plan to add' faction' content in future but i believe that will be expansion pack based. And again, it will be gimmicky:
You will get a UI, ships and a few casual missions,with a focus on PvP and then neutral missions that all factions get. Federation seem t obe the only ones who get pure storyline/general misssions ontop.
By the by in regards to this:
Re-reviewing STO after 7 months and just a few relatively minor content/bug-fix patches is like re-reviewing WoW after going from X.0 to X.1. If you're going to re-review, at least wait until something has changed.
All mmo's get re-reviews. They usually get a initial launch one, a few months down the line one, and then they get a finilized/expansion one (usually a year or so+)
You obviously was not around in the beta. As a proud closed beta tester for this game, i can definately say that a LOT has changed since testing began. Its still expanding, slowly, but surely. There was NO diplomacy system, no bridges, no crew, no klingon PvE, No klingon levelling system, no planet life (animals etc), Low content...
There is significantly more content which is still being pushed forwards. Cryptic LISTENS, unfortunatley that is also their downside. I.E in the beta, too many whined there was no bridges. Cryptic responded quite nicely that they were in progress please wait.
Guess what. Idiots couldnt wait, they whined and flamed and screamed. So cryptic got tired and said 'shut the hell up, here, have some unfinished crap designed bridges'
Then waited a month before they began fixing the concept bridges. Now ive criticised them heavily at launch for so many failures, but things like this were the PLAYERBASE's fault. Had people accepted the polite request to wait, bridges would probably have been functional and released in a month or two. Instead, we got a bare minimum, eventually animated, eventually made to size.
Oh, and im not blind. I still dont play STO, I wasted far too much money on it, i have a pre-order special lifetime account from back in the closed beta when it was looking fantastic and promising. Eventually ill play it again someday, probably after the ground revamp.
As to them having hte IP, theyve done a great job for two years work. TBH they really should have spent 4/5 on it though.
Lastly, as someone who has seen the old star trek online (yes, i witnessed perpetual entertainments STO it was a glorious thing to behold) I can say i wish PE had finished. That was the most fantastic game i had ever seen. Ever. Unfortunatley, they were ass's about it and refused to let Cryptic have any concept art/work done and coding/engine etc, and so cryptic started from scratch.
I don't care how the game has changed...
Their constant use of MicroTransactions, especially in a collector world like Star Trek, has dubbed them as heartless blackness.
I'll never play a cryptic game again...
Fair assessment: the art is solid (and improved), the space combat is fun and nuanced (lots of customization in your build), etc.
The big detractors: the ground combat is stupid easy (especially once you realize how to insta-gib everything), Klingons don't have much PvE content outside of exploration, DSE, fleet actions (Group Instances), STFs (5-man raids), Borg Sector missions, and 8 unique KDF missions.
The game has really improved since launch - and most of the additions have been added in-game (not the C-Store):
I got into this game at launch and had a ball...at least until I maxed out on level super-fast & wound up with nothing to do but grind exploration missions or suffer through a PUG on a raid. Levelling was SO fast that by the time I really got to appreciate a particular starship, its loadout & handling, etc., I'd be leaving it behind for some new ship class. The only enemies that were remotely challenging were Romulan Warbirds, and the Borg--well, the Borg just flat cheated. I'm glad to hear that they've finally got ship interiors, and that they're revisiting & changing around some of the mission content--that'll be good. And I'm very sorry for the Klingon players. They were promised--PROMISED, multiple times--that more Klingon content was coming their way, that Klingons were and had always been intended as more than just "monster play"...and now it turns out that they were lied to. I'm so very sorry.
The rating MMORPG has given STO sounds about right. It should be higher--that is, Star Trek Online SHOULD be rated higher, but the game itself does not deserve it. Maybe it will, eventually...but I'm not holding my breath. STO had vast potential, and I hope that someday, they'll figure out how to unlock it. In the meantime, I'll be ventilating goblins & orcs over at LOTRO while waiting for SW:TOR to go live. For the Republic!
Wow Nagus I hope that was sarcasm . If it wasn't, that was quite a reach and good for a chuckle. You put your credibility at risk . /CDF salute ! .... LMAO. On a more serious note , yes that's the reason Cryptic gave and it's been like that how long ?
I left STO two months in and came back in the third month and out of all three of the updates I saw none had more release content than C-Store content, I don't see how you could even come to this conclusion, if you count missions seperately then you should also be counting c store items individually as well but even if not I have yet to see it as any closer than fifty fifty.
I tottaly agree with you m8t ....
They did the damage to this IP already... it will take alot to get me to go back. But untill then LOTR & EvE online is what i will be playing ... and then SWTOR ..when it comes out .. And maybe Black Prophercy!
But STO .... nope ..there are just much better games out there for my $15 ... than this one!
PS: ...and i Love Star Trek...!
None of this addresses many of weaknesses that experienced MMO players can't help but notice: No death penalty of any kind, extremely small playable spaces (both in space and on the ground), no economy to speak of, massively oversimplified combat controls (space bar and F and you can play the whole game), little tacticaly flexibilty, no player interdependency, extremely poor use of the IP ( for trek fans), no real end game. This list goes on, and on.....
