Originally posted by Varny

 I think massive changes is exactly what the game needs to give it extra life.

Hmmmmm ...... NGE the NGE?   Naaaaa never happen, although the pre-NGE NGE (or would that be post-NGE pre'er's?) posts would make for some interesting rants?  Well atleast once you figured out which side of the fence they were on :)

Unfortunitly I don't think you could do 'massive changes' and still have a game.  They've already tried that and what you(we) have is the fallout from it.

Only way would be to design an entirely new game; up to date and tested, announce it and give all current players a 30 or whatever free trial to it while shutting down the old.

Once the wrench is broke, you can't fix it, only get a new one.

Originally posted by Soupgoblin

 

 Just because you bought the system last year doesn't mean that it was a good system when you purchased it. Lots of companies sell there old stock at reduced prices just to get it out the door.

 The processor and video card in your "last years" system are 3 years out of date. I purchased a used laptop early last year with a core2 2.0 Ghz and an nvidia 8200, and laptops usually lag behind desktop sytem in regards to performance.

 Please don't blame STO because you bought a lame computer.

I'm just saying I bought it last year. When I got it I was looking at the system spec's for SWG, PotBS and LotRO and it was fine for all of those.
And at no point did I blame STO for me not being able to run the game.  I decided a long time ago that I'd probably never have cutting edge equipment.  It's not their fault I know that!

Originally posted by x3r0h

You sound very proud for having a piece of crap system, as if happy to find an excuse not to play.

If you'd bother to read any of my other STO posts you would have seen I was looking forward to playing.  What I'm proud of, is checking the system spec's PRIOR to dropping money on a game I might not be able to run at an enjoyable speed.  As far as my system being a piece of crap; not being able to run a brand new game set for a 2010 release doesn't meet my definition of crap.  It does quite well for what I use it for and if I'd rather put money into feeding my sons, going on family vacations and visiting my oldest who's in the Navy vice buying a brand new cutting edge computer every year .......

 Originally posted by Ktanner3

For the OP, you don't need a program to tell you if a game will work. Just know the specs on your computer and compare them with the "recomended" specs of the game.

While I'm OK with straight number's like speed, video cards etc... I couldn't tell you the difference between the rec cpu and what I have if I had to.  So while you might not be tech savy you've got me beat :)

To Warjin: I'm sure that's very useful info, but you may as well have been speaking Russian.  "I can see your lips move, but I've no clue what you just said".  LOL.  This things just a big typewriter to me.

Best info was desecrate's: Wait for open beta, DL and see if it runs. 

I'm a firm believer in the KISS principal, especially when the last 'S' is me.

Not a fantasy MMO, but they already did this in a Sci Fi game ............ Just look at all the Rebels in SWG!

Nope, no joke, nor is it malware.  I found the site in an article in the Sacramento Bee about a year ago in their Tech Section.

My spec's: (for the parts that failed)

Minimum: Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8 GHz or AMD Athlon X2 3800+
You Have: Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2220 @ 2.40GHz
 

Video Card
Minimum: NVIDIA GeForce 7950 / ATI Radeon X1800 / Intel HD Graphics
You Have: GeForce 7100 " NVIDIA nForce 630i
 

That one's no biggie since even I could tell a 7100 is lower than a 7950.

All the other parts; speed, video card attributes, sound etc.... were OK.  Just these 2 items came up as not meeting spec's.

While I would like to play STO, I brought home the system spec's to compare with my home system to see how it stacked up.

 On a whim I checked www.canyourunit.com to see if they listed STO fully expecting the answer to be NO since it's not out, but much to my surprise there it was so I ran the check.

Came up with a big red FAIL in both the CPU and Video card spots in the minimum required slot.  Man, makes me glad I didn't give in and pre-order while I was at work! LOL!

For those wondering if their systems up to it, I can't recommend the site strongly enough.  Lists plenty of games you can check against and only installs a totally safe Active X program onto your system to read it.

And since my system is only a year old I'm not going to buy a new CPU just to play. 

Originally posted by metalhead980

 

THat's a pretty cool idea with the factions being tied into the main storyline.

Would you make is as obvious as good and evil? or would we go with a little depth and make some morally gray decisions. maybe like four factions.

this would put an interesting spin on faction play. instead of just starting a new epic arc for a faction at the endgame you could set that up from day one and expand the main arc with those choices. This may even keep the sandbox guys/gals happy.

Good post.

I just used good and bad as base examples.  In SWG it'd be Imp / Reb / Neutral.  PotBS: Brit / French / Spanish / Pirate and so forth.  Figured going really broad would make it easier to understand.

