I think space in this game is going to be really awesome.  I love the way it looks and the game mechanics behind fighting with the shields, etc.  But does anyone else feel that the ground element seems a bit undercooked?  I mean graphics wise too, it seems a notch down from space combat.

And could someone explain what this Genesis thing is?  Someone told me you can make your own (or the game makes its own) random planet environments for you to explore.  Is that true?  That's pretty nifty if so, it would allow for an unlimited amount of places to go.  However, I can also see that being limited so it might not truly be that interesting if it just randomly throws a planet map together.  No thought would be put behind it.  But I'm not 100% sure that's even really in the game.

Originally posted by thedfw

I think space in this game is going to be really awesome.  I love the way it looks and the game mechanics behind fighting with the shields, etc.  But does anyone else feel that the ground element seems a bit undercooked?  I mean graphics wise too, it seems a notch down from space combat.

And could someone explain what this Genesis thing is?  Someone told me you can make your own (or the game makes its own) random planet environments for you to explore.  Is that true?  That's pretty nifty if so, it would allow for an unlimited amount of places to go.  However, I can also see that being limited so it might not truly be that interesting if it just randomly throws a planet map together.  No thought would be put behind it.  But I'm not 100% sure that's even really in the game.

I think the ground aspect of the game looks great, but we won't realy know untill the game launches and we all get a chance to play it. Now as for the Genesis thing you're talking about, that is a built in engine in the game that randomly creates new planets for you to discover and explore. So you get a mission from the Empire (or Starfleet) to explore the Beta Uta Pi Sector... so you go to the BUP Sector and find planet 1. You as a player are able to name the planet (or so I read a while ago, on the offical forum they have a list of confirmed features) and then explore it. So what the Genesis engine does is creates new planets for players to explore and name. It even creates races to populate the planets with and you can convince these NPCs to join your crew or join your faction. They added it because some of the core aspects of Trek are exploration and first conatact. You couldn't have Trek without first contacts. Again check the offical forums over at Startrekonline.com to get a list of all the confirmed features.

Yes, you could say that the ground content in the game looks "undercooked" in a manner of speaking. I think this is actually the second thread which has used a food analogy to question the quality of the ground content in the game.

Personally, I think a lot of the character models look terrible in comparison to the models we have seen for space ships and such. There is even one screen shot on on the official site where you get a close up on a character using a tricorder (sp?) and he is holding that little gadget they take out of the top of the tricorder to scan things close up. On the show its a tiny object they can hold with two fingers, but in the screen shot from the game it appears to be the size of a soup can and the skin on it looks terrible. I hope all the items don't have major appearance issues like this.

And the ground combat itself, both from the descriptions the devs have made and from the gameplay videos we have seen, looks like just a massive button mashing fest. It reminds me of Tabula Rasa, which despite what a few hardcore fanboys would have you beleive, was a game with a terrible combat system. You pretended to aim and use skill but it was actually all based on RPG stats and dice rolls (and yes, there is one guy who will probably reply to this post to rant that Tabula Rasa didn't have dice rolls because the stats were all fixed, but so what, it was still based on number crunching inside the computer and not on actual player skill, which is the point I'm trying to make here).

As for the Genesis system, its one of the few things I have a small glimmer of hope for in this game. Pretty much it sounds like it will work like this:

1. You go to a "cluster" of "unexplored stars" and the Genesis system will randomly generate a new star system for you to explore.

2. The contents of the new system will be random. It could just be some stuff for you to scan. Or there could be an entire race of evil doers you will have to fight off.

3. Once you have completed the content in that star system, you can save the location of that system so that you or anyone else you give the location to can visit it again later.

My real question is: Will the randomly generated content in these systems be good enough to justify visiting it more than once? Or even visiting it the first time around? Yes, the system SOUNDS awesome. But Cryptic's example of "random" content in their past games has been pretty sad. I wouldn't visit a radio/newspaper mission in City of Heros/Villians more than once.