This whole deal smells surprisingly like a new PR effort on behalf of Cryptic/STO. Access for interviews with Cryptic corproate types (which happened recently) in exchange for a re-review?
Anyway, this game is still not worth the sub fee on top of the C-store on top of the box (even though this can be had cheap these days).
The re-review is a bunch of hot air, just like the promises of Cryptic and their defenders.....
This game is riding the coattails of the Star Trek franchise.
Star Trek was about exploring new worlds and solving diplomatic problems, with some troubles along the way. There is no vision in the mission stories and they all end up being the same, dreary, "go get there over there but watch out for some humanoid bad guys who might try to stop you".
There is no real loss in this game, death has no meaning - clearly tailored towards the instant gratification crowd but displaying all the attributes of a game designer interested in making money now and not caring about what happens a few years down the line because he'll probably be developing another, similar, game to rifle through your pocketbook.
Might as well never play another MMo again, as MicroTransactions are being used by nearly every major title now in some manner and it is the wave of the future sadly enough.
I think that is a load bull, everything is non-combat interactable until I decide to shoot at it and then it becomes combat interactable.
Fool me once. Shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I got taken once by champs online (thank god it was 10$ on steam). I beta'd STO. CBS just needs to flat yank the IP from cryptic. Not one person over there has had an origional idea concerning this game since it's inception. The ground combat might be the worst looking, worst playing piece of total garbage i've ever seen. Hell, even hellgate was better than this galactic turd. I apprecite the re-review, but to be honest, if I see a pile of dogshit on my lawn, im not gonna come back 6 months later and see if it morphed into a flower bed. It's just 6 month old dogshit, and a slightly different color. You can't patch the Star Trek into star trek. You have to get the concept right from the start. They missed the whole damn target and shot a neighbor 4 blocks away. Getting rid of those 2 was an excellent start. But to little to late. As usual. This game is 6 something months old and still is about 1/20th of a normal mmo content with the worst most shallow hampster wheel of content I've ever seen. It gets old in 1-2 days even for the most diehard trek fans. It has about as much to do with star trek as scooby doo has to do with rocket science. Gene roddenberry would have sliced out his eyes with a dull spoon before he endorsed this game. That should tell you something.
Obvious crap is obvious.
Oh, your free to think whatever you want, but in this particular case your wrong. There is no interaction you can have with enemies other than combat. You cant scan them or activate them in any way.
Well, my experience with Star Trek is nearly life long. I've been waiting for STO to come out for years. My friend bought a key for me, I downloaded it and it crashed the moment I tried to play. It NEVER worked. I contacted both the tech dept and cust servc. For the first time in my history playing MMORPG's, I never got a response of any kind form either dept. Ever! That was in May of this year. I have since found out that, despite earlier assurances that if your machine could run CO or CoH/CoV, the issue I have is with my machine, not necessarily the game. This is my first time here at this website and, though I'm sad to see it, I'm not that surprised by what I'm hearing about the game given my experience. Since I've never played, I obviously can't give a personal view on the game play or anything else. What I can do is present some ideas and observations that might help to turn this around for all the people like me whom have been literally waiting for years to enjoy a fully immersive MMORPG based "faithfully" on the IP.
The first thing I noticed was that many people are very angry and feel ripped off, and rightly so if only half of what I've read is true. It would also seem that the reviewer, Patrick Gerrard either isn't looking for the same things in this game that many Star Trek fans are, or has to stay true to purpose and write a review that gives STO the most favorable outlook possible. Please don't vilify him. He has to eat too. I'm sure many of us might like to be paid game reviewers but that job would quickly lose it's luster when we found out that the people giving us a paycheck could direct us to write a "favorable" article irregardless of how we felt. IF that's even true. I also noticed that Grand_Nagus seems to be working some kind of damage control in favor of the game or the review. I suspect this because of his rather timely entrie onto the forum that seem to be aimed at minimizing or explaining away some of the players complaints about the game and it's shortcomings. I could be wrong about this. Maybe Nagus is just a loyal fan who doesn't want to see his favorite game die. If so Nagus, I apologize for my suspicious nature. If you are being paid to do damage control, that's fine because, as bad as some of this may seem, I don't want this game to die either. I'll explain why shortly. If I'm right, then I'm not mad at you any more than I would be at Patrick for the same reasons, although I will say that your choice of Avatar was highly appropriate. (yes, that was a joke!)
As for why I wouldn't want this game to fail despite how I feel, it's simple. They have done some good things like the graphics and certain aspects of space combat so I don't want that thrown away when we, as gamers and/or dedicated Trek fans, have an opportunity to get Cryptic to turn STO into what we've wanted. I truly believe that, if we operate together, we can do this by thinking "outside of the box" and getting Cryptic to do the same. I’ll post again to explain myself
I've heard that STO doesn't 'FEEL' like trek. I haven't played so I won't try to comment on that. What I will do is give all of you some ideas about ways some of the things that "feel" like Trek may be insertable into the game.
