Trending Games | Black Desert Online | Trove | Blade & Soul | Elder Scrolls Online

    Facebook Twitter YouTube YouTube.Gaming
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:3,208,175 Users Online:0

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed

Star Trek Online Developer Blog

The folks from Cryptic Studios' Star Trek Online have started this exciting new developer blog here at

Author: Awenyddion

Focusing the Experience - Craig Zinkievich

Posted by Awenyddion Monday March 16 2009 at 1:02PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

After we got the license to Star Trek and the initial excitement died down – it was time to get to work. We picked a group of directors and designers to sketch out what we wanted to do with the game, and that group sat in a room for numerous 3 hour “lock in” sessions over the course of a couple weeks to hash out the core aspects of the game.

Right off the bat, we decided that we didn’t want to list all of the “standard” MMO features and then try to jam them into a Star Trek setting. The first meeting was us just listing all of the things that we, some as great fans, some as casual, and some who only had a rudimentary knowledge of Star Trek, expected to see or experience in the game.

What did the Universe require? What did the Universe want? Those were the things we wanted to shape into something that players could experience online. The whiteboards in the room filled very, very fast.

We made lists and lists of things that we thought needed to be in a Star Trek game. The races, the planets, the experiences, the ships, the gameplay, the different character roles – all the stuff you can imagine.

The Star Trek Universe is huge. Just looking at the list of things that we thought players would want to do within the game was daunting. Not only do you have starship captains, but you have first officers, engineers, medical officers, communications, etc … And the shows and movies don’t stop with the members of Starfleet; many of the show’s most famous characters don’t contribute directly to the day-to-day functioning of the ship or station. Sure, you need Mot to cut your hair, Guinan and Quark to serve you drinks – but do we need to allow players to stand in a transporter room all day and wait to beam another player to an interesting location?

How should we choose what to put in and what not to? Did we have to make all of those roles available?
Now, you could design an MMO that tries to be everything. A game that tries to provide the ability to captain an spaceship, to be a first officer, to run a bar on DS9, to do deep space tribble trading or even to cut hair on a starship. We definitely didn’t want to make mini-games for all these things. We wanted to provide players a deep roleplaying experience in the Star Trek Universe, not Raving Rabbids - Star Trek Online Version.

But heck – if we made that many full-featured and deep games, we’d end up either never getting the game out to you guys or providing a huge range of thin and rather crappy experiences. Neither is an attractive option.

So you focus the experience. (Unlike this rambling devblog!) You pick what is important and focus your resources on making that as great as you can.

The hardest and most controversial decision we had to make was where to stop. Everyone in the room had an interest in pursuing a design where multiple players could work on a ship together. Someone could be captain, another navigator, a third person engineer, etc. So we thought about what that gameplay could be and what it would feel like. Someone pilots, someone works the weapons, someone is busy with the shields, etc. Could we make each of those experiences special and different from each other?

We could probably design and make something – but it added up to at least five or six totally different gameplay experiences that we’d have to deliver. The engineer couldn’t just worry about his systems when the battle turned sour – we’d have to come up with gameplay that someone would enjoy for hundreds of hours, for each of the jobs.

One undisputed fact about Star Trek Online was that as much as some people may want to be that engineering officer and play a supporting role on someone else’s ship, that almost EVERYONE at some point in time was going to want to be a Captain. Players would want to take the center seat and command their own starships.

It wasn’t easy – we argued, fought, waffled and fought some more – but that’s what we finally decided was our core, our kernel, to build the game around. We would make sure that as we designed and developed Star Trek Online, we wouldn’t do anything to close the door on being able to add player crew members, but for the launch, our focus was going to be making the coolest possible game with YOU as the Captain.

StormNet writes:

We look forward to the experience

Mon Mar 16 2009 1:28PM Report
OddjobXL writes:

Star Trek strikes me as fundamentally about four things.

An enlightened and rational society, The Federation.

The Federation, in pursuit of knowledge and self-improvement (not my words, that's how it seems to be in canon) wishes to explore the universe, glean new scientific insights, and learn from other cultures.

A ship is sent out to go on those adventures.

This ship has a crew and through their eyes and interactions we all learn more about them and ourselves.

Now DS9 is more about politics and the grittier side of reality but it still has one central base of operations for a crew.  A station is essentially a stationary ship.