Here is a post I found on the official forums which contains a bunch of Quotes from the developers about the Genesis system:

http://forums.startrekonline.com/showpost.php?p=949362&postcount=12

I'd say you have to give them some credit. Having a space game and a ground game all in a single package is a very large feat. Star Wars Galaxies didn't launch its space pack untill a year after launch. EVE Online still has no form of ground or interior combat. So what cryptic is doing is unseen in most MMOs, having two forms of gameplay in one game at launch.

With that said its easy to see that ships would look better than characters. I say this because the ships don't realy have moving parts. The player avatars have to have a large ammount of animation in them so with the technology they have and the resources your computer has to work with its fair to say ships would and should look better than the avatars.

I will agree the footage I've seen has looked a bit choppy however as stated in a differnt thread it seems Cryptic couldn't thread a good gameplay movie togather if their life depended on it lol. I've never been let down by a cryptic game when it comes to gameplay (CO let me down due to a lack of things to do, but the core gameplay was good in my mind in the fact that it was the same as COH). With that said I sitll have faith in Cryptic. Afterall I've been following STO since the Prepetual days so I'm just happy to see a release date thats only months away and an actual beta happening. As for undercooked stuff... hell they can cook it more when the game launches I don't care I just want to play it lol.

Since they went with a Tank-Healer-DPS system for space combat, they'll probably do the same thing for ground combat (Cryptic doesn't seem to know how to do anything else).  Expect ground parties with tanks, healers, and dps characters.  Or if it is undercooked then it will probably be a mess of unbalanced ideas tossed together (that said, I'd wager they will have the Holy Trinity system even so).

*sigh* 

They have already said that the three character types (Tactical, Engineer and Science) will still dictate what abilities characters will have during ground combat. So yeah, probably something along the lines of Engineer=Tank, Science=Support and Tactical=DPS.

just reminding you, if you are in beta you cannot be speaking about this.

If your not in beta then you probably wont have seen ground combat.

I am not going to say whether I like ground combat or not due to NDA

Originally posted by Raltar

They have already said that the three character types (Tactical, Engineer and Science) will still dictate what abilities characters will have during ground combat. So yeah, probably something along the lines of Engineer=Tank, Science=Support and Tactical=DPS.

Actually, they've said no such thing.

You're just showing yourself, again, to be ignorant.

Ground elements in this game are handled very well, and you can learn this with or without access to beta.

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by Raltar

They have already said that the three character types (Tactical, Engineer and Science) will still dictate what abilities characters will have during ground combat. So yeah, probably something along the lines of Engineer=Tank, Science=Support and Tactical=DPS.

 

Actually, they've said no such thing.

You're just showing yourself, again, to be ignorant.

Ground elements in this game are handled very well, and you can learn this with or without access to beta.

http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=24490
 

Hmm, everyone has personal shields.  10% of shield damage bleeds through to personal damages.  Medics have ranged heals.  Engineers can repair shields in combat.  Overall a lot like a Tank-Healer-DPS system, though you have two healing classes (whether one is really needed a lot more than the other is a more interesting question that isn't answered).  No one asks about tanking, but given that they are giving people shields, I expect there are going to be ground-based tanks (or perhaps the system just isn't fleshed out very well).  In any case, it sounds more silly and not at all "handled very well."

Edit: http://www.startrekonline.com/node/363

Given that shields regen very fast if you don't get shot at (e.g. run behind cover and you have to RUN behind cover because there's no such thing is kneeling behind it or the like), it seems like Medics are the big healers in combat and shields more easily get fixed just by hiding a particular guy.  They don't seem to talk much about the mechanics beyond engineers dropping devices and medics healing though.

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by Raltar

They have already said that the three character types (Tactical, Engineer and Science) will still dictate what abilities characters will have during ground combat. So yeah, probably something along the lines of Engineer=Tank, Science=Support and Tactical=DPS.

 

Actually, they've said no such thing.

You're just showing yourself, again, to be ignorant.

Ground elements in this game are handled very well, and you can learn this with or without access to beta.

Actually they did say that there are three cahracter types and they dictate your skills on the ground. It's easily found searching the forums on the STO site. I'm busy so I can't find it right now. Don't jump on people before knowing all the facts.