First off, some players don't like the fact that all players are captains and have their own ships. I understand. In old school RPG's, I had the players go through a series of adventures until one of them got promoted and assigned his/her own ship. The other players were usually bridge officers or dept heads. In STO, this might be feasible by having starting charcters that don't want to go right onto the bridge of their own ship go into a "Recruiting area" where NPC or player Capt's may offer them assignments to a ship as a bridge officer or dept head. Good thing about this is that groups of players can operate together on the same ship and replace NPC landing party members. Sub games could be created for selected bridge stations and on board actions such as emergncy repairs, medical emergencies, engineering duties and such. Condensing these into microgames can help players develope skills and then, when that ship encounters situations in space, each player could act his or her role. They would need to be able to play together and a Team Comm system would be needed but it seems like a "dressing" variation on raid type missions in other MMorpgs.
That format could also be used during the infamous landing party or away team sorts of missions. They will need to provide a good deal more content on worlds but...THAT"S WHAT WE"RE PAYING FOR! It would be interesting if parties were attacked by wildlife instead of armed sentients. How about catching a disease that the med officer has to find a cure for before they can return to the ship? There are many ideas for gameplay that could fit this format.
Modify this format by inserting an opposing team (Klingon, Orion pirates, etc.) and you have a PvP situation. Of course, it will help if they have a fleshed out faction for Klingons and Romulans but if we as their customers keep insisting on that content, Cryptic will have to provide it. We have to give them appropriate time to do the work though. Just spouting mad won't do anything. Organizing that mad will get us a much better game.
Imagine a diplomatic team consisting, on both sides, of Players. Again you'd need comms for the team memebers to talk to each other and the other representatives. Game material can assign critical points to each sides negotiations and the more of your sides concessions you get, the higher your team scores. That would again be a variant on PvP but it's still PvP. Just without the weapons. If those negotiations break down and war breaks out, then you'd have a potential for massive battles with Players controlling ships on both sides. A 'Grand Melee" sort of arena or PvP format. At the conclusion, players should actually see differences in major game content. Neutral zones re-defined or planets lost to the other side who's citizens must now be evacuated in another series of adventures or scenarios. Technology seems to have made all of this possible and many other ideas to bring real Trek content into the game. AS players and fans, we need to rallyy together to get Cryptic to do these things, not just through away what we do have because of what we're missing. Groups of fans are what brought Trek back from extinction in the first place and there's no reason we can't do something like that here too. It's even more likely if their new executive staff realizes and aknowledges that they delivered substandard product and it sounds like they have. Let's push them in the right direction and maje them spend the right kind of time and money to do this. If they do, we'll all get what we want or at least something that's better than what we have.
If there is one game that you MUST avoid, this is it. They are constantly making horrible updates to a game system that is just completely broken. It is a debacle of an MMO, and will make it only slightly longer than Tabula Rasa only because of the license involved.
I am with so many, shame most of these sites make their money of the same games they need to review.
Seems every game gets at least a 7 no matter how crappy, STO and so many other MMO's out there deserve a 5 or less. Very few MMO's would even dare get an 8 out of 10, and this is comming from a guy who really only plays MMO's about 95% of the time.
Looks like Cryptic is on the ball.
I hear what you're saying...And I think the point is valid.
Part of what I've seen personally about STO is directly related to the strength of other MMO's. I have 4 Guildies who I've been playing with for years now...These 4 wanted STO to succeed more than I can even explain...They are all HUGE Trek Fans...I personally was really hoping I could call STO my temporary Home for a year or so before SWTOR comes out...All of us are back on LOTRO now full time and actually, we're all thrilled about it. We're thrilled because we are playing an outstanding game with some real depth and teeth to it...Because even for those 4 who like Trek lore more than LOTR, the quality of the games overall is simply uncomparable...
When I see that STO gets a re-review of 7.4 I think it is a bit misleading...I realize a superior game like LOTRO got an 8.5, but I still think 7.4 is misleading to folks who may be looking for feedback on this game...I'm sorry, but in comparison to the rest of the market, STO is not average...It's below average...I'm not saying that to dump on the game either because it does have potential...But it's still probably a year or so away from being average and this quick re-review, 6 months after launch, is kind of screaming "help!" And I think even if MMORPG.com wants to help, they should have passed in this case...Because if STO can't hold the rabid Trek Fans that I know, the game is very simply lacking greatly overall and in no way should be only 1.0 rating point (or so) below the elite MMO's on the Market today...It's just not that good...And I've got a Guild full of Vet MMO Players who feel that way...
There is just no way in hell any unbiased reviewer with more than 20 minutes experience in MMORPGs could give this quai-turd any rating higher than 4. The only game I've played to date which was shorter, more shallow, and lacking content was APB. The ground combat alone in STO is enough to make you uninstall it, let alone the the absurd adaptation of this view or star trek. They seriously should have just left the ground portion out and called it Starfleet command 4. In reality, thats all it is. Thanks cryptic for another incredibly shallow and 1/15th done game. And gee, we get to look forward to them utterly destroying the neverwinter nights franchise now too. It boggles my mind that CBS hasn't yanked this ip and had ATARI liquidate these douchehats. The moronic crpytic store is enough to make me sick, let alone a subscription fee. Sometimes it's ok to just give up and let something die. You can't polish a dog turd.
