PVP:Yes | Distribution:Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Subscription
Desktop Client | System Req:
Star Trek Online: Early Impressions
MMORPG.com's new Star Trek Online Correspondent Troy Hammers writes this first look at the game, giving his impressions on what he knows and has heard so far about the upcoming MMO.
Just how innovative is STO? What will make STO better and different? Ship customizations, vivid character creation, intense PvP on the ground and in space, possible PC/Console hybrid, where console and PC units can connect to the same sever - and explore together sounds like a good start to me.
To me, STO is going to go where no MMO has truly gone before. The level of customization that Cryptic is said to offer is staggering,b ut wait, haven't we seen great customization before? Haven't we all played Spore? Or perhaps another Cryptic game known as City of Heroes? There's a difference here, and that is content. Yes, Spore isn't an MMO, but let's take a deeper look. The customization is down right innovative, if not the best there is on the game market. However, afterwards there isn't much to chew on to keep you hooked. That is where STO will hopefully not make that mistake.
When it comes to gaming, Star Trek fans have been frustrated, to say the least. Trek fans do not have a company like Lucasarts to find developers to churn out great games every year. We, the fans, have been screaming for a good Star Trek game for a very, very long time. The original STO was dropped by Perpetual and picked up by Cryptic last year, and in my opinion, this was the best thing to happen to the franchise.
)
Starting off as the Captain of your vessel for Starfleet or the Klingon Defense Force, players set out on journeys to explore strange new worlds, engage each other in PvP on the battlefront, take missions from your faction to further gain wealth and rank, create ship names and hull registries, and customize your bridge crew with different abilities. Crew members can be different races, genders, and have unique features to make your journey more interesting, and hopefully make it seem more real. What would a Captain do without his bridge crew anyway? The only con I can think of coming to us at launch with STO, is the inability to have ship interiors, which Cryptic has already stated this on their to-do list in a later updates such as an expansion or content patch. I guess we can't always get what we want, Jim.
)
This brings us to our next innovation, ship interiors. Personally, I was glad to hear Cryptic is going to delay player's ability to walk around freely on their ships (announced at the NYCC). First, hear me out! With how vast all the ships, space stations and facilities on both sides Starfleet and the Klingon Defense Force are, you’re talking about hundreds of hours of development time. I would rather wait to hopefully see great interior designs on my Bridge and Captain's Quarters rather than to see some rushed, buggy environment where I can lag through the halls and get stuck in a wall, you know what I mean? I wouldn't mind seeing something similar to what Star Wars Galaxies did with the expansion Jump to Lightspeed, but of course in a better fashion.
PvP is also going to where no other MMO has gone before. Ground combat is said to be a lot of run and gun, duck and hide, fast paced action. Whether or not to set your phasers to stun is completely optional! Hand to hand combat has been talked about, the most promising looking thing that I’ve seen is the ability to beam aboard an enemy vessel and take on your foes, face to face. Instead of a fast paced, Star Wars style space battles, STO will feature a more strategy involved combat system. I've seen a few notes from STO's developers stating that it will be more of a normal Star Trek fight: powering shields, moving power around the ship to compensate for damage or diverting more power to your phasers and photon torpedoes. PvP is said to include maneuvering around an enemy vessel to further damage its exposed side, or to pummel its engines - so that the enemy's vessel is a sitting duck… classic naval engagement. Early stages of PvP seem to be happening on the ground and in space, although Cryptic hasn't released much information about PvP. I'm going to bet a lot of players will be especially interested in this aspect, meeting their foes with rapid phaser fire or pulling a Worf maneuver, RAMMING SPEED!
)
Last but not least, community. I have been following STO since Perpetual had the IP, and really started catching on with Cryptic. The community, put simply, is fantastic. The boards are filled with great conversation and debate, and the flaming is kept at a minimum. I'm very pleased to see the good natured individuals and the fleet’s already forming in the Star Trek Online community. I know the talks will change dramatically with release, I only hope they will actually be a part of the solution and not the problem. The bottom line is that the community will support the game. If the players are not behind the game, especially with an IP like STO, things can get ugly. Luckily, Cryptic seems to be avidly listening and giving feedback to what the future players have to say.
There are many reasons why STO will go where no MMO has gone before, many of which will show up in the near future. And if STO is going to play as good as it's looking, then beam me up.
)
- Removing starship interiors from the designplan for launch. And what is now the status on the Starbases / HQ's with their massive interiors? Are they now removed too or not?
- Not having the choice to form either a player crew or NPC crew. Basically having one true class. Namely captain.
Those are 2 basic gripes I have that pretty much killed it for me. As especially point 2 has the biggest impact on the whole direction of the game.
Everyone is going to be a captain. So woohoo on great customisation. On what? Faces. As for the rest everyone will be walking around in a red suit and thus look the same.
Basically, what is this game going to offer? Fly around and Pew Pew other players with your ship?
Or beam to the ground and Pew Pew other players there?
Is that it? Combined with some PVE mission system in prolly the same boring random map rotation scheme as they did with CoX?
What is the fun if everyone is playing basically the same class. Namely Captain?
People kept saying about who wants to be playing the boring engineer or tactical officer... but that it might be boring to you, doesn't mean that it's boring to others.
Being an Engineer could have gone part with also being a good Engineering crafter.
Being a Tactical officer could have gone part with also being a good Weapons crafter.
Being a Medical Officer could have gone part with also being a good Alchemist/Bio engineer.
Options are limitless on what they could have done in making this a trully Star Trek worthy MMO in wich crew members relied on eachother like family and how crew members explore where none has gone before.
Instead Cryptic is basically turning it into a cheap PVP SciFi shooter with some PVE.
As a Star Trek fan having looked forward to this MMO for a long time it was really dissapointing to see how they went with the Easymode approach, instead of trying to make something great and true to the Epic Star Trek lore!
Another huge and legendary IP gone to waste? I think so yes.
Is this going to be just another Eve Online but with a StarTrek name attached to it?
And Spore wasn't innovative. It was downright boring.
I was looking at this game over jumpgate because I thought you could have a player crew. That is gone though, so I dunno.
Sorry, but I could not keep myself from laughing at the above diatribe. While the concept of multiple character types is laudable, it is entirely impratical. Imagine spending 45 minutes or so finding a decent engineer for your ship,only to find out your tactical officer had to go eat dinner. Or right in the middle of a big fight your engineer goes D/C...opps.
You have to love pie in the sky thinkers that can't interface their concepts with reality. Nothing wrong with tilting at windmills long as you can eventually tie it to reality.
I do think Cryptic is going to do a great job with this title. Perpetual with the infamous Daron Stinnett was dialing a recipe for disaster. That is obvious to anyone. Cryptics boards are full of meaningful discussions, while perpetual's were full of contentious derision.
God Bless Cryptic for working on two MMOs at once. I just really wished they put their resources into STo than Champions, and therefore give it the time and money it needs. I get the feeling they will rush this thing and we all get an Earth and Betond Game in a Star Trek skin.
If that is what you like ( you haven't played E&B / EvE), then you should enjoy STO for a few months. Unfortunately I was looking for more.
::clenches fists at Jack Emmet::
Quit misleading the consumers!
Shame on you MMORPG.COM
{Mod Edit}
I've always disagreed with the decision to only have captains and not have player bridge crews. A big part of the magic of Star Trek has always been the interaction of the bridge crews. The friendly teasing between Spock and McCoy. Data's quest to become more human, along with the constant "will they or won't they" of the Riker/Troi relationship. Worf coming over to DS9. Paris and Kim with their ongoing friendship and strange fascination for Captain Proton. It goes on and on.
What's more, Star Trek has always been about fighting as a last resort. There has certainly been plenty of action, but that wasn't why the Enterprise was out there. The fact that STO seems to be moving more and more toward a space and ground combat game makes me wonder whether the devs really "get" Star Trek at all.
Regarding the matter of ship interiors, the author of this article made a big goof. How can you beam over to your opponent's ship to fight in their corridors if those corridors aren't going to exist until some nebulous point in time?
That said, as disappointed as I am to learn that ship interiors have been postponed, I have to be realistic. If everyone is the captain of his ship, then what does the ship interior really become except the most elaborate player housing ever -- mostly consisting of generic and barren corridors with NPC's walking up and down them. Yawn.
For my money, the jury is still very much out on this game and will remain so until after the release of Champions Online. That game will show us whether Emmert and company have actually learned from CoX or not. If yes, then there's hope for STO. If not, then I'm going to be even more inclined to give STO a pass. Which is a shame, since I've always loved Star Trek.
If you even bothered to actually read my post.... but no no.... it's far easier to ignore 99,99% of someones post for the sake of trolling.
I said CHOICE! Having the choice to form a crew with your budies and if you have difficulties filling a spot, then you can pick an NPC or go for a full NPC crew if you are the solo type.
An MMO is about diversity and uniqueness.
What is fun about EVERYONE being a captain and that's it?
It's downright boring and get's dull real fast.
It's just shamefull and insulting to see the Star Trek IP being ruined and used for some cheap PVP Pew Pew MMO with some boring PVE a la CoX attached to it.
Star Trek isn't about PVP! Star Trek is about exploration!
Cryptic isn't doing a good job. They just want to rush out a cheap MMO with less then 3 year development time.
With all due respect, how is that any different from playing any other MMO? ("LF tank and healer for Nexus. Two slots left. No paladins.") Raids and even general party play have these exact same issues and players not only deal with them but thrive. Is STO being built as a solo MMO? If not, then it's going to have plenty of content that needs multiple players -- and that content will result in exactly the same sorts of issues that you say make player crews impossible. The difference is that rather than looking for a science officer you'll be looking for a science vessel to support your dreadnaught.
And by the way, there are simple solutions to your issue. Here's one:
Star Trek lore provides for the standard bridge crew, backups for each of these individuals, and multiple shifts throughout the day. Did even Data sit on the bridge 24/7? Other people occupied each station when the primary bridge crew was away. There was always someone available to step in at a moment's notice if the captain sent someone on an away team or if one of the crew was injured. Not only does lore allow this, but it just plain makes sense.
It's also easily modified for MMO purposes. Let players have their own ships. But also allow those who want it the opportunity to serve on each others' ships or even form persistent crews. If a particular station is unoccupied for whatever reason -- whether it be that nobody was available that evening or someone goes link dead, an NPC steps in to take over the role.
