Originally posted by Raltar

Yeah, same here...

Guys like Ktanner just don't get it. Us "haters" don't WANT the game to fail. We WANT it to be good. We would be happy to be proven wrong for a change.

We just don't expect it.

I don't expect it, either. I also don't intend to give Cryptic any of my money until I see otherwise. Those who do are just encouraging more shoddy MMO releases.

It already looks unimpressive. Bah, atleast SOE didn't get hold of the license!

I'll buy the game but i doubt i will last longer than 1 month

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by ktanner3

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/star-trek-online-eg-expo-hands-on

"Trekkies can put one fear to rest right now: Star Trek Online feels just like Star Trek. From the 10-minute demo available on the Eurogamer Expo show floor, it's difficult to learn all that much about the mechanics and structure of this licensed MMO (you can read more about these in our recent preview and interview). But it's immediately apparent that developer Cryptic has nailed the unmistakable flavour of faintly cheesy, high-minded, planet-hopping science-fiction with a straight face and a glint in its eye - with an equal love of politics, philosophy and punch-ups"
 

 

 

In view of the fact Eurogamer is mostly spot on and very critical... it is promissing.

Perhaps Cryptic used CO to gather much needed resources to invest in the real game of ST.

Timing of launch is perfect : they have at least 3 months without any competition.

 

They don't seem to be spot on with this one to me. So far the only mission thats been talked about was a diplomacy mission ..........sounds Star Trek'ish at first glance until you hear the details of that diplomatic mission. Kill the discovered species, kill the Klingons, destroy the newly discovered species base, destroy the Klingons ships lol.

Star Trek diplomacy at it's finest huh?

Well it might be to the better there are so many doubting Tom's, that way expectations aren't off the charts.  If cryptic can deliver a game that has the Star trek atmosphere and is fun, everyone will be happy in the end.  Better than either promising the moon (or trying half -ass to cover every aspect or play style) and not delivering the expected product in my opinion.

Again, people should not judge a game until it is actually released.

"I don't expect it, either. I also don't intend to give Cryptic any of my money until I see otherwise. Those who do are just encouraging more shoddy MMO releases."

LOL MMO doubter if everyone did that how would we know if the game was good or not?  I surely wouldn't take anyones word on this forum lol!  As we all have different desires and expectations the only way to see if the game is any good is to try it out.

Originally posted by Player_420

Want proof this article is TRASH and fluff:

Here ya go (direct from article)

 

"Space combat isn't EVE Online - although your weapons do lock on, they have limited fire arcs, and there are no autopilot options. The focus is on physically manoeuvring your ship to keep your enemies within optimum firing range while manually firing weapons and keeping an eye on power balance" (if you need me to explain, that pretty much is EVE's combat)

 

(notice the typo, dude cant even spell check an article...)

OMG you must be smoking cannabis mixed with ginger ale, cocaine and afrodisiac. Seriously if that is EVE's combat then I've been playing a different game for 4yrs and CCP needs to give me my money back.

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by brezel

ship classes = standard tactics = boring gameplay = fail.  where are the mmog's for peopels who want use their brains?

 

clearly not at Cryptic

What do you consider as "Standard Tactics"?

I'm planning on buying the game on launch or near it as well.  The way I see things is Cryptic while not my favorite dev in the industry does have a track record of making products that atleast work from a technical sense and appeal to me graphically so there is no harm in trying it.  I expect the game to certainly be worth the purchase price with a free month to see if I want to continue to sub or not.  What worries me is I've rarely found much long lasting fun  from Cryptic but I can say that this game certainly for me seems to have enough going for it to buck the trend finally.

Again the biggest point to me is that this is a company who atleast has a handle on the technology they use to bring us games and they rarely lf ever lie about what they will have and with so many few companies able to do that I could certainly do worse than STO from Cryptic.

I'll buy the game if they prove me it's fun enough to last at least a 21-day period. Yes, only purchasing the game after I get some kind of trial of it.

I'm not purchasing MMOs with content and mechanics that last only a few weeks.

Originally posted by Zeroxin

Originally posted by Player_420

Want proof this article is TRASH and fluff:

Here ya go (direct from article)

 

"Space combat isn't EVE Online - although your weapons do lock on, they have limited fire arcs, and there are no autopilot options. The focus is on physically manoeuvring your ship to keep your enemies within optimum firing range while manually firing weapons and keeping an eye on power balance" (if you need me to explain, that pretty much is EVE's combat)

 

(notice the typo, dude cant even spell check an article...)

OMG you must be smoking cannabis mixed with ginger ale, cocaine and afrodisiac. Seriously if that is EVE's combat then I've been playing a different game for 4yrs and CCP needs to give me my money back.

LOL.