I know what I post will be at the end of the comments, but I'll post it anyway... reading these, I see a TON of displeasure coming from the posters above me, and I'm not exactly sure why.... the general overall theme I get from people here is "Its not WoW in space. We demand WoW in space." You're all just comparing it to something that not even you are able to truly define... its not want it to be... but I can't tell you what that is. Being an MMO developer is not an envious position...
Aside from all the rantings and ravings about how people want the game to be, I feel the above article and rating are accurate. Because, if you haven't played any other MMO before, and knew nothing of what MMO's were... this game would definitely be enjoyable. This game is a very close second to "Best Star Trek Game Ever Made" in my opinion (first being the RTS game Star Trek Armada). Here's why:
The game is instanced... yes, how many times have other captains really gathered together to go on your standard Star Trek missions? Not many times. But does that mean its not encouraged? It really is... because STO has loot, with more people, you face harder enemies, you get better rewards. However, its nicely instanced in that I don't have to worry about other players coming in and stealing my kills or drops or any other nonsense. The fact that you have the choice to encounter other ships and captains sparingly feels a lot more like Star Trek than if you had to group up with other ships for every encounter.
The graphics are nice. There's no denying that... a little repetitive... another planet, another asteroid belt, another nebulae backdrop... but really, when it comes to space... there's not that much out there. For what they got, the backgrounds and graphics are nice. Space combat is also fun, albeit a little easy. Character and ship customization is top notch.
Now when it comes to the content, thats where most of people complain of lacking... but I'd be willing to bet most of those complaining haven't played the game recently. STO contains a lot of missions that are designed to be randomly generated. Patrol and Exploration missions, specifically. In the beginning, you'd complete some story and then have no other storyline content, and have to rely on the random stuff to get you through to the next level. It was pretty aggravating. HOWEVER, the game is not the same as it was before. WAY different, in fact. I restarted a new character, and am having to go back to the random stuff as the amount of story and special content is much greater than it was before. I now can't keep up with all the storyline content, and with the advent of weekly missions (Really great stuff, there. Its intriguing, will keep me coming back to see the story unfold) the amount of special content means even more choice for leveling outside of randomly generated stuff. The amount of content is tenfold and even the random missions don't feel as random. There was a time when it was "kill groups" and it took forever, then the next randomd mission would be to again, "kill 5 groups"... it was rediculous. Now, its a lot more shifted where some of the stuff is repeated, but theres a lot more options to choose from.
However, it is FAR from perfect. The ground combat still feel a little sporadic at times. "Exploration" feels like a sidenote, when it should be one of the main focuses of Star Trek, and their Klingon faction is mislabeled. They call it a faction, when in reality it's like LotRO's Monster Play. Billed as for the PvP-centric. Instead, it came across as an Alliance/Horde situation which it clearly isn't. Mislabeled... see it for what it is and you might appreciate it more.
Overall, to each their own. Give it a shot and if you don't like it, you don't like it. But, if you enjoy Star Trek and don't need a game to be exactly like a re-skinned version of every other game you play, I'd say give it a shot. I'm playing it, and I like it. Compare that to those that have not played it, or have just dabbled in it, and how much their opinion means. (Heck, I could tell you my opinion on medicine today, but I am no doctor, or my opinion of what in your car might need fixed, but I am no mechanic... so what does my opinion really mean?) Cryptic, despite mass opinion, is doing a good job to bring this game up to where it should be. It has only improved since launch, and it shows no signs of stopping continued improvement.
I enjoyed the rating, and I enjoyed the comments by Ambrose99. I really like this game. Can it improve? Yes, but so can every other MMO I have played. The peeps I run into for group play love the game, and the community seems very helpful. Crafting is weak, but since I hate cratfing as a time sink, I consider this a strength (in other MMOs I could rarely make enough money to buy others crafts anyways). Please keep up the improvements.
I played STO in beta...gave it a 5 out of 10, which was frankly much better then I expected after having followed the development of it. Haven't tried again since.
I'm glad to hear it's improved....but frankly I'm not inclined to give my business to any company who's business model seems to revolve around cranking out fast/cheap MMO's out of well established IP's and hyping the hell out of them to cash in on the IP while shorting actual development of resources needed to make it half-way decent.
I'm also rather skeptical of just how much CAN be done to improve STO given alot of the choices they made in design.
Bottom line is that there are so many games and companies out there competeing for entertainment dollars... that I'm not sure Cryptic really deserves another bite at the apple, given it's past business history. However, I'm glad that it has gotten better (if that's true) for those who are playing it.
Ambrose, screw wow. I hate wow with a passion. Wow isn't the reason I hate this game. I hate this game because its lacking in pretty much every way.
Exactly...
I never even played WOW...Neither has anyone else I know that quit STO...Well, maybe one guy, I'm not sure...
Anyway who's saying they wanted STO to be WOW in space? I wanted it to be a quality ST game myself...
Seriously? You can't use that kind of logic to justify a high score in a game.
That's like saying E.T for the Atari 2600 would be an enjoyable game... if only for those who've never played a videogame before.
Ambrose99 your logic is flawed . Firstly you assume everyone here plays WoW , which they don't . Secondly you assume that everyone here likes WoW , which they do not. Thirdly you imply that to like this game it is better to be virginal gamer then experienced . If you have experience you can't appreciated what STO has to offer , because you're tainted with ideas of what a good gaming experience should be.