Originally posted by Yavin_Prime  

Afterall I've been following STO since the Prepetual days so I'm just happy to see a release date thats only months away and an actual beta happening. As for undercooked stuff... hell they can cook it more when the game launches I don't care I just want to play it lol.

If you have played SWG or at least know something of its history, then you know the words highlighted in yellow are almost never a good thing.

I'd wait three more years for a game done right, that I'd love, rather than pay for an ongoing beta.

 Star Trek is too d*mned important a genre to screw up with a bad MMO conversion.

The whole "release now patch later" attitude of developers is one of the main reasons games aren't as good these days as they used to be. And its one of the big reasons so many MMOs fail at launch. I'm sure someone at Funcom said "Yeah, we know Age of Conan isn't ready for release yet, but lets just release it now and finish it later!" Look how that worked out for Age of Conan.

The fact of the matter is, if your game isn't up to standard when it is released, it probably never will be. All your customers will get fed up with your crap and leave. Even if you "fix" the game later the majority will not be willing to give you a second chance.

Of course, MMO developers these days probably don't even care if you quit the game after launch. As long as they got $50 dollars out of you (or even $70+ for the pointless CE version) for the boxed copy of the game they probably couldn't care less if you continue to pay subscription fees after that. Thats why companies like Cryptic release their games with one or two months of content at most. They don't even expect you to be around any longer than that, so why waste their time creating more content?

Well, first in regards to ground combat...

I think too many people are expecting the most awesome FPS ever to grace the planet rather than the RPG style that Cryptic has explained they wish to go for. Additionally, people seem to hate the "Holy Trinity" but NEVER EVER offer an alternative and usually ALWAYS follow it themselves.

And you know what, I for one, LIKE the Holy Trinity dang it. When I play games like this, I want a specific job to do. If I want to heal, I want to heal. If I want to tank, I want to tank. That being said, they've explained this is a SKILL based game. So, you can actually make a character capable of healing and tanking some. They've mentioned the skill system and the things you can do with it.

And as for a Star Trek MMO... honestly, IT WILL NEVER BE PERFECT. Take that idea, throw it out the window and say good bye. If you want a PERFECT game, it will never be completed. EVER. Everquest is one of the oldest MMOs out there and they still do patches. If you do not like it, well, you can request they stop working on bugs in games and leave them buggy forever. Seriously, you people act as though creeating a decent MMO is as easy as baking pre-prepped cookies.

Originally posted by DanaDark

Well, first in regards to ground combat...

I think too many people are expecting the most awesome FPS ever to grace the planet rather than the RPG style that Cryptic has explained they wish to go for. Additionally, people seem to hate the "Holy Trinity" but NEVER EVER offer an alternative and usually ALWAYS follow it themselves.

And you know what, I for one, LIKE the Holy Trinity dang it. When I play games like this, I want a specific job to do. If I want to heal, I want to heal. If I want to tank, I want to tank. That being said, they've explained this is a SKILL based game. So, you can actually make a character capable of healing and tanking some. They've mentioned the skill system and the things you can do with it.

And as for a Star Trek MMO... honestly, IT WILL NEVER BE PERFECT. Take that idea, throw it out the window and say good bye. If you want a PERFECT game, it will never be completed. EVER. Everquest is one of the oldest MMOs out there and they still do patches. If you do not like it, well, you can request they stop working on bugs in games and leave them buggy forever. Seriously, you people act as though creeating a decent MMO is as easy as baking pre-prepped cookies.

You have incredibly low standards for something we are expected to pay monthly to play.

No one expects any game to be perfect, but that is a far cry from expecting a game to to be worth paying for at release.

What you may call "Low" is what I call "Realistic" Therefor you'll ALWAYS be disappointed, while I shall remain on target.

But then again, your user name kind of allows you to be he he MMO_Doubter....

Originally posted by Raltar

The whole "release now patch later" attitude of developers is one of the main reasons games aren't as good these days as they used to be. And its one of the big reasons so many MMOs fail at launch. I'm sure someone at Funcom said "Yeah, we know Age of Conan isn't ready for release yet, but lets just release it now and finish it later!" Look how that worked out for Age of Conan.

