Originally posted by solarine

Originally posted by Brenelael

Originally posted by Cerion

Originally posted by Varny

Along with swtor this has the most potential out of ones we know about.

 

Difference being, BIOWARE "gets" the Star Wars Universe. I haven't seen anything yet that convinces me Cryptic understands the Star Trek paradigm at all.

First of all I mean no offense by this but there just isn't that much to "get" about the Star Wars universe. I love Star Wars just about as much as anyone else but it is just a Spaghetti Western shot in space and it has the depth of a spoon. Not that this is a bad thing mind you... for Star Wars this works and it works well. Bioware has a lot easier time catering to the SW fans as they are a pretty easy to please bunch.

 

Star Trek on the other hand is a completely different animal. The lore behind the ST universe is very rich, deep and it's a lot more cerebral than SW. This means that no matter what direction Cryptic takes this game it will no doubt piss a lot of people off. This has to be one of the most complex IPs anyone has tried to make games for and is why most ST games do so poorly. No matter what they decided to do with this IP they will alienate at least part of both the MMO and ST fan bases as there simply is no "right way" to make a Star Trek game.

 

Bren

 

I'd say this is nothing but myth. 

First, Roddenberry himself said he envisioned Star Trek as a kind of western in outer space. It's a space opera through and through. It feeds off of epics, fantasy, western and quite a few other action story genres. The genre a story belongs to does not in any way make it inferior.

And if you're telling stories, just coming up with fancy technology and future systems makes your story "cerebral" the wrong way. It just gives you a busy terminology. Yes, Star Trek does have ideas, but the the storylines and themes are not exactly Tolstoy stuff. Everything works on the surface and is mostly related through dialogue. It's a pretty superficial way of telling stories. Not to mention the handling of the themes are mostly naive. So I'd say it's way down the scale of "cerebral" science fiction - writers like Stanislav Lem or the contemporary Iain M. Banks do a much better job of it. Or even a mix-matcher like China Mieville.

Actually, Star Wars has more cerebral stuff in it even if by proxy. Lucas may not be a brilliant dialogue writer but he knows how to work those Jungian archetypes. This is why Star Wars lends itself way better to academic analysis.  

And you know what the real irony is? The fact that the latest Star Trek movie not only does not get its own franchise, but also utterly fails in grasping the other franchise it wants to fashion itself after. Thus, Abrams' a downright Star Wars wannabe manages to be both shallow and out of ideas. You can't beat that!

I'm not a big fan of either, but at least Star Wars does a good job of being Star Wars!

 

As a final note: I think one can't say he likes Star Wars as much as anybody else and then go ahead and argue "there's not much to get"... That'd just mean that person is doing a poor job of liking it. There's a lot of depth to the Star Wars universe you can sink your teeth in, given that you're willing.

 

Well I had a whole huge reply to this written out but decided to delete it as I don't want to turn this thread into a Star Wars vs. Star Trek debate. Lets just say that we are of differing opinions and leave it at that. As for your last comment a story (or universe) does not have to have depth to be enjoyable. I like Star Wars for what it is.

Bren

Originally posted by Brenelael 

First of all I mean no offense by this but there just isn't that much to "get" about the Star Wars universe. I love Star Wars just about as much as anyone else but it is just a Spaghetti Western shot in space and it has the depth of a spoon. Not that this is a bad thing mind you... for Star Wars this works and it works well. Bioware has a lot easier time catering to the SW fans as they are a pretty easy to please bunch.

Welcome to post JJ Star Trek - not to get to much in to the movie verse the game but ST is no SW, they even got funky high tech swords now.

Originally posted by Brenelael 

 

Star Trek on the other hand is a completely different animal. The lore behind the ST universe is very rich, deep and it's a lot more cerebral than SW. This means that no matter what direction Cryptic takes this game it will no doubt piss a lot of people off. This has to be one of the most complex IPs anyone has tried to make games for and is why most ST games do so poorly. No matter what they decided to do with this IP they will alienate at least part of both the MMO and ST fan bases as there simply is no "right way" to make a Star Trek game.