You sir a laughable. Unfortunately Cryptic is banking on people of your mentality to pump up the shit they have. They want people with little to no MMO experience because you don't know any better, and are therefore more accepting of this crap. It's the console generation this game was aimed at originally and meant for Consoles . Thankfully M$ and $ony opted made it unprofitible for Cryptic to put this crap on Consoles. Unfortunately PC gamers are now stuck with POS. It's that apoligists attitude that allows Cryptic to exsist.
This is how bad this game is : http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=181315
LMAO !
I think the rating needs to go up to 8.4 now ? Especially since the bargin rates at which you can get this game at now.
http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Online-Pc/dp/B002673XJA?tag=dealnewscom
Because it just keeps getting better.
Out af the many many many complaints STO has I can honestly say that wanting STO to be WoW in space isnt one of them.
Anyone else find it odd that several game sites re-reviewed STO this month? While I agree it is normal for a site to occassionally re-review a game, it is not normal for so many to do it all at one time. One site gave it a new score of 9.2 or something silly like that.
Like I said in a previous post, I expect it is part of a new, under the table PR campaign launched after that new guy Stahl took over.
And, I would not be surprised if some ad money or inside access to upcoming titles was part of the deal.
Lack of positive PR is not the problem with this game, lack of a good game is the problem with this game.
It is not a good ST game. It is not a good MMO. It is not a good ST MMO. It is an especially not good ST MMO when charging box+$15/mo+cash shop.
P.S. And LOL at the guy talking about how STO isn't WoW reskinned or whatever. This game is CO reskined, same engine, same mechanics, same interface, same feel, same almost everything.
Well this game did peak my interest , its just ground and ship inside interaction actions are none excistent .
Become a space shooter >.< not a terrific one either .
It does has a lot of potential though , just sadly nothing is implemented or too slow .
Maybe if it excist in a year or 2 , it becomes the huge success it was boasted at.
Sadly starting right at this game was way too high feee.
Sorry lifetime subscription + goodies just to make your own bridge crew you would like .
For them to not have proper ground or ship interaction implemented >.<
argggg forget it ;)
I think you're probably right. Its just oddly suspicious and unfortunately, no company is going to be bribe immune.
Any one site could re-review STO and that's one thing (still spin, but hey). However, when many start re-reviewing in the same month or so timeframe, that is something else entirely.
I am sure a good many of the game sites are hurting on the ad revenue side, the economy being what it is, but to sell out integrity in exchange for some short term cash can only hurt in the longrun.
This review, like several of the other re-reviews, greatly over emphasizes the "positive" aspects of STO, while glossing over or completely omitting many of the negative/failing aspects of the game. At the same time, the reviewer takes the "company line" as gospel, and makes it glaringly obvious to most anyone that has played the game, that it is a spin job.
7.4 is joke. Some of the other re-reviews have scored higher. I would say you can't buy PR like that, except in this case, you obviously can.
Dear God, where do I start?
First, why is it 'impossible' for Cryptic to create full content for the Klingon faction?
Every other MMO that has multiple factions manages to pull this off, and i'm sure some of them don't have Cryptic's resources.
Second, what is one of the most iconic things about Trek?
Bridge interactions between the characters.
Kirk/Spock/Mccoy
Picard/Riker/Data
Etc, Etc, Etc... I could do every show, but you get the point. It is one of the most recognizable things in the Trek canon. Why didn't Cryptic faithfully recreate this experience?
Because they're money-grubbing pimps who wanted to make a quick buck. They released the game far too soon, with shallow content, no raid system, buggy boring ground combat(how about a roving monster to kill just every once in awhile?), repetitive space content that gets boring after a few reps, crappy maps, I could go on forever.
And, oh yeah, what happened to that holodeck thing we were supposed to get?
They took a franchise with an already shady history of translating to games, and put a worm-ridden stinky cherry on top. How I wish a competent MMO company like Blizz could have gotten their hands on the IP.
Sometime after launch, they come out and say, "Hey, we have ship bridges now!", and what do we get?
A beeping museum.
Cryptic will never get another dollar out of me until they completely scrap and rewrite the game, which they'll never do, because they will never admit failure at that level.
You suck! Enjoy your C-store crack!
I'm pretty sure that MMORPG.COM had sone candy (more like some ad deal) from Cryptic for this re-review. I've earned my living writing and editing for over 10 years and I almost never read official texts on this site because they are mostly biased to game developers. if I want a good review I just read forums here :)
FYI, you can also buy a new copy of WoW for 11.99 on Amazon.
What a FOS review Pros : Good Value : Are you for real? How can a game where you have to :
A: Buy the Box
B: Pay a Subscription
C: Buy other essentials like character slots, ships, races etc in the on-line Store.
This game is not only terrible to play but the value is a total joke, it's a rip off!
I clearly will not be taking any notice of future reviews from mmorpg as our views of quality are light years apart.
I was concerned about this at first, particularly character slots.
Then I played the game once through and realized there was no point in creating an alt and starting over. All three class types play mostly the same and the content all plays the same.
The races all play the same; the bonuses and special powers they get aren't really different enough to play a substantial role.