With a system such as this, the game would become a lot more dynamic for those players that wish to experience it that way while taking nothing from those players who wish to simply be solo captains.
there is always going to be somebody who thinks they know what everybody wants out of a mmo. In the current economic climate and the history of games attached to the trek ip floundering no matter how good they actually are, do you blame cryptic for being somewhat cautious in how far developed the initial release is. Perpetual spent a butt load of money conceptualizing and building things like ship interiors that in the end they kinda realized noone had all that much interest in if the core of the game was bland. I just recently installed the ultimate universe mod for star trek legacy, a game which sat on my pc for almost a year gathering dust, and with just the introduction of new ships and maps and a little graphical tweek it breathed new life into the game, I played it a whole weekend straight. Cryptic has always been adept at gauging what consumers want. Just because what they are offering doesn't appeal to a few hardcord fanboys ( and make no mistake I am an avid trek fan) or mmo " professionals" doesn't mean the game itself won't be a success. It's time that for once the trek community stops taking itself so seriously and allows new blood and ideas into its fold. After all what would tng have become without the borg? Ds9 without the jem hadar . I loved gene roddenberrys vision but even he admitted that no establishment like UFP is without its flaws....so why not explore them and make the world of trek nmore relatable to everyone aside from tech geeks? Ron Moore did an amazing job turning battlestar galactica from a campy 80's soap opera to a show rooted in relevant issues and relatable stories. It time someone does something different with the ip not only as a movie but as a game otherwise it's going to die.
Multi crew ships work perfectly in SWG. You need from 2-8 players to run a ship.
I find this lack of belief in other players really sad. And i guess developers dont trust Trekkies to be able to crew a ship or something. And if there is one fanbase that should be up for it is.....Trekkies..every million of them
Just because you don't agree doesn't mean it's misleading...
With all due respect, how is that any different from playing any other MMO? ("LF tank and healer for Nexus. Two slots left. No paladins.") Raids and even general party play have these exact same issues and players not only deal with them but thrive. Is STO being built as a solo MMO? If not, then it's going to have plenty of content that needs multiple players -- and that content will result in exactly the same sorts of issues that you say make player crews impossible. The difference is that rather than looking for a science officer you'll be looking for a science vessel to support your dreadnaught.
And by the way, there are simple solutions to your issue. Here's one:
Star Trek lore provides for the standard bridge crew, backups for each of these individuals, and multiple shifts throughout the day. Did even Data sit on the bridge 24/7? Other people occupied each station when the primary bridge crew was away. There was always someone available to step in at a moment's notice if the captain sent someone on an away team or if one of the crew was injured. Not only does lore allow this, but it just plain makes sense.
It's also easily modified for MMO purposes. Let players have their own ships. But also allow those who want it the opportunity to serve on each others' ships or even form persistent crews. If a particular station is unoccupied for whatever reason -- whether it be that nobody was available that evening or someone goes link dead, an NPC steps in to take over the role.
With a system such as this, the game would become a lot more dynamic for those players that wish to experience it that way while taking nothing from those players who wish to simply be solo captains.
and then you would be looking at the devs trying to develop an infintely more cumbersome game.
Just bear with me before reaching for the reply button.
They already have the 'captain' part of theg ame complete, people can go out and explore, fight, engage in diplomacy etc, so thats done. now they add in the 'other ranks' (for those who states this is a MUST for the STO game they want to play'
So now we have to develop additional portions of the game for Science and engineering, ok lets see what we can do to make engineering fun...... now do you see? not yet? not quite..whoah wait dont hit reply just a few more lines and it becomes clear
So I got to develop a role for engineering and ensure that the person doing this is going to have fun, now my captain is a cautious guy, diplomatic, only fights as a last resort so I dotn need to worry about keeping stuff working in middle of cascade system failures.
OOH Calibrate the dilithium field and plasma injectors. ok so erm... yeah lets make it skill based, players have to translate teh transtemporal Doohickey and tehn hit the corresponding sections .. or maybe we can do that water game, user has tubes going in diffrent directions, just got to build it before plamsa comes out the tube. ok thats one mini gaae in place for an engineer what else can we do?
OOHH research, engineers are always tinkering, lets allow them to develop blueprints for new stuff... Oh but we can never let them build it and fit it to a ship, some people would end up with insanely powerful "Type XXXVI Quantum snowball throwers"
instead of going 'BOOO they should allow us to have a custome crew' think to yourselves, how would we ensure that these science and engienering teams were interesting enough to keep people doing it long term, hour after hour etc, the question is you cant, even in my current game Vanguard, with three spheres people only craft and diplo to unlock civic buffs and make money, I cant see anyone wanting to play minigames hour after hour and then expect to enjoy being an Chief Engineer......
boooooring, I want new screens or videos
I don't like how they removed the crews though
How come people are so focussed at ship to ship combat?
Did you guys even watch the Star Trek series at all I wonder?
Most of the episodes were about away missions. Hence the famous quote of all time: "Beam me up Scotty!"
So with a full player crew (with that I mean the iconic stations) it's not only hanging around in the ship Pew Pew'ing.
It's exploring with the ship and with your player crew going into away missions! You are basically spending most time on away missions inside nebula's, planets, civilisations and all kinds of other interesting anomalies.
If anyone ever (even Cryptic crew themselves for crying out loud) has ever seen enough Star Trek then they could see how Epic the Star Trek IP really is and what kind of possibilities it provides.
Hence, it's pretty much safe to say that the Lore available for Star Trek completely dwarfs the Star Wars IP.
Being a Chief Engineer, Chief Tactical Officer, Officer at the Helm (pilot basically) or Chief Medical Officer opens a pleatora of possibilities in both combat missions sense, crafting, diplomacy missions, science missions, etc, etc.
There is plenty of things you can do to make all those classes viable, fun and entertaining.
A lot of people say "Who the heck wants to spend their entire time only crafting?". Well in old SWG there were plenty of such people that actually did!
If it's done right, then players will enjoy it.
Player crews were never part of the design. I was at the convention last year where Jack laid out the plans for STO, and this was the biggest sticking point among those who were present.
What it comes down to is that Jack could have taken two roads:
Road 1 was to bring MMO's to the Star Trek crowd by giving them the things that they love about Star Trek, but in an MMO format.
Road 2 was to bring Star Trek to the MMO market by giving the MMO a Star Trek look.
Option one would have grown the MMO market, but taken longer to really do right. Option two is quicker and cheaper, but ultimately only adds to the competition within the existing MMO market without actually bringing anything new to it.
Cryptic chose the lower road, and I think it's going to hurt them. MMO hoppers will come to it for a little while before they hop on to the next game. The bulk of the Star Trek community, however, will find the game to be pretty shallow and totally lacking in the things that they really love about Trek. The only people who will actually stick with STO are the Star Trek fans who are already MMO players (of which there are many, no doubt) -- but only if they find STO to be more interesting than the many, many other MMO's on the market. From what I've seen so far, I'm really not convinced that Cryptic is going to deliver that.
What's bad is that my heart and mind follow two different path's for STO. My mind agrees with Ozmodan, when he points out that in reality, requiring grouping wouldn't be a good idea. STO wouldn't be the first game that required you to have x,y,z before you went on a mission. What happens, a lot, is exactly what Ozmodan said would happen. You get a lot of people who (rightfully) put real life first, and end up screwing fellow STO players when something IRL comes up that ruins the mission. People aren't responsible enough to take care of business first and make sure they have time to dedicate to a game before logging on like MMORPG gamers used to. Instead, people don't take gaming seriously, so they take out the trash while in group, go afk for 20min to eat dinner, take the dogs for a walk, or the infamous "I gotta go" while you are in the middle of a mission.
My heart follows your idea, and that's player made crews, where each part is fun to play. I personally would love to play as a Security Officer (not sure on name. Red shirts in original Star Trek). I'd prefer the game to be more like the early Tomb Raiders, where most of the game involved exploration and problem solving, and a lot less combat. The thing about combat is that it's only fun when it gets your blood pumping, so turning combat into a routine, like in other MMO's, turns combat into a boring grind. I LOVE combat, but I don't ever want combat to be the center of the game. Make exploration the center of the game. Let action adventure games worry about combat being the center.
With that all said, there is a solution to the problem that my mind has found fault in the player crew dilemma and that's NPC hirelings. If Cryptic made it to where you can replace a player crew member with a NPC crew member anywhere in the galaxy, then it'd solve the problem of people going AFK and leaving the ship during a mission. Also, I don't think anyone is saying they want a SIMS Online on a Star Trek ship. I just think people want to experience the build up of anticipation while talking with fellow crew members, walking around the ship, while the ship is on the way to a mission. They want to experience the cool down that a person experiences after something exciting happens. This cool down would be experienced on the ship, while flying back to a space station or something with your fellow crew members. So you have the anticipation, the mission, and the cooldown, all happening on ship with your player crew. You experience the excitement of playing the game together, in person, not over a chat box.
This is all possible, but Cryptic is choosing to cater to the trigger happy teens of the genre. Ask any Trek fan what they loved the most about the Original series or any other series and I bet it won't be the combat. It'd be the exploration, the interaction between the crews, and solving whatever mystery the episode presented that day. So exploration, interaction, and problem solving. Doesn't sound like Captain, combat, and fast paced combat. The former sounds like Star Trek, the latter sounds like a kids game.
Thanks.
Sorry was looking forward to this game but if interriors are our so am I.. Thats what I was looking forward some cool walking around ships and such likw SWG space sort of idea but for once where had tons of people and such and oh it was gunna be fun!
The article mentioned in PvP being able to beam aboard other spacecraft and fighting. How exactly do you beam aboard another players ship if there is no interior? Are you only allowed to beam to certain areas like the bridge? That sucks.
Everything I've read on the official site indicates that free-roaming ship interiors are not planned for launch. There will be mission ship interiors, I suspect something on the order of City of... missions, but more complex and Star Trekkish.
It also sounds like ship interiors are still considered something to be added at some point. Frankly, given the mechanical structure of the game, I suspect they'll be fairly pointless. I mean, hundreds of staterooms and hallways and storage bays? So you'll be able to stalk the halls of your own ship, alone with random passing bot crew? I think the devs are right in spending their time on the parts of the game that actually matter, like the missions and space.