An (optional) multiplayer ship experience is the Star Trek fantasy.  If you're sitting around with your buddies, playing make believe, you probably are divvying up who's going to do what aboard the ship.  Not deciding who's flying which ship in a fleet.  

That's just intuitive.

PoB (player on board) ships exist in SWG.  I love 'em.  Everyone has something to do.  Well, when there is something to do.  SWG's very weak on the actual space part and that isn't looking to be a problem with STO.

I can see simulating the depth of each role, even just as part of a bridge crew, would be a real challenge.  But that may be a challenge worth taking on. 

Why multiple factions, why PvP, why crafting?  Why not just focus on the two things the vast majority of players will want?  Federation ships and (I'm actually thrilled about this prospect) procedurally generated missions.

It seems Cryptic is taking on a great deal of optional content that's narrowbanded to certain smaller market segments. 

Sure, every player should have the option to be a solo captain.  Solo content is essential.  If there's no possible way to work in player crews with a compatible solo mechanic, well, that's just how it is. 

But, man, will it be Star Trek without a bridge view?   Really? 

And once there's a bridge view won't players be asking to be able to 'fill in' on each other's ships for fun?  Isn't that the logical progression?

All this said, I am excited about STO - multiplayer ships or no multiplayer ships.  As I mentioned I'm dying to see how procedurally generated missions work.  Competative PvE has been on my wish list for ages to capture the dynamism of PvP without the, well, PvP.  Star Trek will be a great setting for roleplay and good natured companionship and adventure. 

After Eve Online I'm ready to be a "big damn hero" for a change.

Mon Mar 16 2009 1:52PM Report
XCman writes:

This I think was the smartest thing they could do.  Player crews are a core component of STO.  But it just would not fuction well for ppl that would solo.  

Granted it is less complicated to make the game with a Captain per ship. But at least the game is out and playable by the masses. 

It is extremely important to have player crews in game, and they have said from the very beginning that they would look at putting it in.  It just seals the deal when they are so mindful about it that they are actually making the game from the beginning.  

If they do this,  you won't have issues of them programming the game in such a fashion that it will make it more difficult for them to add player crews later on. 

Mon Mar 16 2009 2:19PM Report
SiskoBell writes:

Though I'm content to play as a solo Captain, I also see the value in player crews. I hope to see STO do both some day.

Mon Mar 16 2009 2:33PM Report
MacAllen writes:

I understand how player crews are completely impossible to implement.  For every small group of role players who want to be a crew, there are 100 jerks who can't wait to get some snot nosed Lt JG under them to make them do pushups.  "Leadership" of other players must be 100% voluntary or it will kill the game, so I agree with the "no player crews" position.

For me, the biggest hurdle the "experience" faces is not "what do you want to be?" but "what do you get to do?"  What I want to be is a simple answer...I'm going to be a capt, great, decision made.  Down the road we may have fleets, big ships, player crews, I can be an admiral, hoorah, but right now, I'm a capt...what do I do?

I ask, because Cryptic's prior MMO had one major fault to was boring...boring as hell.  The CoH experience is defined as: I go to an npc, I get a mission, I go to (insert one of 6 mission zone textures here) and fight (insert one of 12 npc textures with one of 5 power sets here), click on (insert glowies here), then get exp and influence.  That's it.  It's my fond hope that STO doesn't become: Beam down to (insert one of 5 planet textures here), fight (insert one of 8 npc textures here), then get exp and influence.

Unless we're changing the galaxy by our gameplay, MMO's are (by their nature), static.  But Star Trek *ISN'T* static, it never has been.  For good or ill, Star Trek changes over time.  There isn't a Borg invasion every Sunday at 2pm, where Capt JnWyIsABich spams /LFG for more ships to fight it so we can get that special laser beam.  To me, that's the biggest obstacle of an ST MMO, ST does not hold to most of the standard MMO pieces.

I appreciate seeing into the decision making behind why everyone is a capt...I get it, thanks.  What I'd really like to see is what Cryptic isn't doing in STO that's like other MMO's, especially CoH/ChO.  How is STO different from Eve or Wow?  What design decisions are being made to help us feel like we're a part of STO?