Thanks

Originally posted by Drachasor

Your post seems to act like this Lore was some brilliant innovation that wrote itself and Cryptic just had to deal with it.  In reality they made the lore so that they didn't have to worry much about non-combat stuff.
 

Originally posted by USFPutty

Yes, and if *I* write into the lore that there was a massive incurable space plague, I don't have to code NPCs into the game either. Or you, for that matter. The backstory supports the game you're making. Writing into the story that 'everything's at war' is a blatant grab for a heavily combat-based game in an IP that bounces between war and peace, combat and exploration. As long as you can get PAST the war, rock on. If it will entirely saturate the game, then it'll get boring fast.

I know this is all Cryptic's game lore (well maybe not *all* as someone at the IP had to sign off on it).  I'm just saying that atleast it appears that they're being up front about what the game will be about (based on their lore).  I think it would be a lot worse if they said 'come join Capt. Kirk on his 5 year mission.  Meet new aliens and promote peace!' and then game us  a combat game.

I don't know, maybe Cryptic can't write a diplo / exploration game to save their lives. :)

I like the main story arc where your choices matter.  Only problem would be trying to write those AND normal quests.  The dev time would be massive! LOL

So get rid of the normal quests;  Every toon starts out neutral, you have the one story arc and at certain spots you have a choice to make; help the good guys or bad guys, you pick you branch off, etc... for each fork in the road.  Those fork spots are what would push you towards your good guy / bad guy faction rep. 

Maybe some forks would be the lessor of two evils; kill 10 hostages to ensure the evil mastermind dies or try to rescue them and have the guy escape. 

You could backslide on your rep like the one Dirty Harry movie where the young cops have taken justice into their own hands and are killing bad guys.  Hey the bad guys need to be punished no question there but do you do it or let the courts?

Would make you think and give you replay value.  Harder to write than normal quests?  Yea but oh so much more worth it :)

Just curious here, but for all those that have been going on about 'Star Trek isn't just about combat'. 

While I agree with you; have you read the Back Story for THIS GAME?  Not ST lore, not the movies, nothing else but THIS GAME?

Because from what I've read of it, the whole back story is the whole place is AT WAR. 

Now I agree that they could have done so much more with the IP and frankly I would have rather had a game set in the classic trek universe that would have given us diplo, exploration and combat, but that's not what they did.  Instead they jumped the years ahead and set up a universe in conflict.  While that should still give us a (smaller) chance for diplo and exploring the main focus would be combat and that's what they're giving us.  We may not like the lore they set up, but they do seem to be running with that lore.

Will it be a good game?  Who knows.  I plan on trying it and if I can get a years worth of enjoyment out of it (like PotBS gave me) I'll call it a personal success.

100% go with the free trial first.

I want to know if the game in its current state is actually any good.
 

It's OK, it does have it's weaknesses but it has it's strengths too as others have pointed out.  What I wanted to say was to enjoy the game:

Nr. 1 - Don't think of it as Star Wars.  If you can get over that fact and that so much in it is not SW canon, then you'll enjoy it more.

Nr. 2 - Yes Starsider is probably the most pop. server ...... SO STAY AWAY FROM IT!   Because of that big pop. Lok regularly crashes when they do stuff there.  The server can not handle the numbers that have crowded into SS.  I've heard Bloodfin had a healthy sized pop so it would be worth looking elsewhere than SS.

Nr. 3 - If you want to RP than you'll still find many that also want to.  SS has many such groups but they don't play well together and when they do get together .... see Nr. 2 above.

Granted the promo video's will concentrate on the 'action' parts, just like a movie preview, but yes I do think the main part of the game's going to be about combat.  After all they did set it in 2049 and say War's coming or here so you got to figure it would be like that.

I don't think you can really say it's 'based on Star Trek', a more accurate phrase might be 'set in the Star Trek Universe'.

I plan on playing and based on how well the missions are written, that will be my yardstick on how long I stay. 

This could turn out to being a Pvp liked game with players burning through the missions to get to max level so they can hang and fight in 'contested space' like Deep Space for SWG or the Red Zones for PotBS.

I got linked over to the O-boards yesterday and was reading some of the dev stuff.  When they were talking about the missions (episodes) and how the maps worked for it, one of the dev's said an example mission might be like;

Map 1: warp into the system and find an abandoned ship in orbit around a planet, Map 2: Visit said ship and find out you need to go down to the planet to investigate.  Map 3: Planet map to find out 'what's what'.  Map 4: Back into space to fight off monster / bad guy of the week.  Map 5: Wrap up and leave.

So yes it sounds like the planet map's will just be a small slice of life.  No real exploration.  Space exploration - Visit sector X to see what's what.  Wow!  There's a solar system here!  Seems to be how the space part will be.