Hi guys, this is the writer of the article Troy. The article was made to shine a light on the game and to add some critical discussion to STO. There may be a misconception, ship interiors will not be avilable at launch. Cryptic has said you can beam to enemy ships, which I'm guessing are NPC ships and will have limited use. These are not fully function player ship interiors. Please forgive me, I'm writing this from a mobile device! Thanks everyone for reading and I am loving the discussion.
Thank you
Wow, if ships interiors are useless then it sounds like the game isn't designed right and they need to start over. NPC crews are fine but you should be able to swap them out for human crews if you want. NPC's should be there to fill in when a PC isn't available.
Isn't this whole no player ship interiors what started the big mutiny when Perpetual still held the IP? I can't speak for everyone but when I envision Star Trek the first image I get is on board the bridge and the rest of the ship. Star Trek is 55% Ship Interiors and 45% away missions. I say this because not all missions take them to the surface but no matter what your on the ship. Your at Ten Forward, or your in the medic lab, Holo deck, or actually working on the bridge. Heck the ship could be a game by itself with all the features that should be in it.
I realize this all could be time consuming but don't half ass the game. Many will come to play and many will leave and not come back if you don't get it right out the gate.
Guys the simple fact is they need to get the game out before the money runs out. Thats what it always boils down to.
If they tried to release the game with Ship Interiors and building crew roles so groups could play 1 ship. Then do all the balancing for that. Then add in enough content so that combat is rare....
Well the game would come out sometime in 2012 and cost about 10x as much as they can afforde to put into it.
However if they release the game without some of these features, they can be added in later. Heck Cryptic is well known for adding in major core functions to a game as part of free expansions. If the game can grab the public market and thrive then we will see all of these other bells and whistles come out.
If it can not grab the general market... Then its dead no matter what. And adding the level of complexity some of the people here are asking for would mean that 90% of the potental player base would be run off before they could get a grip on the game.
Shrug, I think they are doing fine and am looking forward to the game. Does it have everything I want? No not even close. Does it look like a Star Trek MMO that is at least trying to follow the Star Trek universe? Yes.
So far its worth my $60 +$14.95 a month.
As a long time Star Trek fan, i'll be playing the game, ship interiors or not.
If they can add them in later that would be cool, but if not oh well no big deal for me anyways.
They never said this game would be a simulator, perhaps one day someone will build the Star Trek sim people are looking for, Cryptic is building a Star Trek game.
I do respect the fact that there are those that won't play without starship interiors, hope you all find something that you find worth playing.
I'll be having fun in STO, well i hope lol, hopefully a beta will happen soon.
Multi crew ships work perfectly in SWG. You need from 2-8 players to run a ship.
I find this lack of belief in other players really sad. And i guess developers dont trust Trekkies to be able to crew a ship or something. And if there is one fanbase that should be up for it is.....Trekkies..every million of them
You choose to use the biggest fail in the history of all MMO's as an example for how a game should be.Not a good way to make your point.
Try and visit the actual website before posting lies about how much the developers don't care about the fans of Star Trek. Many of the guys working on the game are fans of Star Trek, but they also realize this going to be a game, not a simulator.
There are so many points that I can see both sides of the discussions (one of the things that my wife both loves and hates about me...) with STO.
TLDR Version: I can accept players being just 'Captain's... I can wait for an expansion for Player-Ship Interiors... I want more in-depth coverage of non-combat play possibilities... and I can accept the loss of both Crafting and/or a Crafting-Class in STO due to both limitations of development time and lack of a real purpose to be had from implementing it.
Player Roles: I agree that having different roles for players would be nice. Look at Vanguard... I played 3 completely divergent characters in my time playing the game, and each was enjoyable in his/her own fashion. Player "classes" that I could see implemented in STO: Helmsman, Tactical Officer, Chief of Engineering, Science Officer, Captain. Each would have their own capabilities both onboard the vessel and on away missions. But, wait, they already have this form of setup with NPCs... And, in creating your 'Captain', you can choose to have higher capabilities in different skillsets... thereby leaning toward one range of the spectrum, or another. And, with more 'Captain's out in the universe, space will be a far less empty place to roam about in. And, if they DID go the route of having multiple PCs on a single ship, then you really just have the same old formulaic system as every other MMO. Tank+Healer+Support... And you CAN have more than a single 'Captain' PC on an Away Mission, anyways... This is not a S/P Game, afterall.
Player-Ship Interiors: I'd love to be able to have access to wander my own ship's corridors and visit Ten-Forward, the Holodeck, or other 'vital' areas. (So, those aren't the most 'vital', but I like 'em. Heheheh.) But, I can see this as a non-issue for a first-release. All it would mean, right now, is added workload for the art department for areas that won't have a real impact on the actual gameplay. However, for a later expansion that allows Player-Ship boarding for PvP or NPC combat (the 'excuse' to get it implemented), I'd love to have a basic floorplan created for each of the craft-types and variations, and allow the player to step off of the bridge to stroll a bit, or visit the various chosen officers in their workplace. For the current build, it really isn't necessary.
Playstyles: This does get to me, a bit... But only in how players have been reacting to the lack of solid information. What we've heard is how they've 'justified' mass-combat in the STO universe. What we haven't heard or seen, is how players can have a fulfilling experience while avoiding combat. In Vanguard (one of my biggest disappointments... 1) I just couldn't afford the MMO due to the economy and 2) It just played hell with my graphics card (which is part of why #1 came to a head) from the insane polycount in cityscape areas)) I happily played a dedicated Diplomat with almost zero combat capability. For her, it was all about travel, exploration, and meeting new peoples (the plural is grammatically purposeful). I'd like to see this in STO, with a captain that is mostly skilled in Diplomacy and Inter-Species Etiquette (but has a well-trained Tactical Officer by his side, just in case)... the 'Picard' of his time, if you will. Sure, I'd play a gung-ho combat veteran, too... But, StarTrek will always be the 'Talk first; Shoot only if need-be' genre to me, rather than 'Shoot first; Talking is for woosies' (unless you're a Klingon). Even Kirk and Archer were backed by a crew that helped keep them from shooting anything that moved before letting a round of conversation go badly.
Crafting: I'm afraid to say that Cryptic may just pass over this area of MMO play, just as they did with the initial City of Heros. (I honestly don't know if they ever implemented a form of crafting to it or CoV... I didn't stay past my "free time" due to the initial repetition from one area to another in my week of play.) But, I'm also unsure how they could really DO this, as even with all of the little projects that the various Chiefs of Engineering in each series had, the BIG happenings were always by dedicated research vessels and stations, that were merely the backdrop for different episodes of the show. (Exceptions being a few happenings from DS9 and Voyager... but they were special cases, in both location and plotline.)
I look forward to having a MMO that makes the use of a formulaic group/party be an option rather than a necessity. Sure, I like playing in a group, but not all of the time, and not by force. I have my own life to deal with, and I don't like having to choose between my groupmates or sudden R/L issues from being a husband and a father. But, I do enjoy playing in a persistant and player-inhabited environment, and having the choice to group with others in a joint effort. I've seen it offered up so many times... and in each, the final product failed to deliver. Here is one more time that I wait and watch, and pray I don't see something that will make me completely turn away. (Which I haven't with STO... yet.)
I'm guessing you have not been directly involved with very many large projects.
When starting a project you get a general feel for what you want to do and how you are going to do it. People put together timelines and budgets for each part of the project... But at this stage it's all guess work. Heck many times the tech to do some of the things has to be built from the ground up.
And of course as is always true, people guess wrong. Someone will guess that their part of the project will cost $5 Million and take 3 months. But half way through they realise it is much bigger then they had thought and will take $25 Million and a year.
Sure they had a press release where they had said they were planning on this part of the project but at 5x the cost and a huge delay... No way.
People make mistakes. The only choices they have are 1. Spend more money then they have and fail to ever release or 2. Release the product without that part of the project. 3. Remove resources from another part of the project to pay for this part.
Given those choices, would you prefer to 1. Have the game never come out. 2. Have the game come out but without something promised. 3. Come out with who knows how many other things removed so you can get the one thing you want.
WOW! i don't know where to begin....i don't why any of you posted anything, if you have never read anything about STO except for this small review. I have been following this game since it was announced by perpetual and then by cryptic.
PC crew v NPC crew:
this has been discussed in length on the cryptic forums and ultimately lead to closing (not necessarily banning people or deleting threads) any thread about it. basically the system will work like this, since everyone is a captain they can go solo in the game if they choose to...you can form teams or not, its up to you...if you choose to go exploring a planet you bring your npc bridge crew with you or you can bring PC team members that replace your npc crew. its entirely up to you...
yes i understand the arguement about entirely PC crewed or at least PC bridge crew ships. I was one of the proponents for it when it was under perpetuals control, but cryptic has made a good point its like creating 6 games in one...an engineering game, medical, tactical, science, etc. it would take a long time to create not to mention having to come up with new content for each "game" itself continuously... yes i know thats a cop out, but is a sensical cop out to say the least and i'm ok with it. There is only so much to do while pvping, exploring, and spending time between traveling. you can only upgrade a system so much before the upgrades become trivial. there is also the problem of people going l/d on a planet, what happens if the ship leaves where do they respawn at....are they stuck on the planet until another ship comes by or do they have to sit and wait until the ship warps all...the...way...back just to pick up that person. then there are the travel times, are they fast or are they realistic, if they are realistic then what does the captain do all this time while engineering, medical, tactical, etc. are doing their things.
PvP:
It seems as if most people who write about this game concentrates so much more on PvP rather than on PvE. PvP is delegated to PvP areas, so your not going to see PvP everywhere...PvE is very important part of the game, exploring is a major center piece. they have even gone to the trouble of creating self generating content as people continue to go farther out into space. there are goin to raids, dynamic events, PvE space and ground combat, etc. the game isn't centered only on combat
Ship Interiors:
Ok so they are not going to have major ship interiors at launch, with exception to major hubs like DS9...big deal...they said its on the to-do list post launch, besides what are you going to do in those ship interiors, stand around and look at the view....
Well said!