One of the things that tire me about most MMO's is the fact that, whether I log in or not, nothing will change.  Those Borg will invade every Sunday whether I log in or not, whether I fight or beat them...I don't have to log in at all and everything will go long as if I had.  I don't matter to the game.  But I want to matter.  I want to find new stuff, see the consequences of my actions in game have impact beyond my own play session.  It doesn't have to be huge, but it should be there, IMHO.

Just my 2 gold-pressed latinum.

Mon Mar 16 2009 3:12PM Report
OddjobXL writes:

Actually, Eve changes all the time.  If you want a dynamic world that's the place to be.  You have to swim with the sharks though.

STO will have a competative PvE neutral zone which should function in a strategic sense.  How exactly that works we don't know.  It will also offer optional PvP flagging.

Mon Mar 16 2009 3:23PM Report
Misscreant writes:

Player crews could be a goer in the following scenario:

Captain has an NPC bridge crew that he has trained up, but wants to replace the tactician with a human, so invites Joe Bloggs... on the bridge, the NPC walks away as the human PC's avatar takes his place.  The invited human PC then sees himself at the tactical station... you get the idea?

@MacAllen:  If the human snot nosed Lt JG pisses you off, fine, you're the Captain... send the bugger to the brig (effectively uninviting him) and the NPC tactician returns.

If the Human PC can't play anymore cos it's dinner time / bed time or got disconnected... same, the NPC takes over.

This would allow for a very dynamic game, where others can work together in an adhoc fashion without disrupting the flow of a mission.  How many times in other MMOs have you gone out hunting with a bunch of mates, then half have to go for some reason and the rest go "well, not enough of us to kill that mob, and I can't be arsed trekking to another area for something easier, so I'm gone <disconnects / go crafting / whatever>"

In my mind, Cryptic haven't ruled this out... but I hope they do it in their first expansion rather than later.




Mon Mar 16 2009 6:13PM Report
JTrouble1289 writes:

     OK so i know some people complain about many of the games features but when you look at the game practically. Also in light of the fact that Cryptic is a company and therefore must make a profit. They are making the game for both Trekies and non Trekies (which means a compromise on many aspects) alike not to mention with the support of fans and future subscribers many of the hopes and wishes people want to see; the ship interiors, player bridge crew, more races and factions ect. may be added in expansions or patches.

     Finally I think they are making the smart choice on what they are doing with the game. By not allowing an overflow of ideas to control the game, such as in SWG, (which was a fun game but i mean really there was TOO much crap in it) where it seemed like every idea that popped into someone's head, including the village idiot, was thrown into the game, they  will make STO fun, enjoyable, and functional not perfect.


    Oh and a big personal question i have is if the Borg are in the game will they go around assimilating everything... because that would be wicked sweet... also plz in one of the future expansions give us a Borg faction and let me kick some alpha quadrant ass.

Mon Mar 16 2009 6:20PM Report
Ghimpi writes:

The lack of vision accounts for the inability to make those "mini" game positions within a ship. Not everyone is egocenteric enough to want to be the captain, especiallyin in a roleplaying environment. But then again, MMO don't cater to the roleplayers, they cater to the theme fanboys, and those fanboys though thier limited vision, want to be king of the sandbox Captains. A ship should be the main zone of the game, where the crew (guild) does most everything. It's a zone like any other in an MMO -- just that it's moving around in space from place to place. I don't think Cryptic has the budget to pull off the ship as a living crew environment, so they're going with the Captain route.

Mon Mar 16 2009 6:28PM Report
BLZBUB writes:

@ Miscreant:


 That sounds like a doable scenario for multiple PC adventure's...invites to others onto your ship ( and versa-visa). I could certainly live with that.

 One really hopes for exploration and discovery in this MMO universe, and having a fellow guild(Fleet) mate along would make the game that mus=ch more enjoyable.

 Let's hope for a great expansion pack after the initial release! :)

Mon Mar 16 2009 7:43PM Report
esarphie writes:

I completely understand the concern with "stations" on board a single ship.  I mean, seriously people, what is the Communications Officer going to do most of the time?  Say there's a prolonged combat going on, is the Captain going to say things to a helmsman and have him do it? Is a Science Officer going to twiddle his thumbs after peeking at a scanner for 2 seconds? How about the engineer?