Ships... again, not much of a difference, other than the old science, escort, cruiser thing. You don't need the ships in the store.
Gotta agree, the review was pretty kid gloves. Especially the ground game. The only time it's really a challenge is when enemies keep knocking you off your feet. And even if they manage to take you out, your crew usually has things mopped up before you get back. The ground game makes me groan every time it rears its ugly head.
Listen:Iif you want a good place to get an idea of a lot of the problems with STO try here:
http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=181341
Thing is, all the anger, no matter how justified, isn't going to get you anything. If those of us who would like to have a better game post things like what's at that link to the Devs and continue to demand performance, we might get a better game. If we use and expand on the new UGC, we might get a better game. If you don't have a suggestion to make the game better, then why bother posting here or elsewhere about the game. You have every right to but what are you hoping to accomplish? I'd like to take what Cryptic's delivered and, despite how angry we may all be, take it from where it is to where we want it to be. Given the investment necessary to make a good Trek game, if this one dies we will probably never see another attempt.
why and what do the posters here hope to accomplish... so that cryptic goes out of business and we therefore hopefully see less games that are less than half finished to release state released. so that when a game is completely subpar, a developer knows that adding a cash shop will make his predicament worse. so that hopefully in another ten years or less someone attempts to make a half decent mmo from the star trek ip.
and last but not least... SO THE OWNER OF THE DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS IP PULLS THE RUG OUT FROM UNDER CRYPTIC BEFORE THEY DESTROY THAT FRANCHISE'S CHANCE OF A DECENT MMO!!!!!!!!
if after nine months you havent realized that cryptic still has you with "the next patch will fix so much and be awesome"... then completely fails to deliver...but if sitting on the official sto forums for another nine months wondering why cryptic really has not improved the game much, thats your choice.
How about calling out the author of the re-review for a suspect article as a start? Sure people are talking about the flaws of STO here in post after post, but you need to take it in context; the author treated STO with kid gloves and glossed over many outstanding problems with the game. People are rightly pointing out how overly generous the new score is.
I mean come on, look at some of the criteria he used for the new score. Roleplaying? While a valid category for those who enjoy roleplaying in MMOs, you can't just slap a high number in that category because someone can roleplay very well in their mind; the roleplay category should only take into consideration those game mechanics that actively encourage and help roleplaying. Currently STO's heavy use of instancing, rather lacking fleet mechanics, and poor implementation all actively discourage roleplay rather than encourage it.
The other criteria he listed were for the most part also overly generous, with the exception being graphics and sound which STO has always received high marks for (and which helped give it a score as high as it originally was on this website). As I said before, the review seems to be focusing more on where STO will be in the future, rather than where it actually is right now.
I see your point Dinendae and did what you point out here in a previous response I posted:
Patrick Gerrard either isn't looking for the same things in this game that many Star Trek fans are, or has to stay true to purpose and write a review that gives STO the most favorable outlook possible. Please don't vilify him. He has to eat too. I'm sure many of us might like to be paid game reviewers but that job would quickly lose it's luster when we found out that the people giving us a paycheck could direct us to write a "favorable" article irregardless of how we felt. IF that's even true. I also noticed that Grand_Nagus seems to be working some kind of damage control in favor of the game or the review. I suspect this because of his rather timely entrie onto the forum that seem to be aimed at minimizing or explaining away some of the players complaints about the game and it's shortcomings. I could be wrong about this. Maybe Nagus is just a loyal fan who doesn't want to see his favorite game die. If so Nagus, I apologize for my suspicious nature. If you are being paid to do damage control, that's fine because, as bad as some of this may seem, I don't want this game to die either. I'll explain why shortly. If I'm right, then I'm not mad at you any more than I would be at Patrick for the same reasons, although I will say that your choice of Avatar was highly appropriate. (yes, that was a joke!)
If you are saying that All of MMORPG's reviews might be suspect based on what we've seen here, I'd have to agree. I'd even have to say the same thing about future postings by Patrick. When you deliver a review that's so much in conflict with the experiences of other gamers, you may affect your rep. I think the site is mainly to blame though.
Just a heads up for Patrick...
Bloggers/reviewers are required BY LAW to disclose any payoffs/gifts related to the product in question.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/business/media/06adco.html
HAHAHAHAA
Funny but completely true. It's sad. Wonder what the other sites have to say about this game and others? Since this site differs from popular/common opinion so conclusively there is no more reason to take it seriously. Game over.
In defense of the Grand_nagus, i have seen him on many occasions take Cryptic to task for problems with STO. As for all of the reviews being suspect, I wouldn't go that far without seeing evidence of it. However with STO's re-review, something is indeed fishy; just recently we had both Emmert and DStahl commenting on the horrible state of STO currently, and they haven't had time to fix the problems they laid out in those interviews. I find it highly suspicious that the game gets re-reviewed and the rating is bumped up that much before Cryptic has had time to address those problems. I'm not going to go so far as to say there was some kind of pay off without definitive proof of that, but the review was clearly biased in favor of STO.
I do find it troubling, as one previous poster pointed out, that there don't seem to be any MMO reviews on this website that have scored under a five. I mean really, there are no lousy MMOs out there at all? Really? As for STO, while improvements have been made to the game, it still has a long way to go as two of Cryptic's top executives have admitted. Bumping the original score up to a 6.8 or perhaps 6.9 would have been more realistic in my opinion.