I am looking forward to STO the game, knowing full well it isn't a ST Simulator. I have faith that Cryptic will do a good job and put out a very entertaining immersive game. Cryptic did a spectacular job adding content very regularly with CoH, so I don't think we will have to wait all that long to hang out on the bridge of our ships. For those that say no ship interiors at launch are a deal breaker, well I think they are going to miss out.
Short and sweet, makes sense.
Just my thought. I mean, bigger companies were burdened with making ONE MMO, but two? Heck, that almost CANT go right.
Either way, Trek fans surely always had it hard. I dont know why anyone at Paramount - or whoever has the Trek copyrights - creates one gaming company which cares for all the Trek games, like Lucasarts did all the years.
My gripe No 1 still is that the idea to make each player captain and thus practically identical with the ship made me lose all interest in the game. I had hoped for a team based game, where I am one person on a ship and my friends are other officers like me on the SAME ship. Star Trek was only very little about space combat, and turning STO into another EVE can only be bad. It just is such a reduction of a big franchise to a space shooter which totally irks me.
It all sounds a lot like PotBS. You are a ship, and space stations/planets are like figleaf exteriors. Sounds like a borefest to me. I have a deep distrust against heavily instanced games, and both the plans for ship interiors and planet missions sound like playing a single player game.
So yeah, I too clench my fist at Emmet.
Oh and the STO official forum mods are all N****! Never seen such a bunch of deletion, and thread-closing idiots like them. EVERY critical thread leads to instant close, an attitude I cant stand.
I am sorry if I trod on your vision of what a star trek MMO should be. Don't blame Cryptic for this, Perpetual made the commitment for no bridges long ago, all Cryptic did was inherit the code and graphics done by Perpetual.
Sure Cryptic could have thrown all that out and started completely new, but you are adding years to the process and upping the cost of making this MMO immensely.
I will grant you it is possible to make a game with a multi player crewed ship, just you better have a backer with deep pockets because they have to make it so that if one player leaves the rest of the party does not suffer. Remember, you are in a ship in space, you can't just fly out a replacement quickly if someone leaves.
I am sure another iteration of Star Trek at some point in time will probably have this feature, just not this one. At least you will get a chance to play this one.
Umm... As a blue, you really should know to check your facts before spouting off.
Jack Emmert stated at the convention last year that they inherited next to nothing from Perpetual, which hadn't even gotten to the point of writing code yet. Cryptic got the rights to the IP, some concept art, and design docs. That's about it.
What has taken years off the development time is the fact that Cryptic already had a game engine built and ready to go -- the one that they're using for Champions. So Cryptic could focus on adapting the engine to STO (minor task) as well as creating content (major task).
And did you actually READ what I or pretty much anyone else wrote on the player crew subject? We've been advocating allowing it to be played either way. Players in the roles if players are available, and NPC's in the roles if a player isn't available or isn't wanted. How does a mechanism that lets NPC's step in at a moment's notice result in your doomsday scenario of twiddling one's thumbs while waiting for an alternate player to travel to you? And again, did you read my initial post about how waiting for replacements isn't even remotely new to the MMO genre? I've long since lost count of the times I've been in a dungeon or raid and then been stuck waiting for a new player or two to come in. The idea of NPC's being able to step in to replace a lost team member eliminates that problem just as effectively as removing PC bridge crews from the game did.
The player crew idea is a moot point because the devs have made it so. That doesn't mean that the potential player base has to step back and sing "All hail the all-wise Jack Emmert". We have the right to disagree with his decision and voice our disappointment. Maybe Cryptic will indeed put out the Trek game that the fans have been hoping for. But from the very vocal dissatisfaction in this thread alone it's pretty obvious that there are going to be a lot of unhappy players. I'm glad you're perfectly content. For my part, I'm ambivalent and need to see more before I can make a decision. I simply know that I'm disappointed with many of the decisions I've heard about so far.
Just my thought. I mean, bigger companies were burdened with making ONE MMO, but two? Heck, that almost CANT go right.
Either way, Trek fans surely always had it hard. I dont know why anyone at Paramount - or whoever has the Trek copyrights - creates one gaming company which cares for all the Trek games, like Lucasarts did all the years.
My gripe No 1 still is that the idea to make each player captain and thus practically identical with the ship made me lose all interest in the game. I had hoped for a team based game, where I am one person on a ship and my friends are other officers like me on the SAME ship. Star Trek was only very little about space combat, and turning STO into another EVE can only be bad. It just is such a reduction of a big franchise to a space shooter which totally irks me.
It all sounds a lot like PotBS. You are a ship, and space stations/planets are like figleaf exteriors. Sounds like a borefest to me. I have a deep distrust against heavily instanced games, and both the plans for ship interiors and planet missions sound like playing a single player game.
First off, you can customize your ship how you want for the most part, so not every ship is going to be identical...Second, since STO will be using the same engine as champions online, it will hardly be a transition from one MMO to another using the same tech...Third, the average episode took place in space and on the ground, also about half had some combat in them whether on the ground or in space.
So yeah, I too clench my fist at Emmet.
Oh and the STO official forum mods are all N****! Never seen such a bunch of deletion, and thread-closing idiots like them. EVERY critical thread leads to instant close, an attitude I cant stand.
I'm guessing you're one of those people that start the same thread over and over again and finally got warned and/or banned because of it. I'm glad they ban those people, i'm tired of see 6 threads on ship interiors not being in at launch just on one page. it was ridiculous, seriously limiting yourselves to one thread would have been more than sufficient.Nice analysis, and unfortunately probably correct .
"...intense PvP on the ground and in space,..."
Godammit does every mmog developer have his head up his ass these days??? Don't they look around and see what players are actually Playing and Paying for by the Millions?! It sure the fck isn't PvP! Fools. Epic fail
Pew Pew in space, Great.
I've made all of these same points in the official game boards; our only hope is that Cryptic sees the validity of the argument and builds the game with the possibility of adding these features/functions. Player ship interiors they say they "want" to add, but as far as I know we haven't gotten any statement of commitment yet. Player crews.... who knows. I for one am done with this topic; A year after the game launches, we'll see whether or not we were right all along.
I do hope they'll implement some classes, or at least a function makes you stand out of the crowd. Some exploration would be cool to (like to land with your ship and then explore the planet)
I'm guessing you have not been directly involved with very many large projects.
I'm guessing you work for city or goverment planning as I know they make so many mistakes on project, spending money they don't have. Oh and sorry I do have very big project and have made very big project, and sorry they never ended up as with most games, I really feel it's time that developers need to re-think the type of business they are in, make a product and make sure you know your ins and out of a project. Seeing all these MMORPG's come out with feature's missing cause they couldn't make it in with release, then these company need to learn to shut their mouth about things they might not be able to handle.
I don't mind people making mistakes, I do mind if it's a mistake that has been made countless of times, at one point I feel it's fair to believe that someone will have learned somehow, yet I am not seeing it yet.
When starting a project you get a general feel for what you want to do and how you are going to do it. People put together timelines and budgets for each part of the project... But at this stage it's all guess work. Heck many times the tech to do some of the things has to be built from the ground up.
And of course as is always true, people guess wrong. Someone will guess that their part of the project will cost $5 Million and take 3 months. But half way through they realise it is much bigger then they had thought and will take $25 Million and a year.
Sure they had a press release where they had said they were planning on this part of the project but at 5x the cost and a huge delay... No way.
People make mistakes. The only choices they have are 1. Spend more money then they have and fail to ever release or 2. Release the product without that part of the project. 3. Remove resources from another part of the project to pay for this part.
Given those choices, would you prefer to 1. Have the game never come out. 2. Have the game come out but without something promised. 3. Come out with who knows how many other things removed so you can get the one thing you want.
What you people fail to realise is that development time of an MMO used to be 5 years at least.
Back then companies took the time to actually finish it and release it as much feature complete as possible.
These days they just try to crank out MMO's within 2-3 years of development time!!
Result is that you get a shalow, bland MMO thrown on your lap and expect you to pay AAA price and monthly sub for it.
No one here said STO was to be a simulator. Thank god no. That's just boring!
Having a player crew. Having different classes in form of roles. (Captain, Chief Tactical, Engineer, Medic, etc). Ship interiors. Starbase, HQ interiors. etc. Are vital elements to make this game an MMORPG.
What we will get now at release is just a shooter in space!
Sorry tho. But that's just insultive to the Star Trek IP.
If they don't have the time and money to do better, well maybe they shouldn't have bothered picking up the IP in the first place.
Too many great IP have been ruined and crewed up already.
Sorry tho. But that's just my 2cents.
Again why are so many people so focused on space combat...the game is about exploration (ground and space) and customization (player customization, bridge crew customization, and ship customization)....IT'S THE MAJOR FOCUS OF THE GAME...sheesh. no one listens they just spout half truths without actually paying attention to details.
- I also agree with the poster below this post it seems to be the classic Star Trek purist vs. The Sci-Fi fan
As that poster stated this is NOT supposed to be a Star Trek Sim. It is also not a heavy PvP game (NOT EVE). It is a Heavy PVE game with pvp. As far as player crews go see previous sentence... . Those who are fuming over that issue you should re-read the above quoted post. This is a game aimed at Star Trek and Sci-Fi fans who want a Space Ship MMO that is NOT EvE. It is NOT a purist's Star Trek sim.... (aka a day in the life of Captain Kirk, Picard, Cisco,Janeway etc...)
Having said that i would be interested in a Star Trek sim. If any dev out there reads this i think there is a small niche market for that type of game.
-
Quoted for Yessatude and Exactlyness 
I am hoping this is going to be the title that I think it can be. I agree with the choice to be a Captain of your own ship. The customization idea is also brilliant. Good article, if a bit one sided. There are some potential issues here, which I am sure they will find solutions for. All in all, I am looking forward to this game!
T
man, did Cryptic write this article for you guys? Talk about PR fluff. Did yal get a trip out tot he studio for a behind the scenes tour in exchange? lol more spin then a neutron star, but I'm getting used to it
OK, to the game. I agree that we should be captains. Who wants to not be able to play because half your crew is still at work? HOWEVER, i also agree with player crews, as well. I don't think it needs to be an all or nothing situation. You should be able to invite players to your ship for some crew-based co-op questing. I remember that in SWG teh falcom was a lot of fun to play with a full crew, even if the combat was painfully repetitious.