The fact of the matter is, if your game isn't up to standard when it is released, it probably never will be. All your customers will get fed up with your crap and leave. Even if you "fix" the game later the majority will not be willing to give you a second chance.

Of course, MMO developers these days probably don't even care if you quit the game after launch. As long as they got $50 dollars out of you (or even $70+ for the pointless CE version) for the boxed copy of the game they probably couldn't care less if you continue to pay subscription fees after that. Thats why companies like Cryptic release their games with one or two months of content at most. They don't even expect you to be around any longer than that, so why waste their time creating more content?

BINGO.

We are seeing too many shoddy releases for it to be accidental. I am convinced that short life MMOs are the current business model for most of these companies.

Whoa whoa whoa... dont go there... there's too much we'd all contribute to that ha ha. And I think most are in agreement that we'd like to see some form of quality game put out to last a long time... but that would also reesult in an end to Insta-Gratification that so many yearn for.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Raltar

The whole "release now patch later" attitude of developers is one of the main reasons games aren't as good these days as they used to be. And its one of the big reasons so many MMOs fail at launch. I'm sure someone at Funcom said "Yeah, we know Age of Conan isn't ready for release yet, but lets just release it now and finish it later!" Look how that worked out for Age of Conan.

The fact of the matter is, if your game isn't up to standard when it is released, it probably never will be. All your customers will get fed up with your crap and leave. Even if you "fix" the game later the majority will not be willing to give you a second chance.

Of course, MMO developers these days probably don't even care if you quit the game after launch. As long as they got $50 dollars out of you (or even $70+ for the pointless CE version) for the boxed copy of the game they probably couldn't care less if you continue to pay subscription fees after that. Thats why companies like Cryptic release their games with one or two months of content at most. They don't even expect you to be around any longer than that, so why waste their time creating more content?

BINGO.

We are seeing too many shoddy releases for it to be accidental. I am convinced that short life MMOs are the current business model for most of these companies.

Well, I hope that they plan on STO not lasting a year, maybe even six months.  I've said it before...anybody remember The Matrix Online? 

Huge fanfare when the game was released by SOE, then it tanked almost immediately.

This game will be no different.  People are all in the mindset that "because it's Star Trek, it HAS to be good, right?"

When you have a dev team that publicly says they're worried about phaser types being canon when asked if there were any fan concerns they were addressing...

Well, that's all I'm going to say for now.

Originally posted by DanaDark

Whoa whoa whoa... dont go there... there's too much we'd all contribute to that ha ha. And I think most are in agreement that we'd like to see some form of quality game put out to last a long time... but that would also result in an end to Insta-Gratification that so many yearn for.

Um, huh?

That's already going on with the current game.  Because that is exactly what's going to happen in a game that has no basis in design except for war and gear driven linear leveling.  No exploration, none of the elements that make Star Trek what it is.

The game design is based on action only.  When you have an action oriented game, even if you have a good genre like Star Trek, you attract the power leveling types that will burn out quickly on the game and leave it rather than long standing subscriptions.

The game will tank.  But you can either play it or not.  I plan to play the beta, just so I can earn the right to complain that I was right.  So will a lot of Trekkers with low expectations of this game.

You do realize that exploration is actually non-existant in reality right? Exploration as an idea is based on the idea YOUR society has never been there, not that NO ONE has ever been there. Even in Star Trek, they explore, but they usually always visit places visted, seen, or even inhabited by OTHERS. So technically, they have not explored at all.

Exploration, as is limited by MMO constraints, has been detailed and has some good potential. Your fearmongering is simply due to the fact they are not making the game in every single possible aspect you want, and since you cannot have your ideal perfection, you flame. Immature.

They have made several controversial decisions in game design, and all of them have logical merit. And due to your limited reasoning ability, you cannot cognitively accept it, and therefor it must fail, die, and burn in your mind.

I am sorry they didn't make a game tailored specifically, solely, and only for your tastes. And as I mentioned to others, you are also free to make your own. Heck, you guys should all get together and make one. Especially since you all have the best understanding of programming and game mechanics that no developer in the history of computers has ever had. I am sure it'd be fantastic.

That being said, one of my favorite games is one that was made as a fun side project and turned out to be fully entertaining...