The minigame concept, making a set of tasks to perform at each station... over and over... kind of like a Star Trek/Puzzle Pirates mash-up... is that something you'd want to keep doing for any length of time?

If they can get the feel of big giant ships, with big giant weapons, dueling it out in space, throw in some anomolies to say "fascinating" at, and wierd planets to explore with people that have bumps on their noses/foreheads/ears etc... then I'll be happy.

Mon Mar 16 2009 9:11PM Report
ivan50265 writes:

NIce post I appreciate the insight.

Mon Mar 16 2009 9:29PM Report
UnSub writes:

I agree with JackFetch - it's not that player crews aren't a good idea, it's what they do all the time that makes the play experience fun. Puzzle Pirates serves as an example of player crew-based content, but it has its limits and having a sailor experienced at a wide range of on-board tasks because it suits the genre.

Star Trek, on the other hand, is a team of specialists who generally don't cross disciplines. I don't remember Troi going to Worf, "You take care of Councillor duties today - I'm taking over as Security Officer!". Or, unless everyone can do something meaningful during combat, those positions will be the most sought after.

Player captains are a more sensible design option, imo.

Mon Mar 16 2009 10:22PM Report
cyberqat writes:

A long and invovled argument that, in the end, defeats itself.

The fact that you feel you have to go to such lengths to justify the solo-ship decision to the fans should be ample evidence that it is a bad one.

Star Trek was always an esamble cast show.  The heart and soul of ALL of the various versions of Star Trek is a small group of interesting personalities with unique skills working together to solve a problem.

Your focus puller is asleep at the switch.




Tue Mar 17 2009 2:52AM Report
Lt.Mitch writes:

Dear Cryptic Team, and my dear "midshipmen".... i speak to you as a true fan and someone who is looking forward to STO with a glimmer in his eys. I am very pleased to see all this good working progress and community infos. But there is one thing pressing on my chest, the interior problem. It was sayed that most of that will be there "after release" i unterstand that, there is alot of data and work included, but i am tired to play a ST game were i am supposed to look at the aft section of my ship while crusing around in space. I hope you guys would come up with at least a bridge and vital rooms as transporter room. Please guys if we are the captain we should feels so... I had the big chance to sit in Kirks and Piccards chair. So give us all the chance to sit in our own "place in the middle". If you think about a tv episode of Star Trek the bridge is the turning point... not the view of the warp narcelles.....

Best wishes your Michael

Tue Mar 17 2009 3:27AM Report
Ekibiogami writes:

Keep the servers warm for me Beccuse I wont play till we can play as crews.

Ive got Eve I dont need to be a Captin.

Tue Mar 17 2009 10:52AM Report
Eryxx writes:

STO is certainly a very polarizing game, especially in light of the fact that it hasn't even been released to beta yet and (alleged) players are already btiching!

Lighten up, folks! To everyone who keeps comparing STO to "the TV shows/movies," guess what? This is NOT a TV show or a movie! You can't just sit on your hindquarters and watch the story unfold anymore, you have to participate to make anything happen. In case you haven't gotten it yet, that means this group of devs (nor anyone else for that matter) isn't able to directly translate what you previously watched into what you now get to play. A decision had to be made as to the best way to implement an immersive and interactive gameplay mechanic; the decision has been made and all your whining and crying and bitching is much, MUCH too late and, at this point, completely counterproductive to what the devs ARE now trying to achieve for YOUR benefit!

"My benefit?" you surely ask. Yes, for you. Naturally, these guys get paid and this is their job, but why this job? Why aren't they managing a SQL database or load-balancing servers for great pay and no one constantly wanting to rip them a new one (assuming they are adequate to their tasks) multiple times on a daily basis? Because these people love games; they love making games, they love playing games and, more than those two combined, they love to see players enjoying the games they've created. They love to see the online worlds their collaborative talents combined created go forth and be all that they can be. That much of it, the reward factor, is for themselves, but they don't get that reward unless you, the player, enjoys and appreciates the creation. The best they can do is create what they think the MOST people will enjoy and return to and love as much as they do. NOT the "most dedicated" people, or the "most authentic fans" or the "most Captain-ish" or whatever you think you are, but the MOST PLAYERS, period.