Of Course, allowing player crews would likely necessitate some ship interiors. I mean, it could be done, with everyone watching the combat from the 3rd person, but everyone has different skill commands etc, depending on their assigned role. I guess this would give crewed ships an advantage over single-captain ships,,,,but then if all of the crew simply showed up in their own ship, they'd all have an advantage anyways.
I don't know how many of you have played the game starfleet command, which is based of starfleet battles. It was a very cool setup for ship to ship combat,, as far as its combination of simplicity and depth. I am hoping that this games combat is something similar.
Having ship and star-base interiors just to have then, with nothing to do in them, is a waste of art and dev time, imho. Starbases would be like cities in space, so you could shop, etc. maybe having a section of your own ship like 10-forward or something available to invite guests into your ship would be cool...but do I really have to navigate my way through repetitious hallways to get there? Yes, teh first time would be cool, like always...but after then 10th time.....uggg, no thanks.
I do wish the game was less cartoon-like, as space is very easy to make look awesome...lets face it, its mostly empty...so the ships and combat effects wcould be really georgeous and not be absurdly taxing on your PC. /shrug not as important as teh other point, but que lastima
QFE. The community at the offficial website is ten times better than the one here at MMORPG. This site seems to be the last refuge for disgruntled players that hate the fact they can't troll and flame over at a game's website.So they come here and cry about how they are being "censored." Anyone that has spent any time at the official website knows the facts and those that troll here know nothing. Hence why the trolls refuse to acknowledge this post that refutes every bit of garbage and lies they have been spewing.
Wow. I can't even begin to list the blatant inaccuracies here that have been spouted by some of you guys. (To the point that I had to create an account and say so.)
To start off, the reviewer Troy Hammers is fairly dead on in his statements about the game. In fact, the only things that he posted that I can find fault with are:
-- We actually don't know if this will be possible, as they're still deciding how the collision systems will work; and in his follow up statement where he says:
-- Craig Zinkievich has stated that specific interior spaces will be available at launch as instanced areas. So we will have missions that include both ship and starbase interiors, but they will not be "free roam" areas at launch. Indeed, we have seen actual gameplay video showing combat on a ship's bridge and a screenshot showing a starbase's warp core.
I invite you guys to check out the STO forums, or at least read some of the "Ask Cryptic" articles, found on STO's main page before bashing Cryptic for things that you clearly don't know anything about.
Ok i just skimmed over this and i seen that alota people are disgusted about everyone being a captain.... from what ive read that being not much is that YOU are Technicly a captain..... But that is not your actual rank. you have to earn your rank from acadamy Up. Sorry if this is incorrect but if your going to say its not provide me with proof.
Really if people are judging it this early they are way off things can change right up to the last day.
I also think that it will appeal to non ST fans because of its Custermization features, Exploration and Mild but not based on PVP.
Overall i think it has great potential even if it isnt what we want on release they will get feedback and than they can improve it in the Expansions.
(sorry for my bad spelling)
And if someone wishs to prove me wrong provide proof not your opion
The ramming speed joke was from Worf during TNG movie First Contact, when his ship was busted up and had no more options against the Borg Cube. I always thought to myself, "Wow, that could be called the Worf Maneuver"
But you are correct sir, that was not stated by Cryptic to be put into STO.
So very excited about this game, and so happy it's in the right hands now.
No need for interiors as a general feature at launch. They'll be there in episodes where they're relevant to the story. Player crews is just too silly a concept, and people should take heart that Cryptic actually was polite about the issue instead of laughing in their faces for being so silly as was probably their instinctive reaction.
Don't be fooled folks. Most of the negative "noise" is being generated by a small text based Star Trek simming community that thought they could pressure Cryptic into giving them an environment to simply transfer there simming over to. There's absolutely no thought about how unrealistic that is as a business model, and once it was made clear PC crews wouldn't be in they've been on a campain to get a negative spin going about the game to put pressure on Cryptic another way.
QFE. The community at the offficial website is ten times better than the one here at MMORPG. This site seems to be the last refuge for disgruntled players that hate the fact they can't troll and flame over at a game's website.So they come here and cry about how they are being "censored." Anyone that has spent any time at the official website knows the facts and those that troll here know nothing. Hence why the trolls refuse to acknowledge this post that refutes every bit of garbage and lies they have been spewing.
It's funny how interested Cryptic and Jack seem to be in putting this game over to us "disgruntled players" on this site and forums. The official forums might seem ten times better for you fanboi's, because anyone who criticizes the development gets chased off those forums or has their threads locked no matter how constructive. If you read neutral sites like this one or Massively, you'll see what the average player market (who Cryptic care far more then the community they already have drinking their koolaid) think about this games direction.
Keep on enjoying those official forums and thinking everything there is fact, I remember the AoC offical forums telling everyone the "facts" on how great and bug free that game was. While these "disgruntled players" told everyone how the game was far from ready and needed more content. Wonder who had more facts?
All us "disgruntled players" talked about how WAR wasn't ready, wasn't well balanced, and needed more ORvR options. We talked about the game having short playability and predicted that people would cancel out of boredom 2-3 months later. 400 thousand cancelations later, I'll bet they wish they listened a little better.
I'll bet we were disgruntled when we knew Tabula Rasa and Vanguard were going to be massive disappointments, when so many of their fanboi's declared their games the next WoW killer.
You might think people are "disgruntled" because they post their opinions here and don't just say "yes yes yes" when they know the developers can make a better game and tell them what people are going to expect from a big named IP. We might seem disgruntled, but it's funny how much the people here are correct on predicting how well or bad a MMORPG will perform in the market. The people here have their finger on the pulse better then any of the more recent Dev teams, who just can't quite get that pulse anymore.
Oh please. There is no 'the people here" in the sense you're trying to use the phrase. There's people with varied opinions like there is everywhere else. There's no more accurate prognosticators here than there is anywhere else either.
People are going to like what they see about a game or not, and in the end after a game is released one side is going to look like they were right and one side isn't. There's been just as many occasions where the negativity ninnies were absolutely wrong about how a game would do once released.
There isn't any "consensus" about STO here either. Quit trying to come off like there is. There's many that like what they're seeing, some that don't like it. That's the same as every single game that's ever been in development and after it was released.
Then there's the old story of mmorpg.com with players going to "visit" who they see as possible competition for their favourite game to stir up negativity, and with STO there's some that couldn't get any traction with their negativity on the STO forums, and so started trying to spread it here.
This all isn't anything new . I'm sure some think they're being "tactitions", but it's all old, and pretty lame actually.
It's funny how interested Cryptic and Jack seem to be in putting this game over to us "disgruntled players" on this site and forums. The official forums might seem ten times better for you fanboi's, because anyone who criticizes the development gets chased off those forums or has their threads locked no matter how constructive. If you read neutral sites like this one or Massively, you'll see what the average player market (who Cryptic care far more then the community they already have drinking their koolaid) think about this games direction.
Keep on enjoying those official forums and thinking everything there is fact, I remember the AoC offical forums telling everyone the "facts" on how great and bug free that game was. While these "disgruntled players" told everyone how the game was far from ready and needed more content. Wonder who had more facts?
All us "disgruntled players" talked about how WAR wasn't ready, wasn't well balanced, and needed more ORvR options. We talked about the game having short playability and predicted that people would cancel out of boredom 2-3 months later. 400 thousand cancelations later, I'll bet they wish they listened a little better.
I'll bet we were disgruntled when we knew Tabula Rasa and Vanguard were going to be massive disappointments, when so many of their fanboi's declared their games the next WoW killer.
You might think people are "disgruntled" because they post their opinions here and don't just say "yes yes yes" when they know the developers can make a better game and tell them what people are going to expect from a big named IP. We might seem disgruntled, but it's funny how much the people here are correct on predicting how well or bad a MMORPG will perform in the market. The people here have their finger on the pulse better then any of the more recent Dev teams, who just can't quite get that pulse anymore.
The difference between what your saying and what i'm saying is that my information is accurate based on everything the development team has put out. The "disgruntled" players don't even exist yet. The game isn't even in alpha or beta testing yet so your examples of AoC and WAR are mute.
As for the so called "disgruntled" community of people on the official forums go, they are the same people that get warned or banned for opening 50 threads on the same issue when only 1 would suffice. Everyone wants different things for this game, I've heard everything you could think of all of which are still on the forums. The only other reason those threads get closed is because some people keep making personal attacks thus ending a good discussion. By all means be "disgruntled", but don't call us fanbois simply because we expect a certain level of maturity and actual knowledge of what the devs have said is in or out.
Enough with this no bridge whining. You are a very small minority and they should completely redo the game for you? I think not.
Some clueless poster tried to make out like SWG has that functionality. Yeah one person flies the ship and everyone else stands around. Oh yes, some ships do have gun stations, but if you get in a pvp fight in one of the multiplayer ships you are dead meat. Little more than a gimmick. Once you do it a few times there is not much point to it. Safer for everyone to fly their own fighters.
You guys seem to think there is endless development dollars out there that they can provide infinite functionality to meet your whims. Well sorry to burst your bubble, but that scenario does not exist in the current genre.
Personally I think Cryptic has done a great job with the IP. Far better than that monstrousity that Perpetual was working on.
If not having player crews is a game breaker than this game is not for you. So don't play it. You won't find any developers attempting something like this either, just makes no sense from a gaming perspective.
In my opion the wow like screen shots do not inspire alot of rabid fanboiizim. We shall see.
it doesn't look anything like WoW, not even close
Ok Techdog then cartoon like screen shots.
Just one note on this discussion... Cryptic has been through this process before. There was a City of Heroes web site up and active during the development of that title, and it did accurately reflect the game that was eventually released.
Using other companies to somehow disprove other peoples' statements regarding the official site and discussions there is rather absurd. Cryptic is not Funcom, and has their own track record to use for comparison.
I dont know i thought the screenshots were rather nice for a MMO.
It's funny how interested Cryptic and Jack seem to be in putting this game over to us "disgruntled players" on this site and forums. The official forums might seem ten times better for you fanboi's, because anyone who criticizes the development gets chased off those forums or has their threads locked no matter how constructive. If you read neutral sites like this one or Massively, you'll see what the average player market (who Cryptic care far more then the community they already have drinking their koolaid) think about this games direction.