All that lore, all but what exists from Enterprise, was effectively deleted by this years movie so ST is not the deep possible universe it once was.  But yeah, the underlying challenge of a team making a ST game is to recreate the realistic nature of the ST universe as ST is no science fantasy it is true science fiction.  Fantasy is far easier to code in a game than is realism (future or otherwise).

Originally posted by AgtSmith

Originally posted by Brenelael 

First of all I mean no offense by this but there just isn't that much to "get" about the Star Wars universe. I love Star Wars just about as much as anyone else but it is just a Spaghetti Western shot in space and it has the depth of a spoon. Not that this is a bad thing mind you... for Star Wars this works and it works well. Bioware has a lot easier time catering to the SW fans as they are a pretty easy to please bunch.

Welcome to post JJ Star Trek - not to get to much in to the movie verse the game but ST is no SW, they even got funky high tech swords now.

 

Originally posted by Brenelael 

 

Star Trek on the other hand is a completely different animal. The lore behind the ST universe is very rich, deep and it's a lot more cerebral than SW. This means that no matter what direction Cryptic takes this game it will no doubt piss a lot of people off. This has to be one of the most complex IPs anyone has tried to make games for and is why most ST games do so poorly. No matter what they decided to do with this IP they will alienate at least part of both the MMO and ST fan bases as there simply is no "right way" to make a Star Trek game.

All that lore, all but what exists from Enterprise, was effectively deleted by this years movie so ST is not the deep possible universe it once was.  But yeah, the underlying challenge of a team making a ST game is to recreate the realistic nature of the ST universe as ST is no science fantasy it is true science fiction.  Fantasy is far easier to code in a game than is realism (future or otherwise).

 

 

Well the game takes place in the prime time line and not the alternate one set up by the movie so it can still draw on all of the original lore. The only part of the movie that is in this game is the destruction of Romulus and the disappearance of Spock that sets up the new movie but nothing else affects the game as it all happens in an alternate reality. Vulcan is still there and George Kirk was never killed by Nero in this time line so all of the lore and stories we all grew up on are still there in STO. The movie will have very little effect on this game at all lore wise.

Bren

There's already a movie thread available. Please deposit all nerd rage pertaining to the movie there. Thanks.

Originally posted by ktanner3

There's already a movie thread available. Please deposit all nerd rage pertaining to the movie there. Thanks.

LOL... I already defused the situation but thanks for the assist all the same.

Bren

First, no need for inflammatory language. That sort of stuff makes forum discussions like these devolve into sources of embarrassment. 

Myself, I was primarily talking about  the original series. I'm not exactly a fan of it (or Star Wars, for that matter). Not in terms of storytelling anyway. To me, the really compelling thing about Star Trek is that it does have some big ideas and (from a purely subjective point of view) that its heart is in the right place. 

The thing is, seeing the new movie makes me doubt people are on the same wavelength as I am when it comes to what used to be good about Star Trek in the first place. Is the shift of emphasis isolated to the new movie, or will we see more of it  - e.g., will Cryptic focus on the basic merits of Star Trek? 

Thanks to my admittedly low expectations, I was pleasantly surprised with what the gameplay videos have shown us. I like the overall visual design, and I *really* like that space station! Hey, I even like the away mission footage.

On the other hand, I can't help but wonder whether Cryptic is going to give exploration the attention it deserves. I myself have never seen Star Trek as a series of combat-based missions or an amalgam of technological designs. By that perspective, hearing that you'd reach the end of "Earth Space" when you try to go from Earth to Saturn on impulse was  somewhat disheartening.

Still, if the game somehow manages to give the player that "thrill of exploration" the series argues it's built upon, great! :)

Yes, we all want more than combat - diplomacy, exploration, negotiation, politics. etc..  But I think the reality of computer programming limits the DEVs whatever their disposition to those sorts of things are, combat is the only thing that can me gameplay simulated though I would expect at least superficial treatment for the other things in the way of side elements and perhaps mini games though it may only end up in as quest dialogue.

Originally posted by solarine

First, no need for inflammatory language. That sort of stuff makes forum discussions like these devolve into sources of embarrassment. 