Originally posted by buegur

"I don't expect it, either. I also don't intend to give Cryptic any of my money until I see otherwise. Those who do are just encouraging more shoddy MMO releases."

 

LOL MMO doubter if everyone did that how would we know if the game was good or not?  I surely wouldn't take anyones word on this forum lol!  As we all have different desires and expectations the only way to see if the game is any good is to try it out.

What, not anyone's word? As cynical as I am about the industry in general, I would think if you see me praise a game, you can be pretty sure it's worth playing.

If you examine my posts on WoW and Warhammer, I think you will see that I recognize both the good and bad in both games.

Originally posted by EricDanie

I'll buy the game if they prove me it's fun enough to last at least a 21-day period. Yes, only purchasing the game after I get some kind of trial of it.

I'm not purchasing MMOs with content and mechanics that last only a few weeks.

Why not? A single player game that costs $60 (or $40 PC version) can sometimes last only for 10-15 hours.

A MMO that last a month for $40 is a step up. I have no problem with that value proposition.

Originally posted by buegur

I surely wouldn't take anyones word on this forum lol! 

As we all have different desires and expectations the only way to see if the game is any good is to try it out.

If you don't think that anyone on this forum is a credible source of information, why do you even bother to read this forum?

And I take it you don't believe in reviews either?

Let me guess, you were one of those guys who totally ignored the warnings of everyone who played in the Age of Conan beta and tried to tell everyone how horrible the game was, so you ended up wasting money on it anyway?

Originally posted by nariusseldon

A single player game that costs $60 (or $40 PC version) can sometimes last only for 10-15 hours.

That would be a very crappy game. I don't know what type of single player games you have been getting into but I wouldn't buy a single player game that short for any amount of money. I mostly play turn based strategy games and deep RPGs, I often get over a hundred hours of gameplay out of them. Hell, I still sometimes go back to play Sid Meyer's Alpha Centauri or System Shock 2 all over again even today.

Will STO be a game that will make me want to come back and play it again ten years later? If not, then it may not be a very good game.

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by Yauchy

Regardless, why does everyone forget about the perpetual crap that happened to this...and that the game has been floating for many years <_<  Just odd everyone thinks it was dev'd overnight...

 

All the development which was done by Perpetual was thrown in the trash when Cryptic took over the game so that they could start fresh using the game engine they recycled from Champions Online.

Cryptic stated in an interview that they used PE assets that fit with their concepts and trashed the rest. Yes they used the Cryptic engine, but seeing how close the two games are in release (CO and STO) it would have made absolutely no sense to develop an engine from scratch to do the exact same things. If the games were separated by a year or more maybe technology would drive the development of an engine specific to STO, but we would probably be waiting another year for it. Plus it's easier, and cheaper, to maintain both games if they use the same engine.

Originally posted by trnqlChaos

it would have made absolutely no sense to develop an engine from scratch to do the exact same things.

Plus it's easier, and cheaper, to maintain both games if they use the same engine.

The... exact same things? Are you really serious about that? CO is a super hero game with simplistic cell shaded graphics. STO is a massive (we hope) space travel game. These two games have almost nothing in common either graphics or gameplay wise. In my opinion, they should each have an engine designed for that specific game to better enable that game to do the unique things the other game will not do.

And I never said it wouldn't be quicker and cheaper to recycle the engine from CO. In fact, that was kind of my point. The real question is will it result in a better game... or just a quick and cheap game?

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by trnqlChaos

it would have made absolutely no sense to develop an engine from scratch to do the exact same things.

Plus it's easier, and cheaper, to maintain both games if they use the same engine.

 

The... exact same things? Are you really serious about that? CO is a super hero game with simplistic cell shaded graphics. STO is a massive (we hope) space travel game. These two games have almost nothing in common either graphics or gameplay wise. In my opinion, they should each have an engine designed for that specific game to better enable that game to do the unique things the other game will not do.

And I never said it wouldn't be quicker and cheaper to recycle the engine from CO. In fact, that was kind of my point. The real question is will it result in a better game... or just a quick and cheap game?

I am serious and CO does not use cel shading - it uses cartoon textures with a custom model outline. At any rate, some engines support shader plug-ins so it doesn't really matter anyway. With a flexible engine you can make any number of games from any number of genres.
 

I'm not sure how much you know about game engines, but they do more than just rendering. They handle stuff like camera and movement vectors, they calculate collision, distance and occlusion, calculate light and shadows, handle BSPs where needed or dynamic objects. New engines also provide a range of functionality from physics to networking. The concept is that you could feasibly just work on your game design and have all of the core functionality bundled in your engine - I see no reason why the Cryptic engine has to be any different.

I think the savings will make the game better. They have had the luxury of spending the majority of their time on game design, not writing an engine. Hopefully being cheaper to maintain also means quicker turn-arounds on bug fixes and more time spent on adding content.