Keep on enjoying those official forums and thinking everything there is fact, I remember the AoC offical forums telling everyone the "facts" on how great and bug free that game was. While these "disgruntled players" told everyone how the game was far from ready and needed more content. Wonder who had more facts?
All us "disgruntled players" talked about how WAR wasn't ready, wasn't well balanced, and needed more ORvR options. We talked about the game having short playability and predicted that people would cancel out of boredom 2-3 months later. 400 thousand cancelations later, I'll bet they wish they listened a little better.
I'll bet we were disgruntled when we knew Tabula Rasa and Vanguard were going to be massive disappointments, when so many of their fanboi's declared their games the next WoW killer.
You might think people are "disgruntled" because they post their opinions here and don't just say "yes yes yes" when they know the developers can make a better game and tell them what people are going to expect from a big named IP. We might seem disgruntled, but it's funny how much the people here are correct on predicting how well or bad a MMORPG will perform in the market. The people here have their finger on the pulse better then any of the more recent Dev teams, who just can't quite get that pulse anymore.
The difference between what your saying and what i'm saying is that my information is accurate based on everything the development team has put out. The "disgruntled" players don't even exist yet. The game isn't even in alpha or beta testing yet so your examples of AoC and WAR are mute.
As for the so called "disgruntled" community of people on the official forums go, they are the same people that get warned or banned for opening 50 threads on the same issue when only 1 would suffice. Everyone wants different things for this game, I've heard everything you could think of all of which are still on the forums. The only other reason those threads get closed is because some people keep making personal attacks thus ending a good discussion. By all means be "disgruntled", but don't call us fanbois simply because we expect a certain level of maturity and actual knowledge of what the devs have said is in or out.
Spoken like a person who actually has visited the site and know what's going on over there. The developers are very open and listen to what's being said on the state of the game. The community is very varied, it isn't just a bunch of fanbois as the morons on this site suggest. I had many things in this game that I wanted to see that aren't happening and I did threads stating that fact. But I didn't go off on a tanent like some baby because I couldn't play a Borg or merchant. The decision was made and I accepted it because I realize that not everyone is going to get what they want. That's just life.
In fact, we're STILL having discussions on playing a Borg and the threads aren't being locked even though we know that playable borg won't be in the game. Might have something to do with the tone and the maturity of the people involved in the conversation. Hmmmmmm.........
I just want to say that I like what I am hearing about STO so far -- even the wrath of STO's critics is gratifying.
Whenever anyone posts a rant about STO and then "stomps off" stating that he or she will NOT be playing this game, I just smile and think "that's great!" Such posters would not be happy in STO and, what is more important to me, I would not be happy having them around while I play STO. So, I see this situation as a complete Win-Win for everybody.
Based on what I am hearing thus far, STO sounds in many ways similar to Guild Wars, an essentially single-player game with a healthy and substantial (but OPTIONAL) MMO component, all thanks to the use of NPC groupmates. Sadly (and stupidly, imo), AreneNet is abandoning this winning game mechanic in their design of Guild Wars 2, but, happily, it looks like STO is going to pick up the ball dropped by ArenaNet and carry it forward. Exit ArenaNet/Guild Wars 1 but -- hooray! -- here comes Cryptic/STO to fill the void.
This sounds absolutely perfect to me. Guild Wars was not a game for everyone, but it hit just the right note for me. It's good to see that another game is on the horizon for players like me.
I think STO is going to be great fun. I am so encouraged by the direction Cryptic is taking this game.
What is up with all the trekkies wanting a tv show game? On the tv show so and so interact, they do away missions,you wonder if people will hook up, blah blah blah. Talk about your recipe for disaster.
If the game centers around various classes simply operating a starship......umm.......boring.
IF you make a game about Star Trek, it sould be... surprising.. about Star Trek. You say is boring, but the TV Serie was like you describe, and worked long and long and long and long. What you describe could make a good RPG, and these people are making a RPG soo.. hum?.. maybe you don't like RPG's and all you want is hack and slash diablo. Then there are lots of games *ALREADY* like that on the market. Adding something is already on the market is not wisdow market decission, because you are competing with everybody, so your product has to add something new, or competece in price and quality. Since quality is alredy cornere by WoW and price by free to play games, you *MUST* give something good and decent quality + decent price to even start making a MMORPG.
IF you make a game about Star Trek, it sould be... surprising.. about Star Trek. You say is boring, but the TV Serie was like you describe, and worked long and long and long and long. What you describe could make a good RPG, and these people are making a RPG soo.. hum?.. maybe you don't like RPG's and all you want is hack and slash diablo. Then there are lots of games *ALREADY* like that on the market. Adding something is already on the market is not wisdow market decission, because you are competing with everybody, so your product has to add something new, or competece in price and quality. Since quality is alredy cornere by WoW and price by free to play games, you *MUST* give something good and decent quality + decent price to even start making a MMORPG.
The star trek franchise encompasses many things. Picking the most boring among them is a recipe for failure.
The star trek franchise encompasses many things. Picking the most boring among them is a recipe for failure.
Exactly. Standing around the engine room b.s ing and pressing a few buttons isn't many people's idea of having fun. The SIMS type MMOs have tried and faile. That's why developers are moving away from them.
Exactly. Standing around the engine room b.s ing and pressing a few buttons isn't many people's idea of having fun. The SIMS type MMOs have tried and faile. That's why developers are moving away from them.
Enjoyed the thread until it devolved a while back. Unfortunately I understand both sides of the argument and even some of the squabbles (that detract from the whole unfortunately), I'll try to ignore the general bad feeling...
Yes the game (as described by Tech (thanks)) sounds excellent, better if I'd not read the many earlier threads inviting me to take part in star trek the series. The truth is that this is the state of the market, we're playing (typically) singleplayer combat games that we can hang out with our buddies and hopefully have a damn good time, as many people are doing (much to the chagrin of some people). So we'll play STO and have a laugh and play with our customised ship, fly around and phazer each other, beam down to planets and (after consulting the wiki) complete some quest so I can finally get my new ship (or whatever). But like I said, I understand both sides... I dont mind 'these' games, hell even WOW is an excellent game when we consider what we were playing not so long ago (if your old like me :). But its not what I expected from RPG. Sorry but I've said it, its not RPG, at least not yet.
I hear a lot of the disgruntled folk here on this site, and I think I see a common thread, they are often angry and demanding of crazy features that just dont fit in with the current thinking, and certainly couldn't design a game that could ever reasonably be built and compete with the current games for their current market. And yeah, threads do often polarise into fans and trolls, some of this is definitely due to people being people (hence some are just annoying and prideful of it). But you see I think I know what it is...
SO many people want an RPG
You see they're annoyed 'cos they, like me, want a roleplaying game, not an FPS nor a RTS nor a ###, but an RPG (yeah I play all of these, but I want an RPG as well). If nobody can make it, or if it'll be rubbish even if they did, then thats a drag.... its a terrible shame and we'll all just have to sit here complaining about it. But please, do me a favour, stop calling these other games RPGs, I know its a role your playing as the captain or the paladin or the whatever, but its a role your playing when you assume command of a fighter in a flight sim but at least that gets its own name... its a flight sim. I dont think having some character progression is enough to warrant the RPG designation. I dont mind a game with starship combat with some cool away missions, I'm just not sure that makes it an RPG. Lets give this current crop of MMOs their own name, and leave RPG for us sad folk sat here waiting.
Well playing STO I imagine, and you better believe that when my bird of war decloaks in front of your federation heavy cruiser I'm doing it with a heavy heart, that I wasn't the engineer on your ship :)
Actually just thought of a way of providing folk with their chief engineer (or whomever) without substantial modification of the basic game. No I'm not trying to demand anything, and I'm not undermining your right to play the game in its current guise, just chatting away with those who may be interested, and if you're not then simply move along to the next post...
Ok, have they gone? So as I read it everyone is a captain of their own ship, and you can choose to beam down as yourself plus NPC group or with PC friends... so already halfway there. What about permitting alt characters (from the usual bridge crew/medical etc personnel) however these guys are secondary to your captain. When you 'skill-up' your captain you gain 'skill-ups' to be spent on your alts, hence you can increase your engineer or your tactical guy etc. When you're playing the game you'll typically be assuming the role of captain as normal, however you'll have subtle bonuses due to your support team and will have names to beam down to the surface with rather than 'who the hell are you' NPCs (they're still NPCs but now with defined names and abilities). However the big advantage will be when you decide to group, you can either form an armada as I believe is currently the gameplay, or you can employ one of your alts to make a cameo appearance on your friends ship, thus providing advantages to their ship and of course joining them on away missions. No need to explain their ability to jump between ships around the galaxy, as its only a small game impact, I assume that they will be having a star map with various races struggling for supremacy (EVE) and so the instant relocation of captains could have considerable impact as they are effectively ships, the bridge crew however are just minor mods to an existing ship, and in order to employ them your 'race' has lost a ship elsewhere, so no 'unbalancing' problem. This cameo character can earn themselves some skill-ups and this will benefit their captain who gains a more experienced team. Its not that different from what is currently described but would give you the options some have previously highlighted. Of course this wont address any of the mission content issues previously raised as I agree this would be a major alteration to crypics game plan and certainly result in no star-trek MMO at all.
Enjoyed the thread until it devolved a while back. Unfortunately I understand both sides of the argument and even some of the squabbles (that detract from the whole unfortunately), I'll try to ignore the general bad feeling...
Yes the game (as described by Tech (thanks)) sounds excellent, better if I'd not read the many earlier threads inviting me to take part in star trek the series. The truth is that this is the state of the market, we're playing (typically) singleplayer combat games that we can hang out with our buddies and hopefully have a damn good time, as many people are doing (much to the chagrin of some people). So we'll play STO and have a laugh and play with our customised ship, fly around and phazer each other, beam down to planets and (after consulting the wiki) complete some quest so I can finally get my new ship (or whatever). But like I said, I understand both sides... I dont mind 'these' games, hell even WOW is an excellent game when we consider what we were playing not so long ago (if your old like me :). But its not what I expected from RPG. Sorry but I've said it, its not RPG, at least not yet.