I'll be playing, but I do think they could have done so much more.

Originally posted by Gorudu

 Mainly when it comes to pve I'm more interested in the end game and raids.

Ahhhhh ....... you should have been clearer on this point as it would have changed some of the posts you received.

The biggest complaint I always saw on the O-boards was lack of end-game.  Now being that the games only about 1/3rd or so along in it's life that's to be expected.  Alot of players at the start finished the base game, got tired of the then end game raids and took a break, then came back for the Mine's, blew through it, took a break and are now back for Mirkwood.

I mean honestly you can only run the same raids so often before they get old right?

If you're looking for an end game type of game, then I'd be safe in saying LotRO isn't the best for you at this time.  This is the type of game where the journey is better than the arrival.

Without a doubt do the free trial and see what you think.  Once out of the starter area I'm sure you'll be able to find someone to help you breeze through the content so you can try some of the end game raids.  Have fun.

Originally posted by conanaras

Originally posted by Nebless

Originally posted by Gorudu

Is it actually difficult? - Yes.  Unless you're so much higher than the level of the quest and can just go blowing through on a slaughter spree, you'll need to actually think about your tactics.

 No. Most quests are soloable, no special tactics. Most of the quests that "require" 2 or 3 people can be soloed, no real tactics required. There are a few that need 5 and 6 people to complete, and very few actually need full group and tactics to complete.

 Instances are not hard too, excluding some bosses that can be challenging to impossible if you go in unprepared (aka without hope tokens and hope gear).

The one I was thinking of when I answered this was in the Lonelands, the Kill the Goblin King or some such name.  It's up in the ruins and really starts when you go across a rope bridge.

I tried it solo as a Warden like 2 levels above the quest level.  Granted the NPC's where that level but they were all Elites and would gang up on you either 2 or 3 at a time.  Now I'll be the first to say I didn't know how to fight my warden in the 100% perfect mode but I wasn't able to handle more than 1 Elite at a time and wasn't even able to make it across that bridge.

I even tried the quest with my son who had a level approprite minstrel and we weren't able to do it either. 

Yes a bunch are solo-able now, the Tom Bro.... mission into the barrow was easy downed quite alot and they have been working on the various zones to easy them up too so maybe they've hit them all by now.  I just know when I played (stopped in August) there was a challenge to the game.

If it's all solo-able now with no special tactics or thoughts, then they will have ruined a really good aspect of the game.

Originally posted by Gorudu

 Is it constantly being updated? - Turbine is releasing the story plot a bit at a time.  So far there's been the base game, then Mines of Moria and now Mirkwood.  It doesn't seem to be on a regular scheduled base so who knows when the next one will come out or how far they will go.  That would depend on their IP contract and how well the game goes; i.e. if it's worth continuing to put money into it.

Are there lots of raids and instances? - Depends on your definition of 'lots' I guess.  Plently of instances mainly with the epic story line missions as most of those are meant for you to do.  For the normal one's you may have other players wandering in and out as you kill stuff.  Never did any of the raids so can't talk there.

Is it actually difficult? - Yes.  Unless you're so much higher than the level of the quest and can just go blowing through on a slaughter spree, you'll need to actually think about your tactics.

Does every class have a somewhat equal use in every raid? - Some are of course more equal than others.  I played a warden which was a ranged/melee mixed fighter.  A good toon, but neither fish nor fowl so I fit as a solo player better than the average group guy, unless the group really knew how to use all my professions pluses.

Also, while I'm on the topic of this game... how well can one customize their class? Is there a talent tree system or something similar or not similar that allows my... lets say Burglar... different from every other one in the game? - Yes, as you go through the game you gain traits which you can use to customize your toon.  For my warden I could push in either the fighting, defense or crowd control (for lack of a better term) area's or I could average out etc... Not to say others might not hit that same combo but I always felt my choices made me fairly unquie.

As far as a game goes I'd say it's biggest plus is the storyline / quest write up's as they made sense and were very well written.  If you're the type that doesn't like to read mission blurbs than you won't get but a fraction of the game.  Many of those that have said they disliked the game were one's that didn't read the blurbs and so didn't get into it.

The fighting style takes a little to get used to as certain base attacks open up certain combo attacks which can open up more combo attacks etc....

Downside has already been pointed out in that each level block only really has 2 zones with level appropriate missions in there.  Another that I found personally a pain was how they and the epic missions would jump you back and forth alot between the zones so you end up with alot of travel time.

And the biggest reason I stopped playing was it is way to easy to get burned out on the never ending missions, which since most of us, me included always complain there's never enough missions is a heck of a thing to say.