I happen to think the solo captain route was a very smart opening move, as I, for one, do not want to stand around a starbase waiting for the right combination of players to finally assemble to pilot a starship to wherever the h3ll we have to go. I know, I know, many of you out there have your clans/guilds/trekker groups/etc., ready and waiting with baited breath to all finally combine your passions into one glorious starship and be the crew you've already imagined countless times in your hearts. Hey, that is great, and Godspeed to you all! When (if) Cryptic does finally implement a PC crew system I look forward to it with you, so long as the NPC option also exists. I also belong to a few gamer guilds/clans, but sometimes I just want to do things alone and not have to worry about finding another PC to do them with.

My main concern at this point (as was previously outlined by MacAllen) is STO not be ANYthing like CoH, which I played for a mind-numbing 5 days out of a 90-day free trial period (which I was given by NCSoft when it killed my beloved Tabula Rasa, but that's another story entirely) before I lapsed into a pixelated coma and decided it wasn't going to get any better. What was the decisive moment that pushed me over the edge? When I was trying to complete a very-basic n00b level mission that REQUIRED me to team up with a PC villain (opposite "faction") and I waited for 2.5 hours and none ever showed up. If STO ever makes me wait 2.5 hours for a Warp-rated Engineer (or whatever) to show up before I can launch, it will likely be the last day I login to that game, too.

Will I love STO? I have no idea at this point; I have seen many things that look attractive and seen/heard a few that still give me pause, but I know one thing for certain: I am not going to bury this game before it's even launched and I've had the opportunity to judge for myself with my own eyes and fingertips and thought. Be patient, try the game, give it a chance. If after having done that you still hate it as much as you think you will, then flame away with a clean conscience. If I do not like the game after release, I will be right there in line with you.


Tue Mar 17 2009 10:54AM Report
nate1980 writes:

This is why Star Trek will suck. Because THEY didn't want to make the effort or even have the imagination to make every type of officer fun to play or to allow players to pursue non-combative professions. Want proof that people out there do have imaginations and it can work? Look no further than SWG. The difference between SWG and Star Trek is that developers have had years to learn from SWG's mistakes and to perfect the things they introduced that made the game great.

Tue Mar 17 2009 11:44AM Report
nate1980 writes:

You can also tell that none of these developers served in the military. Not everyone truely wants to be a Captain. It's a lot of responsibility. Just like not everyone wants to be a guild leader. Some people enjoy just being members, while others would prefer to take on some extra responsibilities as an officer. But there are far fewer people who actually want to manage and lead something as vast as a ship. I for one would never want to be a Captain. I'd rather be a pilot or a security officer.

If Cryptic was smart, they'd find a way to make this game what half of the community wants it to be and that's a good Star Trek simulation. Then you'd see the game rake in millions of subscribers, versus the few hundred thousand I bet the game will have no more than.

Tue Mar 17 2009 11:50AM Report
Benadar writes:

To me, you should start off with Star Fleet Academy. I know the Federation is not everything in Star Trek, but sure is a good basic start. You do missions, level up your piloting skill, gun skill, etc. All races could start there including some androids, for you Data fans out there.  Same could be said if you start out as a Klingon or Romulan.

In Star Trek, not everyone finishes academy, you could then be a bartendar, barber, bounty hunter, bad guy and that is just the B's.

I don't think you need the Borg invasion every Sunday, but you could add some new races or a dash of Q.

I also know you don't want to add stuff into game that every other MMO has, but lets face it, you will want to sell stuff to by that new ship, Romulan Ale or a Lap dance at Quarks, so you will need some type of auction house, bank, etc. There are enough MMO's out there that you can tweak the good stuff to suit STO.





Tue Mar 17 2009 2:40PM Report
shelby500 writes:

From what I can tell there are too many people tring to compare this to all the other MMOs like SWG, WoW, Everquest, etc. Me personal have been waiting for the release of this since the frist company had it and dropped it. Im glad it wasnt forgotten to the selves and we get to see it made. Will It live up too everyones hopes I think not for all them. Hardcore gamers out there that its there life to log in everyday and  power over everything they do and be the first to say I made max rank in a week. Rubbing it into everyones face tell them they suck or calling them Noobs. I think the player aboard ship to take a roll idea is a good one later down the road and like someone said in a post above if that person isnt on than replace it with the NPC or pet that had the station before. The academy idea is good too maybe set it as a learning center for the game to do missions and get to know the ships movements and such but make it skipable for someone that has a toon and wants to make a new one of a different race or faction. I play WoW on a relgious basis and i have to listen to dump people in trade channel all day doing nothing  but taking up bandwith from someone that whats to play and not have to worry about someone lagging because there is 25 people with lvl 1 alts danceing in Ironforge. Now do I think this game will rock? Yes. My Girlfriend and I are alreadying desided to reserve 2 copies for me and her. Also been strolling the forums there for fleets to get into for the both of us. Will people wine about the game and say it will suck? Yess!! But they are intitled to their opinion just as I am, but opinions are like Butts and everyone has one. On that note Devs keep up the good work and keep us imformed. Hope this game Breaks the nasty cycle of your games that fell short.

Tue Mar 17 2009 3:43PM Report
jaxsundane writes:

I'm glad to see such a well written explanation on what I have noticed as one of the games biggest turnoffs in the whole player crew issue and one of the best lines in the blog was about how you would have to come up with these hundreds of hours of gameplay experience for these player crews which I still would hope is a possibility but am glad it is not the way the game is being designed I mean I can't be the only one who can imagine the time it would take to design the game that way from the top down as well as the numerous complaints you know they would get from those who ultimately are not happy with the way things were designed.

I'm glad that a company I trust and respect has the ip for this game and am looking forward to seeing just what Cryptic can do with it.

Tue Mar 17 2009 6:42PM Report
Interitus writes:

" Sure, you need Mot to cut your hair, Guinan and Quark to serve you drinks – but do we need to allow players to stand in a transporter room all day and wait to beam another player to an interesting location? "


To me this makes it seem very close minded.  Because the dev's don't think it sounds fun let's no include it? In it's prime SWG had countless image designers, dancers, musicians.  And while these roles could fill a combat need, most of the people there were simply there for the social experience. I mean, really, how hard would it be to let some cut someones hair, just gie them access to the character creator. And if they are really paranoid only let them change things like hair style, colour etc.. (not skin tone etc..)

The point is there are all these apparent missed opportunities.  Ship to ship combat has so much potential. Engineers could be runing around  fixing things, medics could be  healing.  And the fact that we are apparently seeing less and less ship interiors (the main location for the show) is a sad sight. 


Tue Mar 17 2009 7:24PM Report
Tnice writes:

Make the universe and visuals like Eve Online.  Give us the ability to drive the ship like Ace Combat.  Make the characters move and look like EQ2.  Make the planet side world look like Vanguard with the questing and gameplay quality of WoW.

Sure winner!

Tue Mar 17 2009 10:41PM Report
Blackstaff42 writes:

I don't think the hard part about having PC crews is figguring out how to deal with people not doing their job or loging off. The hard part would be making all the content to keep all positons of the ship to be fun to play at all times.

That is the reasons that I think just having players to be captions is a good idea.

Tue Mar 17 2009 11:22PM Report
supernat07 writes:

I understand the difficulty in making a separate game for every person in the crew.  Maybe you could meet us somewhere in the middle.  How about the following?

Solo players can man small ships.  Higher level players get larger ships with player crews.  The crew members could have an incentive like increased skill or experience points, and maybe a voting mechanism for how good the captain is to give the captain incentive.

The solo ships could be free play in the universe while the player crew ships are instances.  Open instances allow whoever to sign up and wait for boarding onto the ship while closed instances are created by an existing group and boarded just by them.

Player crew only enhances the capabilities of the ship, increasing the chances for success by having a live human interacting, while solo crew uses automated computers to man the stations, or generic NPCs.

Surely you could make 5 or 6 mini-games, one for each station.  A player could man any station but receive bonus skill at that station if it was aligned with their archetype (i.e. doctor running the engineering station is fine, but the minigame runs double speed for him versus an engineer). 

The one above could allow the captain to jump into a station and help defend his ship, using the tactical prowess required for the current situation at hand (i.e. man the shields station if shields are getting low).

The ship must be "held together" during battle, so a doctor could actually play an important role in keeping the injured healthy to keep plenty of personnel busy repairing and holding her together.

Just some ideas off the top of my head.