Myself, I was primarily talking about  the original series. I'm not exactly a fan of it (or Star Wars, for that matter). Not in terms of storytelling anyway. To me, the really compelling thing about Star Trek is that it does have some big ideas and (from a purely subjective point of view) that its heart is in the right place. 

The thing is, seeing the new movie makes me doubt people are on the same wavelength as I am when it comes to what used to be good about Star Trek in the first place. Is the shift of emphasis isolated to the new movie, or will we see more of it  - e.g., will Cryptic focus on the basic merits of Star Trek? 

Thanks to my admittedly low expectations, I was pleasantly surprised with what the gameplay videos have shown us. I like the overall visual design, and I *really* like that space station! Hey, I even like the away mission footage.

On the other hand, I can't help but wonder whether Cryptic is going to give exploration the attention it deserves. I myself have never seen Star Trek as a series of combat-based missions or an amalgam of technological designs. By that perspective, hearing that you'd reach the end of "Earth Space" when you try to go from Earth to Saturn on impulse was  somewhat disheartening.

Still, if the game somehow manages to give the player that "thrill of exploration" the series argues it's built upon, great! :)

 

 

Because the game takes place in the 'prime' time line and not in the alternate reality that the movie sets up I would say that you won't be disappointed in STO but as AgtSmith has pointed out some of the things that make Star Trek great will be very hard to turn into actual game play mechanics so we'll have to wait to see what Cryptic comes up with in the regard. As for exploration Cryptic has said it will be a big part of the game and they have even invented a new dynamic content generator they call 'Genesis' to handle this aspect of the game. They did it this way so that there will always be something new to discover even after the game is 5+ years old. I think this is wonderful but ultimately we will have to see this new system in action to really judge it.

I also think that if Episodes(Quests) give EXP there is no reason you can't level your skills from non combat missions. This could all be handled through dialog and some actions (Like using your repair skill to fix a broken comm array) and you would get experience based on what skills you used to complete the mission. There is no reason you can't have non combat advancement in a skill based game.

Bren

I have to side with the comments of Mykell earlier in the thread.

I am a HUGE Star Trek fan and I am having a very hard time getting excited about this game.  The game just seems to have no identity and seems very simplistic/shallow so far.  Things like no 3-d flight in space really hurt this game IMO.

Gameplay vids I have seen seem ok, not great but ok.  The space vids look much better then the character screenshots I have seen.  They look....bad for this gen of MMO.  That being said, I can overlook marginal graphics for awesome gameplay.

I will definately keep an eye on this though and I hope as more details come out it will get closer to what most of us would like to see in an STMMO.

Originally posted by AgtSmith

Yes, we all want more than combat - diplomacy, exploration, negotiation, politics. etc..  But I think the reality of computer programming limits the DEVs whatever their disposition to those sorts of things are, combat is the only thing that can me gameplay simulated though I would expect at least superficial treatment for the other things in the way of side elements and perhaps mini games though it may only end up in as quest dialogue.

The reality does indeed limit the ability to incorporate key aspects of the IP into the game. Which is why the game shouldn't be made at all. Rather, make a decent MMO space combat game and leave Trek out of it entirely.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by AgtSmith

Yes, we all want more than combat - diplomacy, exploration, negotiation, politics. etc..  But I think the reality of computer programming limits the DEVs whatever their disposition to those sorts of things are, combat is the only thing that can me gameplay simulated though I would expect at least superficial treatment for the other things in the way of side elements and perhaps mini games though it may only end up in as quest dialogue.

The reality does indeed limit the ability to incorporate key aspects of the IP into the game. Which is why the game shouldn't be made at all. Rather, make a decent MMO space combat game and leave Trek out of it entirely.

I have a better idea. How about you just decide not to play and pretend that it never happened? I can think of quite a few Trek games that weren't exactly great but that doesn't mean they should never have been made just because I didn't find them attractive. On the other hand, I enjoyed games like Armada, Starfleet Command and BOTF and I'm sure there were many folks who didn't like them.Whether you like it or not, this game is going to be made. Accept it.

Not sure if these gameplay links have been posted here or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3bYTMTK4Zo&feature=related 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCE8q6StGdQ

Enjoy!

 dead link for me