All in all I rate it a great game.  Play it for 3 to 6 months.  Take a break and then go back to it, rinse, repeat.  Just don't try to play it for 8 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Originally posted by Pcgamer81

i have played POTBS but i don't see STO anything like it except ship floating around and ground mission. what sets the two apart is POTBS is heavy PVP while from what i can see STO is mostly PVE with PVP areas. in STO from what i hear PVP will be optional. don't want PVP then stay in your region while POTBS you sail along and red zone can appear out of the blue. yes sailing around and ground fighting they are pretty much the same"ship to ship,boarding the other ship and on land battles".

As a PotBS pre-board member the "in STO from what i hear PVP will be optional" is exactly what they said for PotBS.  What they forget to share was to do your PvE missions you had to go into those PvP zones! LOL!

PotBS didn't start out as, nor is it still heavy PvP.  There are plenty of PvE missions to do.  Unfortunitly without any re-play value once you max you're kind of forced into the PvP side of things.

Atleast the way is sounds with STO there'll be plenty of PvE missions and you won't actually have to go into the PvP - 'contested space zone' if you don't want to.  In that respect I'd say STO sounds more like SWG:JTL where 'contested space' = Deep Space, an open PvP area with valuable resources for the brave, skilled or lucky.

Hadn't seen anything on the Klingon missions but if most of theirs take them into PvP situations I would think that would kind of suck since that sounds like forced Pvp.  Many might like that but not all.

I want to go back and key on something posted (somewhere in all of this) from one of the Dev interviews:

'WE WANT TO MAKE ALL CLASSES VIABLE IN A FLEET BATTLE'

Now I'm going to make a bunch of leaps here but bear with me and it just may make sense.  Well not science vessals as healers mind you but the others atleast :)

First off everyone keeps using WWII as the Naval reference for ship types.  I think we need to look farther back to the Age of Sail for our loose reference.  Just think; Cruisers (Tanks) are your rated ships of the line - good dps and good defense, Escorts (DPS) are your frigates - fast, hard to hit, can't take much damage and stepping out of our reference  big DPS.

Fleet Battle scenario -

Cruisers (tanks) in a tight formation covering each other.  Maybe this is where the extended shields come into play.  Instead of 6 to 12 individual shields / targets, they overlap them to present a solid wall.  We'll put the enemy fleet in the same formation.

Escorts (DPS) attack from the flanks and try to break up the formation so that their allies can now concentrate and destroy individual targets by overwhelming them instead of trying to punch through overlapping and maybe strength multiplied shields.

If one of your Cruisers or Escorts take damage, they fall behind the line of protecting cruisers and 'heal'.

For the Science vessals I guess we'd see them in the back lines conducting ECM / ECCM (debuffs / buffs) and providing repair crews as needed (heals).

If anyone wants to see something like this in action, just check out some of the better Port Battles from PotBS.  Frigates are snapping at the edges of the enemies fleet trying to bust up the formation, The Rated Ships are in Battle line pounding one ship at a time and anyone hurt falls behind the line to repair, protected by the LOS rules.

Now all of this doesn't help in a 5 man raid or while soloing and since Open Pvp will be voluntary in a special zone I'm not sure how much this would help there as you need numbers to pull this off, but in this concept it does make a strange sort of sense.

Originally posted by dstar.

Isn't LOTRO pretty heavy in the RP area? I've never played it myself but I see a lot of people talk about it as the "rp mmo".

LOTRO has an RP server where it's pretty heavy, but the average server doesn't have any to speak of.  It's called an RP MMO mainly because it has a lot more potential for RP than most games but many just play it as a typical hack and slash, level cap and raid game.

Originally posted by rafaelrehn

 If that means that the assholes that build their elite clans and decide for everyone how to RP, nitpick over player names, freak out when others are not using old english in communication are leaving then I will be real happy cos they are the reason why RP is dying in MMOS. They made it into a stupid contest instead of an adventure

I can kind of agree with most of this as it was my experience in SWG when they first started the server transfers and I went to StarSider.  Too many of the RP groups only wanted you to RP their way.  As the saying goes 'their way or the highway'. 

I choose the highway.

Originally posted by Mardy

My guess is one of the low populated SOE games, like PotBS or Vanguard.  They got 2 games launching next year, with more coming up, they can't keep staffing for games with very low population.

PotBS isn't an SOE game, nor do they provide any staff for it.  FLS owns and operates it, SOE just does the billing.  Because of that I don't think PotBS will be leaving anytime soon as FLS didn't have to go outside the company for any money to design or run it.

Yaaaaa, guess I should have typed that first sentence as 'hoped' although you're right that they went with a typical tank / DPS / Healer concept.  Guess original thinking was too much to ask for.