Tue Mar 17 2009 11:28PM Report
tree2me writes:

Just once I'd like to see an mmo company with an IP of Star Trek's magnitude sit down and take the time necissary to make it properly. Perhaps I stand alone in this mindset, but I will gladly sit and wait for however long it takes you to make this game if you make it properly. I don't care how long it takes, guys. I will happily sit and wait for you to produce something that isn't quickly designed crap like the vast majority of the current mmo's on the market.

Give me a ship to walk through, stations to explore, crew members to meet and join together with. Make me feel like there is a world out there and I am a part of it. Unfortunately, I can't feel a part of it if I can't see it through human(oid) eyes, and interact as I would feel inclined to. I don't want to chat in global channels to all the other thousands of fellow captains because I'm nigh sealed in my unearned husk of a starship and unable to communicate in person. I don't want to boldly go where no single crewed starship has warped before to find they have, and half of starfleet is floating about in a huge cluster of ships because every single player has one to fly about in.

Sad to see these things are not worth the effort anymore. What I've seen and read of this game thus far is extremely disappointing, and is closer describing a star trek themed remake of Asteroids than a groundbreaking new mmo that is deserving of the IP it's based on.

Wed Mar 18 2009 1:46AM Report
me_wildman writes:

I agree with supernat07, there are tons of small and mid ships out there that can and should be solo piloted. Then when it comes to the Galaxy or bird of prey class ships it seams only logical to make them crewed then have them go on instanced missions, or raid content for the end game. Everyone shouldnt be able to fly arround in the enterprise all the time, or right away, it looses its magestic qualities. The Devs could then have some fun with the instances or missions they create for those classes of ships. Just a thought

Wed Mar 18 2009 9:24AM Report
emin_354 writes:


Wed Mar 18 2009 10:10AM Report
space-scum writes:

I like the idea of starting off with captain only.  Ideally I would like to see it evolve to a point where players can play a variety of races/factions and players work their way up to the hierarchy of the various races from grunt to president. 

A player at the higher ranks, like Admiral would be the one more interested in directing ships to sectors or specific missions, while the player captains would be the ones to take up those missions and the challenges that entails.

Of course there is always the classic captain "going boldly where no one has gone before"

Will the game have a large amount of random space events which could challenge a captain at any time?

The vastness of this game is scary, it has unbelievable potential and for one am really looking forward to it.

Wed Mar 18 2009 1:37PM Report
grimboj writes:

As a potential player, there's nothing positive to derive from that story. A room full of people decided that they weren't going to implement the game that they all wanted to play and implemented a game that nobody wants. The current planned features seem very shallow and the gaming community is not forgiving. A games release figures are directly proportional to its subscription numbers 12... 18 months down the line. You can't just release a shell of a game and expect consumers to fund the dev time for the rest of the game.

Wed Mar 18 2009 4:12PM Report
genyak writes:

STO is a dream of mine. I have watch almost every episodes of all the Star Trek shows and all the movies. I have played roleplaying game about Star Trek which was fun. So what if you can't have everything about Star Trek. Do you ever consider what the Devs and their team have to do? They are letting everyone to see previews what they are doing. I give my hat to Cryptic for doing what is most important and worry about the other things later.  It COSTS money to make these MMOG. So PLEASE people consider not to whine about STO until you see and play it. I have agree to some people who wrote very interestng ideas for STO.  Cryptic has done the same thing. It is what they love to do, make games for us to enjoyable cause they want the same thing when they play the game. So Please be patient and hope the best for Cryptic to succeed so we can say, "I have gone to places that no-one have gone before".  As a Trekker myself, I really exciting about this after so many times for someone really give Star Trek fans and others something new to experience like "no-one has gone before" experience. So, I hope the best of all fortunate efforts that Cryptic succeeds in making an experience that is really enjoyable.

Thu Mar 19 2009 12:32AM Report
mellobri writes:

Keep in mind, the goal of this game is to be fun, and a GAME about the ST universe.  This is not supposed to be a remake, an episode, a movie, of ST.  It is a game, centered in the ST universe.  You will not have a bridge crew consisting of you and your buddies, that is completely unrealistic and far too involved.  It doesn't matter if you feel that is key to the series/movies/books, that's not the focus of the game.  Think of how complex and boring it would be if  they DID make ships into guilds, and you could only be a crewman until you get promoted to transporter operator, pushing and pulling 3 buttons when you're told to by the other more senior transporter operators, answerring to the chief, so on so forth.  Get real.