I hear a lot of the disgruntled folk here on this site, and I think I see a common thread, they are often angry and demanding of crazy features that just dont fit in with the current thinking, and certainly couldn't design a game that could ever reasonably be built and compete with the current games for their current market. And yeah, threads do often polarise into fans and trolls, some of this is definitely due to people being people (hence some are just annoying and prideful of it). But you see I think I know what it is...
SO many people want an RPG
You see they're annoyed 'cos they, like me, want a roleplaying game, not an FPS nor a RTS nor a ###, but an RPG (yeah I play all of these, but I want an RPG as well). If nobody can make it, or if it'll be rubbish even if they did, then thats a drag.... its a terrible shame and we'll all just have to sit here complaining about it. But please, do me a favour, stop calling these other games RPGs, I know its a role your playing as the captain or the paladin or the whatever, but its a role your playing when you assume command of a fighter in a flight sim but at least that gets its own name... its a flight sim. I dont think having some character progression is enough to warrant the RPG designation. I dont mind a game with starship combat with some cool away missions, I'm just not sure that makes it an RPG. Lets give this current crop of MMOs their own name, and leave RPG for us sad folk sat here waiting.
Well playing STO I imagine, and you better believe that when my bird of war decloaks in front of your federation heavy cruiser I'm doing it with a heavy heart, that I wasn't the engineer on your ship :)
This isn't going to be a FPS nor RTS so I don't get where you are going with that. If you had really been following the game's developmnent like so few of you seem to be doing, you would know that battles are going to be long affairs where you are diverting power to shields,weapons ,hulls etc. FPS don't do that. You just point and click on those and battles last for maybe 5-10 seconds.
And let's clear up this confusion with RPG stands for:
From Wikipedia
A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters. [1] Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, [1] and the actions succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines. [2] Within the rules, players have the freedom to improvise; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the game. [2]
I don't see anything in that definition that says the world has to be made up completely of players that HAVE to group together in order to accomplish something. Further, nowhere in that definition does it say the world has to have a SIM type environment. Long as you are the one determining your character's actions within the rules set byt he game and they have some effect on the outcome of the game, then it is a RPG. In STO, players have the freedom to customize their characters and ships, they will have the free will to succeed or fail based on the rules of the game and their choices will have an effect on the Galaxy. That makes it a RPG. End of Story.
I wanted to say a few things but first please forgive me if I say something that has all ready been covered as I didn't read every single post. I more or less just skimmed through everything. Now when I first heard they were turning Star Trek in to an MMO I was not it's biggest supporter. The thing about Star Trek is that it is universe built on co-operation, people working together to accomplish goals and task. Getting players to work together in MMO is difficult at best. The only exception to that rule is when it comes to guilds and friends who work together. Asking random people to work together is like asking the devil to mend his evil ways, it just will never happen.
However my beliefs on the game have greatly changed after spending some time on Star Trek Online website and glancing over what they have planned. I won't go as far as saying that it will be great because I don't really know that till it is released. However the game shows great promise.
A few things I want to note. While yes it is true that you will be a captain, it doesn't mean that every captain is the same. In Star Trek universe Janeway is different then Picard. Janeway was a scientist through and through, were Picard was more of an archeologist. While he was still as scientist at heart he was not the same type of Scientist Janeway was.
We have also been shown a glimps of other captains from different fields such as Laforge, Beverly Crusher. So we know that Star Fleet Captains come from different fields. Which is just what Star Trek Online will be doing as well. While information still unknown, I believe that the field you choose, such as Medical, Engineering, Tactical, etc etc, will also have a great influnce on the types of missions you will recieve. Cryptic has this down pat through CoX, players get different quest depending on there Origin type. I expect that STO will do the same with a lot more dept to it.
Also about picking your crew, we know that you will have a crew and when you go on away missions you will have the ability to choose the crew members you wish to go on the away mission. What don't know is how exactly that will work or the depth of it. In Star Trek Universe Captains get to pick there Senior Officers, but I don't think they get to pick every single person that comes on board. So my guess is that when you get started you will have the ability to create your Senior officers if not I believe it will be added in later.
Also you will be able to group up with friends and guildmates to do aways missions and combat missions. Again we don't know how exactly that will work.
Some of you think there will be no interior to the Star Ships, again this is untrue. At launch you will be able to see the interior of your ship on missions in instances. Later on they plan on adding in interior completely to the game. I think right now they want to focus on other aspects of the game that are far more important.
Like I said, STO shows great promise however I can't say it will work or it won't work till I actually have a chance to try the game out. What I can say is that I am impressed thus far with what I have seen.
I can't wait for the game to be released.
I think you'll find that I was not stating that STO was an FPS or RTS or ### for that matter, I was highlighting that we have a great many definitions for games yet might not have enough given the often weak claim of RPG. Of course this need not apply to STO, I think you should read my post again but this time imagine that I'm not attacking your jewels and instead that I'm trying to explain why (imo) a number of people are unhappy with this or any other game with carries the RPG definition, this way perhaps you wont feel the need to fight back but instead simply accept the explaination for what it was.
I admit that I have not been following the development of STO, I didn't know I had to in order to form an opinion about its current state of development as disclosed by Tech and now yourself. It highlights a game similar to a number of star-ship combat sims (as desribed in your post) that have been produced over the years coupled with plenty of ST-lore and some planetary missions. This sounds fine to me, but I think you'll find that its not so fine with a number of other voices within this thread. I simply made the mistake of thinking that my views as to why some of them may have an issue with anything less than the perfect RPG, might actually be of some interest.
Also, I have already highlighted in my previous post that if we take the dictionary (or in this case Wikipedia) definition of an RPG then we can include a wide variety of games that we already have seperate definitions for. I think you'll find that RPG has such a wide definition simply because of the great many RPG games that have been written over the years, games that cover pretty much all aspects of life and imagination, however I should highlight that typically the most important aspect is the players freedom to improvise within the confines of the rules. The rules in paper based RPGs (almost 100% of all RPG games are currently 'paper based') usually permit considerable flexability for players to 'improvise', this is due to the common employment of a highly flexible human as the 'game engine'. Therefore while I do not disagree with the Wiki definition, I should like to point out that most people with experience of paper based RPGs, which I should further highlight were the inspiration for the MUDs and now MMOs, expect more from their RPGs. Thats not to say they're going to get it, or even that they should, only that it is their wish. I thought that was clear enough the first time I wrote, I guess it wasn't, I assume it is now... we'll see.
I think you'll find that I was not stating that STO was an FPS or RTS or ### for that matter, I was highlighting that we have a great many definitions for games yet might not have enough given the often weak claim of RPG. Of course this need not apply to STO, I think you should read my post again but this time imagine that I'm not attacking your jewels and instead that I'm trying to explain why (imo) a number of people are unhappy with this or any other game with carries the RPG definition, this way perhaps you wont feel the need to fight back but instead simply accept the explaination for what it was.
Don't confuse me with one of these people whose life lives in a virtual world. i'm not one of those people whose whole world ends when something doesn't go his way so don't think for one second that anythhing you say has any effect on my me. I was only pointing out the fact that MMORPG has one meaning and that's it. There is no ambiguity, but there are many misconceptions to what these words mean. Saying that MMORPG means something else is like saying 2+2 could egual 5. It isn't true.
I admit that I have not been following the development of STO, I didn't know I had to in order to form an opinion about its current state of development as disclosed by Tech and now yourself. It highlights a game similar to a number of star-ship combat sims (as desribed in your post) that have been produced over the years coupled with plenty of ST-lore and some planetary missions. This sounds fine to me, but I think you'll find that its not so fine with a number of other voices within this thread. I simply made the mistake of thinking that my views as to why some of them may have an issue with anything less than the perfect RPG, might actually be of some interest.
No one's saying you can't form an opinion but it would be helpful if you at least formed an opinion based on facts and not what is spewed by the trolls on this website. Many of these people who aren't happy with this game are NEVER happy with any game and you will find them stating so on many of the gaming forums here. Many of them won't be happy until we wind the clock back to the MMOs where forced grouping was the norm. It won't ever happen because developers need to make money when creating a game that requires 24/7 online play and when most of that base doesn't like to stand around pleading a leader to help him finish a quest.
Also, I have already highlighted in my previous post that if we take the dictionary (or in this case Wikipedia) definition of an RPG then we can include a wide variety of games that we already have seperate definitions for. I think you'll find that RPG has such a wide definition simply because of the great many RPG games that have been written over the years, games that cover pretty much all aspects of life and imagination, however I should highlight that typically the most important aspect is the players freedom to improvise within the confines of the rules. The rules in paper based RPGs (almost 100% of all RPG games are currently 'paper based') usually permit considerable flexability for players to 'improvise', this is due to the common employment of a highly flexible human as the 'game engine'. Therefore while I do not disagree with the Wiki definition, I should like to point out that most people with experience of paper based RPGs, which I should further highlight were the inspiration for the MUDs and now MMOs, expect more from their RPGs. Thats not to say they're going to get it, or even that they should, only that it is their wish. I thought that was clear enough the first time I wrote, I guess it wasn't, I assume it is now... we'll see.
And once again I'm not understanding their problem because they already have more freedom to improvise now than they ever did. If they want to forget the missions that they say "lead them by the hand" that are available in the game they can. They can freely form their own groups or guilds and go off on whatever adventure their imagination takes them. The problem is that's not good enough for them. They want players like me to be forced to join them on MY missions and I resent that. There are times when I just don't feel like dealing with garbage that I come across online and would rather do it myself. If my level isn't high enough I go off and do something else until I'm a high enough level or just grind my way there. To me, that's freedom. Having to go around and deal with leaders on a power trip isn't fun and is the reason that MMO's really didn't take off until they took away the forced grouping aspect. I have no problem whatsoever with those that prefer the old style everquest or SWG games, but I do resent them saying that I should go play a FPS or RTS if I don't like grouping. I could only imagine what those people are like in game and i would never in a million years play a game where I am forced to group with them.
Originally posted by Ianonmorpg, highlights by Ktanner3, and more by Ianonmorpg
...I'm trying to explain why (imo) a number of people are unhappy with this or any other game with carries the RPG definition...