Atomic magazine (Australia) wrote a re-review which also scratched to find positives and ended up briefly saying "everything sort of sucks. The PvP is GREAT!"
A few of us called the editor to task and he justified it by saying that reviews are 'his opinion and he writes for himself'. The counter argument was that as a review in a Computer magazine he should be writing for his readers on the basis that many may make purchasing decisions based on what he writes.
In the end we had to agree to differ.
This problem is endemic within the computer games (review) industry.
A couple of years ago one reviewer wrote a blog on it (which I would have trouble finding again). But he commented that although reviews are supposedly out of 10, in fact they are out of 5 - ranging from 5 to 10 with 7.5 as an average.
So, in other words when a game gets a score of "5" that really means "this game is terrible" and "6" means "below average - not worth your time".
The problem is that because of the way normal people (not games reviewers I mean) think and have been educated consider that the average of a score (supposedly) ranked from 1 to 10 is "5". So, right from the beginning we are not speaking the same language.
So...who's wrong?
The Reviewers.
Part of writing is to write for your audience. If your audience consider an average score to be '5' then you need to adjust your scoring to match (not scoring from 1-5 plus 5).
The implications are kind of important too.
Here is a gamerankings.com listing for a newly released PC game - Darksiders by Vigil
http://www.gamerankings.com/pc/991819-darksiders/index.html
Two reviews so far (IGN and Gamervision) scoring 8 out of 10. Looks good huh?
But really, when you consider that 7.5 is about average - that means this game is really only just above average. Certainly nothing special.
Now the reason I picked that title is because Vigil are developing WH40K:Dark Millenium Online - and I wanted to see how they go with a PC game as opposed to a console game? They seem to have managed "okay - a little bit above average" for a single player game. When you consider that an MMO is an order of complexity harder - how do you think they might do with DMO?
The websites need to follow the example of the computer game magizines I read then, and either have a true 1 -5 ratings system, or a percentile based systems like used in schools (i.e. less than 70% is not good). While it is understandable that personal tastes will influence a reviewer to some extent, you are correct; a review should take into account what the average gamer would think of the game.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/interview_cryptic_studios_head_talks_new_neverwinter_why_mmos_kind_suck?page=0,2
Can't say it's surprising.
It should hit ten on the Value meter :
Lately, everyone's been kicking subscription fees to the curb and adopting free-to-play business models. Could we see something similar with Champions or Star Trek?
Sure, sure. You've gotta take any opportunity to maximize the number of people who can enjoy your game.
MMO's are failing because the execution is terrible, as he mentioned. What he didn't mention is that MMO producers are either going after the quick buck or a crude copy of another semi-successful MMO so they can cash in with the same crowd.
There is no true innovation, you still have game companies like NCSoft and SoE are more interested in holding deadlines than releasing a complete, quality product and it shows on many levels.
Indeed. Nor did he mention that Cryptic's last two games failed in the execution as well, and for the reasons you pointed out.
QFT
I know a lot of lifers and insane fanbois will go down with this game; so, trying to convince them that everything about it is fail, will never work. XD
For some reason, my comment on the above quote didn't appear in the post, so here it is:
Oh, PUH-LEASE.
I have been playing Neverwinter Nights 2 the last week or so just to see what the IP is like, computer game-wise. It's fun; it's an OK game, but it's hardly amazing or stupendous, imo. In fact, in many respects, it's borderline lame.
From what I have seen of Neverwinter 2, I think Cryptic will do fine with the Neverwinter IP, and will in fact, improve upon the previous computer game versions by a country mile.
Hmm.. Mmorpg.com hosts contests for STO and now magically they re-review the game and it gets a 7.4?
Its nice that it may finally start getting the developer attention it needs but I'm afraid it will be a case of too little too late. They may be able to keep the game afloat for a while but it will never be the game that they hoped it would be. Maybe they should take over SWG.. not like they could make THAT game worse... right...?
Pat has done an outstanding job in this re-look of STO.
Early on in the review, he makes it clear, again, reiterating that Cryptic can only do so much witn the vast Star Trek Universe and that, sadly, will perpetually leave us always wanting more -- especially if we want to playing anything but from the Federation side.
It will be interesting to see if STO can actually move beyond it's self-inflicted limits (or the actual limits that can be ever surpassed) to deliver more of what we were hoping for in an MMO featuring the Star Trek universe.
I have friends that play. They say that The more money you pay them the better your character! So have your Credit Card Ready!
Take over swg. LMAO
I have to say yes to this. BUT! wow you can buy mounts and aion its pets FE it's pets and a pice on non combat gear,
sto you can buy races that are better then the standard, buy ships that are better then the standard.
It like I said have your credit card handy! for the umber ship and captian!
Oh man, don't get me started about those Space Encounters, but the thing that sucks the worst is that Cryptic knows about it and continues to do nothing while building the items in the C-store and for the dude that said might as well as never play another MMO because microtransactions are the norm,, well only the the norm for games that used to be the shit and now aren't or games that never had it..
Good to see things are improving.