Sat Mar 21 2009 7:59PM Report
caemsg writes:

just as i thought if they need to explain why they are doing this and that they know they are just trying to fob us off with cheap tricks all their arguments have already been disproved by games that have already been released if i just wanted to be a ships captain i would go and play eve which i do so i don't need another one

and i bet they will make it a grind fest as well so from all sides it looks like STO will be a bad game its a pity it was somewhat interesting and i wanted to be interested up until released

Mon Mar 23 2009 12:12AM Report
gladosrev2 writes:

As I see it in all MMO's we have a clear division in a group anyway. Someone has to be the leader and others have to listen... it's nothing new. Someone has to do melee, another nuke from range, yet another heal or tank. Sounds for me just like different officer roles, doesnt it? And everyone can take the lead, IF they are competent or else the group wont accept it lol. So here we have group = ship, leader = captain, shield officer = tank, weapons officer = melee/nuker, engineer/medical officer = healer, etc.

Mon Mar 23 2009 12:31PM Report
steelfrenzy writes:

I have high hopes that this game will bring both a new perspective on mmos, and an exciting one at that :D I literally cannot wait to try it out! Good luck :)

Mon Mar 23 2009 7:16PM Report
bedolla3401 writes:

as a potential STO player, i cant wait till this game comes out.  Personally i like the idea of captain of your own ship, but i would have liked the abilitiy to go to starfleet acadaemy and all that etc.  I would love to be able to move around inside my ship and others ships, maybe have a holodeck.  and i like the idea of able to be other classes also while being capt.  like the OP said about all the other games, i just hope this WILL NOT be like wow.

Wed Mar 25 2009 9:41AM Report
avalon1000 writes:

This game is not Eve at all...we will be able to explore worlds and it's not a PVP centered game.  I am glad they are not trying to be all to everyone at the start or as stated the game would never get published.   I just got done reading about the SWG fiasco and my advice to STO devs is learn from it.  Start with a solid good basic game and grow from there and if your cusotmers are upset with a new update or patch (after testing it) then DO NOT release it.  Better to fix it than lose thousands of customers.

Fri Mar 27 2009 12:27AM Report
grimfall writes:

I'd have to pretty much disagree on the who 'player crews won't work' thinking.

It's akin to saying 'Ever player wants to be a melee fighter' when we have 10 years of MMO experience that clearly shows us otherwise.

If people will make a four man group with a tank, a healer, a crowd controller and a DPS class - why wouldn't they do the same thing with a captain, an engineer, a gunner and a navigator?  If it's just to proved a 'solo element' in the game, that can be worked out in different aspects.

That's a game-breaking mistake you've made.


Mon Apr 06 2009 11:18AM Report
Hathi writes:

 Unfortunately we can go back and forth all day long. The fact remains, the decision not to have player/NPC crews and interactive interiors has been made.  Personally, I think they made it because it takes more time and time is money. They want the game out sooner, so we lapdogs can fund the expansion.

 They decided to not be unique and be safe. Which is a sound financial decision, because casuals will buy it. 

 Guess for those of us who want a new space online experience have to wait a little longer

Tue Apr 14 2009 10:00AM Report
zephyr40k writes:

Multi-player ships is one of the core elements of the Star Trek mythos, and is something that will differentiate this game from other space games such as EVE, Jumpgate Evolution, or SWG.  I certainly hope this feature does make it into production at launch. 

Mon May 18 2009 8:19PM Report
fansede writes:

 Not to beat a dead horse, but I read this blog and then read Sanya Weathers blog

puts things in perspective for me.  Doing something new like player run ships, content which offers stimulating gameplay from something new is risky and costly.  It is easier to churn out an Earth and Beyond Game with some instances of various maps (away missions), grab the trek fanboys for a few months to recoup startup costs, then consider expansions into the developing unknown. Players would already have a vested interest in the game, so they can be more forgiving. That whole NGE episode with Sony won't happen to us...

Tue Jun 23 2009 2:11PM Report
55memo55 writes:

MMORPG games are in Turkey! For detailed information and game reviews

Sun Dec 13 2009 11:02AM Report
55memo55 writes:

Sun Dec 13 2009 11:03AM Report writes:
Login or Register to post a comment

Special Offers