Don't confuse me with one of these people whose life lives in a virtual world. i'm not one of those people whose whole world ends when something doesn't go his way so don't think for one second that anythhing you say has any effect on my me. I was only pointing out the fact that MMORPG has one meaning and that's it. There is no ambiguity, but there are many misconceptions to what these words mean. Saying that MMORPG means something else is like saying 2+2 could egual 5. It isn't true.
I'm glad that nothing I say has any effect upon you, not convinced given you state it, but I get the point. There is often ambiguity, especially when we consider the names we assign to game styles and more still given that RPGs on PCs are very different from the RPGs they originated from, predominately due to the considerable constraints of technology. Constraints that every day reduce a little more, and so I see no reason why eventually PC based RPGs wont be very similar to the paper-based games they had originated from. Given that we have such a large gap between what was, is and will be, it seems very apparent to me that we can easily question the relative worth of a games claim to RP status. It may be a mute point given that its competition is in largely the same boat, but its certainly easier than stating 2+2=5. By the way, as we can form a proof that 1=2 I dont feel overly concerned about claiming 4=5 in this post.
...I simply made the mistake of thinking that my views as to why some of them may have an issue with anything less than the perfect RPG, might actually be of some interest.
No one's saying you can't form an opinion but it would be helpful if you at least formed an opinion based on facts and not what is spewed by the trolls on this website. Many of these people who aren't happy with this game are NEVER happy with any game and you will find them stating so on many of the gaming forums here. Many of them won't be happy until we wind the clock back to the MMOs where forced grouping was the norm. It won't ever happen because developers need to make money when creating a game that requires 24/7 online play and when most of that base doesn't like to stand around pleading a leader to help him finish a quest.
I'm also very glad that I can form an opinion, however I'm sorry if you believe that my opinion is based upon anything other than 'the facts', the fact is that some people want more RP in their RPG. Thats a fact, just because you're not one of them doesn't change that fact. While I agree that some other people wont be happy with any game regardless of its gameplay and ability to be fun (more important than any quibble regards RPing) for them, if they bothered to actually try it, I wont accept that everyone who wants something different than you is automatically a troll and a game hater. I want to play STO when completed, and if I dont like it at that point then fair enough, we all like something different, but I also want to see more RPing in a game... its need not be STO, but I want to see it in a game eventually. Today that appears to be an unlikely event as currently its more effective to produce a far less ambitious game (that may well fail in its goal of providing RP) and instead try to tap into the current market. Not sure why RPing requires 24/7 game play, or leaders, or even quests as established in todays games.
... I'd like to point out that most people with experience of paper based RPGs, which I should further highlight were the inspiration for the MUDs and now MMOs, expect more from their RPGs...
And once again I'm not understanding their problem because they already have more freedom to improvise now than they ever did. If they want to forget the missions that they say "lead them by the hand" that are available in the game they can. They can freely form their own groups or guilds and go off on whatever adventure their imagination takes them. The problem is that's not good enough for them. They want players like me to be forced to join them on MY missions and I resent that. There are times when I just don't feel like dealing with garbage that I come across online and would rather do it myself. If my level isn't high enough I go off and do something else until I'm a high enough level or just grind my way there. To me, that's freedom. Having to go around and deal with leaders on a power trip isn't fun and is the reason that MMO's really didn't take off until they took away the forced grouping aspect. I have no problem whatsoever with those that prefer the old style everquest or SWG games, but I do resent them saying that I should go play a FPS or RTS if I don't like grouping. I could only imagine what those people are like in game and i would never in a million years play a game where I am forced to group with them.
I agree that todays games are a massive improvement over yesterdays in so many ways, and I'd say that this means the future looks good. Not sure why so we must see today as being ok and then assume it cant hope to get any better, GTA2 was a massive advance on GTA, yet many of us will rush out and buy the latest installment... because they can add more. So just because todays games offer more freedom, does this mean that next week we cant have more freedom? I think we'll have a lot more freedom, so why not ask for it a little sooner, and perhaps even draw up a wish list? As for the bulk of your last paragraph I'm not sure who has been picking on you, but I'd not be best pleased about people forcing me to do what they want, not sure what conversations you've been involved in were a RPer thinks you must do what they say. I was under the impression that more freedom would mean you can do what you want, just as I can do what I want. Oh yeah, levels are a system that was in a number of famous paper RPGs and most MMMORPGs, but is not a requirement of RPing, but that's not so important.
What isn't in games that you want to do? How are you being hindered from creating your own adventures with your friends? How is your freedom being hindered by today's MMOs that allow you to group together and accomplish whatever you want?
At last, we get to the point. I'm glad you feel at last that you can have a debate about aspirations of game features, something many of us have taken for granted but it seemed you needed help to see.The very point that numerous people were making at the begining of this thread and a great many others that you apparently dislike, they are stating things they like and dislike about various games (or current projects) and even proposing various features they would like to include in these or even future games. I'm not concerned with giving you a feature list of my 'dream game' because it will vary by genre and even the mood I'm in any given day, but lets assume that it would have greater capacity to alter the world and interact with other characters in ways other than 'thump'. Like I said, it would be longer, but if you're really interested you could run through a few other threads and find out.
As for this thread I was happy to see Star Trek is on its way, and agreed with a number of ideas thrown into the debate by various folk earlier in the thread, but accept that such features would not be included in the game (I'd sooner it got released than not), my issue was with the way certain posters treat any people looking for something more and happy to chat about what could of been. A point I believe I have made.
At last, we get to the point. I'm glad you feel at last that you can have a debate about aspirations of game features, something many of us have taken for granted but it seemed you needed help to see.The very point that numerous people were making at the begining of this thread and a great many others that you apparently dislike, they are stating things they like and dislike about various games (or current projects) and even proposing various features they would like to include in these or even future games. I'm not concerned with giving you a feature list of my 'dream game' because it will vary by genre and even the mood I'm in any given day, but lets assume that it would have greater capacity to alter the world and interact with other characters in ways other than 'thump'. Like I said, it would be longer, but if you're really interested you could run through a few other threads and find out.
As for this thread I was happy to see Star Trek is on its way, and agreed with a number of ideas thrown into the debate by various folk earlier in the thread, but accept that such features would not be included in the game (I'd sooner it got released than not), my issue was with the way certain posters treat any people looking for something more and happy to chat about what could of been. A point I believe I have made.
And as I've stated, I have no problem with people bringing up concerns with the game. But when it turns into trashing the game without any facts, then I make sure to point out the flaws in their argument. Which I think I've done quite well. . I get a little tired of reading "FAILSTO" or "no interiors" in every thread by the same posters. If I come off strong it's because it has become a daily occurance on this website and a few of them try to pull the same garbage on the STO website before they get banned. If you go to the offficial website you will see that I have many good discussions with people there on many different features that might not be in the game. The difference between there and here is that posters like Starbuck don't last on a well moderated site because they are incapable of having discussion without throwing insults. I hope you choose one day to go to the official site if you are not already there because you seem like someone who can have a conversation without flaming.
And as I've stated, I have no problem with people bringing up concerns with the game. But when it turns into trashing the game without any facts, then I make sure to point out the flaws in their argument. Which I think I've done quite well. . I get a little tired of reading "FAILSTO" or "no interiors" in every thread by the same posters. If I come off strong it's because it has become a daily occurance on this website and a few of them try to pull the same garbage on the STO website before they get banned. If you go to the offficial website you will see that I have many good discussions with people there on many different features that might not be in the game. The difference between there and here is that posters like Starbuck don't last on a well moderated site because they are incapable of having discussion without throwing insults. I hope you choose one day to go to the official site if you are not already there because you seem like someone who can have a conversation without flaming.
True enough, too many folk attacking the world 'cos its not their favourite colour; I'd sooner have a world with a shoddy colour scheme than be floating in a vacuum. I may pop over to the forums now and again, but I'm prone to being dragged into too many debates and would sooner skim the surface of several games for now... Even if the most common thread is "troll v fan", it just means I have fewer demands for my attention :)
Just read the blog from Craig Zinkievich, only limited info but it sounds good (and repeats what has been posted in this thread), they want to keep non-captain roles open for a possible future update... lets hope they get the chance.
Ship interiors? Seriously, that matters to you? Other than as a place to repel boarding action, I cannot possibly see a real use for them. What're you going to do? Wander around and go wow, look at the bland, sterile hallways where nothing interesting happens? Damn near everything took place on the bridge/engineering levels, and guess what they were doing on those levels. FLYING A DAMN SHIP. Everything else took place on the ground, or during briefings, etc.
Holodecks, however, might be entertaining. Player created simulations with a level designer/map downloading similar to WC III perhaps?
To those of you who want to have your specialized classes so they can go fook off with minigames. What did these special officers do that was so interesting? Sit in the medbay and scan/hypospray people? Sit in engineering yelling we're about to blow up if I don't press this button? Sit at the tactical station and press fire? Pull some new **** out of their a** to give shields an extra 5% by playing around with some gadget on the engineering core?
Seriously, what the h*** are you going to do as part of a player crew? The ship is ran by a damn computer for the most part. I never caught myself thinking wow, watch Geordi re-align the deflector plate, I wish I could do that. It's a game, It's supposed to be fun and entertaining. Not STO:Even More Boring than EVE(which for those of you who dont know, has been called an interactive screen saver.)
If it was anything like Star Trek, the game would press A to win because they frakking did in the series.
As for no combat in the series....Joe blow got jumped by Klingons all the time. Red shirts died constantly. Derelict ships and conflict happened on a regular basis. Just not Picard because he was the main character. Guess what? You're playing Joe Blow.
If you want to play an mmo where you wander around and talk to npc's all day...I don't know what's wrong with you. It'd get just as boring as pve combat, just as fast when you run out of new kinds of missions to do. MMO's are about socialization with real people. Without socialization, pvp, etc, MMO's suck. Completely, totally suck. Even the crafters need people to sell to.
As far as away missions go, the company stated at some point that you can bring players with you on away missions if I'm not mistaken.
And I dont believe it's all going to be about pvp. There'll be science vessels, production, etc. With any luck, it'll be something like EVE, but more entertaining, with more things to do, more interesting combat, etc. And more mission types, EVE sucks for missions.