Actually, I think if they did make Klingons more lie Monster Play I think it would be awesome!
If we consider that "Star trek" as a complete product then I suppose Star-trek IS the federation, It wasnt really until Deep-space nine and later series of TNG that Trek even got other factions involved. So its no wonder they could never completly and properly fill even the Klingons faction.
I used to be a massive star-trek fan, we loved star-trek because of the un-expected, the new races, the bizzare sitautions, but when I now compare Star-trek to Sci-series like Babylon 5, Stargate even Far-scape that had proper, continuous, integrated and epic storys that spans every series then Star-trek, actually, is pretty poor! And I find myself getting less and less excited about it anymore.
I dont just think that cryptics recent developments with "STO" are too late, I think its too late for a Star-trek MMO all together!
Based on the number of comments, STO can still generate a lot of buzz both positive and negative. That is bound to translate into sales and revenue. So not to shabby for a half baked game.
Hate to dissappoint but any buzz generated by this game is due to the Star Trek not the Online or the Cryptic that appears in the corner.
It's interesting how many uninformed comments followed this article. Pat did a great job with his review. I really did not know what to think about this game until I downloaded the demo. The level of customization of race, costume, and ship is awesome. And the integration of space and ground combat is really good for immersion into the mission and storyline. Unfortunately the demo only gives a small sampling from what the whole game is all about. In my opinion they should let this game go free-to-play like Champion's Online is doing. I also play LoTRO and the ability to earn additional content in-game or pay for it is really awesome. It sounds as if Stahl is leaning that way anyway and if it works for Turbine then it can work for Cryptic.
I realy do not think that anyone has said that the character customization or the graphics were bad. Now as a player who has been playing since open (paid) Beta and also a lifer I would think that I am well informed. The space and ground combat is great for the first month, but after that you realize that they are the same exact missions for every level and after you have done the same exact mission 40 or 50 times you do not even have to think to do them. I can not tell you how many times I had to just log off right in the middle of a daily mission just because I did not want to waste my time doing it since after VA the only thing left is the repeat daily missions to get emblems. When Cryptic said that they were going to add their version of the Peace Corp missions everyone thought wow! finaly something that might actually be inline with what Star Trek actualy was, only to find out that the majority of the peace missions were Aid the Planet missions. The heavily instanced aspect of the game makes it more of a single player game than anything else. With no ingame voice chat available for when you do team up everyone still does their own thing unless everyone is on Vent, then you have say hold on and let me get the info I nedd so we can talk.. The lack of content for the Klingon's is unacceptable, no wonder they talk so much smack during PvP because that is the only thing they have to do besides a few recycled Fed missions. Now if you want a pro-biased opinion of the game you can go to their official forums where you will get, we are looking into it, we are working on it, it is in the works etc. because you will not find too many negative posts on their forums because the CDF and the devs will see that they are taken down/spamed or goad you into posting something that violated their policy so you can get banned. However, if you want or are happy with a game that a 5 year old can make VA all by himself (and he can't even read yet), well he did just turn 6 on the 3rd and it did take him 9 months to do it, then more power to you. I too, even as a lifer wishes that this game goes F2P sooner than later, that way I won't feel so bad when they add more items to the C-store and no or little content.
Don't forget the horrible quest tracking. I was one of the frist to get the game when it came out and I had the collectors edition. (sigh) I gave the game a month worth of my life, but the fact that trying to go back into your captian's log to look at quests, or even track them, was just about impossible. If they fixed this then great, but that was one of my biggest issues.
WOW how did I miss this story back when it was published? Anyway...
Roleplay 9? LOL. How can a highly instanced game where you don't even share the same zone with everyone else and that actually has the stones to charge extra for some emotes rate a 9 here?
Value 9? Ok...are we being punked here? A half finished MMO that charges full AAA sub rate and has an extensive cash shop gets a 9 for value? REALLY ?!?
Customer service 8? They lose 5 points just for telling those of us that dared to call them out on this steaming pile that "we just don't get it".
Cryptic will never see another dime from me and I will pop a cork on a fine adult beverage the day they close up shop.
LOL! Wait what?? They still haven't finished the Klingon side?? LMAO. I knew it. I knew it.
If it comes to people accusing mmorpg being in the pocket of any particular dev, if they said it was Cryptic I would be inclined to believe it. They seem to always find a way to keep it splashed across the main page, this re-review which was done a few months ago with no really new content added and the fact that from what I see criticism of this game can tend to bring retribution sometimes.
And I agree that alot of those scores are so inflated it would take someone without hands on experience to believe what they say. How do you rate a game a 9 on role play when you would have to spend (lot's) of money just to use most of the roleplay features by visiting the cash shop?
I'm enjoying it a lot right now.
I'm deliberately avoiding pew pew gameplay, running a science/exploration team with heavy doses of Diplomatic missions, so far it's pretty good and still fun, you can for the most part avoid pew pew grind and when going down the "seek out new life etc etc" path if and when you do get into a battle in space it feels like an event.
Anyway yeah, STO getting better all the time, once they get the user generated content running smoothly I could see this game blossoming, hardcore Trek fans writing missions for me?
Yes please. ^^
Update this review please. Season Two? lol Welcome to 3 months ago.