Post by Morreion on Feb 28, 2010 7:51:12 GMT -5
Star Trek Online: "Meaningful" Death Penalty Needed (IncGamers)
Why We Won't De-List STO (MMORPG.com Staff Blog)
The lack of any meaningful death penalty in STO is a hot topic among players. Some feel that without any real punishment for being defeated, players are less careful with their ships and characters than they should be in MMOs; you want at least some immersion after all, don't you?
...“I get that people want to feel a sense of risk when they’re fighting in battles, but if the only emotion you feel when you’re playing a game is fear that you’re going to lose some time due to an arbitrary gameplay mechanic, we’re probably not doing something right, ” he said.
...“I get that people want to feel a sense of risk when they’re fighting in battles, but if the only emotion you feel when you’re playing a game is fear that you’re going to lose some time due to an arbitrary gameplay mechanic, we’re probably not doing something right, ” he said.
Why We Won't De-List STO (MMORPG.com Staff Blog)
First of all, no, we will not be de-listing Star Trek Online because a group of readers feel that it isn’t an MMORPG, and so shouldn’t be listed here on the site. We heard this same argument about Age of Conan when it launched due to its extreme use of instancing. We didn’t de-list Conan, and we’re not de-listing Star Trek.
Yes, I am aware that in his recent column, our own Scott Jennings said the following: “Guild Wars doesn’t call itself an MMO. It may be that Star Trek Online shouldn’t, either.” And I think that he has a point. Star Trek Online (and Age of Conan for that matter) does indeed have far more in common with Guild Wars than, say, EVE Online.
So, why do we list it here at MMORPG.com? Why do we list a number of games that maybe don’t quite fit the exact and rigid definition brought on by what the acronym stands for: Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game?
We don’t do that because it isn’t a hard and fast, rigid definition that we’re looking for. The games that we cover are constantly evolving and developers are always trying new approaches and new ways of doing things. We don’t want this site to impose restrictions and instead shoot for rules that embrace the spirit of what an MMORPG is rather than trying to directly define it.
Yes, I am aware that in his recent column, our own Scott Jennings said the following: “Guild Wars doesn’t call itself an MMO. It may be that Star Trek Online shouldn’t, either.” And I think that he has a point. Star Trek Online (and Age of Conan for that matter) does indeed have far more in common with Guild Wars than, say, EVE Online.
So, why do we list it here at MMORPG.com? Why do we list a number of games that maybe don’t quite fit the exact and rigid definition brought on by what the acronym stands for: Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game?
We don’t do that because it isn’t a hard and fast, rigid definition that we’re looking for. The games that we cover are constantly evolving and developers are always trying new approaches and new ways of doing things. We don’t want this site to impose restrictions and instead shoot for rules that embrace the spirit of what an MMORPG is rather than trying to directly define it.