Trending Games | World of Warcraft | Guild Wars 2 | Pirate101 | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,900,831 Users Online:0
Games:753  Posts:6,270,574
Cryptic Studios | Play Now
MMORPG | Genre:Sci-Fi | Status:Final  (rel 02/02/10)  | Pub:Perfect World Entertainment
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Hybrid | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC Mac | Out of date info? Let us know!

Star Trek Online Forum » Perpetual Studios Version Discussion » DoughtNut Ships, Killer Tribbles, 2D space travel, PE people are clowns. hehe

3 Pages « 1 2 3 » Search
44 posts found
  Xris375

Novice Member

Joined: 6/26/07
Posts: 1031

11/12/07 2:47:15 PM#21

Sooooo are we still believing that PE fired people just before G&H were to launch "to make the team better" or were they actually lying to their potential customers ? Spin me once, shame on you, spin me twice, shame on me.

---
And when we got more women on the team, it was like ‘No, no, no. We need puppies and horses in there.’ ”
John Smedley, SOE

  Graff

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/07
Posts: 95

11/12/07 4:52:20 PM#22

Yes, PE actually said they were designing doughnut ships.

Add a little context, John Eaves, an illustrator and designer who created ship and prop designs for DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis, said he was designing ships with different saucer shapes, and in one example he used the donut metaphor to describe one of them, in a podcast interview. Point being, it was a Star Trek production veteran who spoke about designing that ship and relishing the opportunity to do so.

 

Daron Stinnett thinks STO should not be for Trek fans, but for MMORPG fans

You talk about spin in your post and often sling accusations around, but then you purposely misrepresent comments and choose not to include further clarification, such as Daron pointing out shortly after the interview was published that he meant the game will not just appeal to Star Trek fans but fans of the MMORPG genre too. Whether you believe him or not, you can't accuse others of spin when you take a non-impartial position in reporting what has been said, being selective as to enhance your negativity.

either WoW fans or preteen dweebs

Just what are you doing on this site if you think that MMORPG fans are this? What a dismissive and disrespectful statement, I havent come to expect any less but the gall is still sad. It says a lot of the attitude here, though. PE are building an MMORPG, you hate MMORPGs and the 'WoW fans or preteen dweebs' who play them.

But Daron laments, there was no outcry over Elite Force or Bridge Commander being action-orietned

Does he? Where does he lament this concept, link?

Perpetual Entertainment should be renamed PERPETUAL SPIN.

You do seem to be an expert, not a week goes by without another rant and negative spin thread from the multiple personalities of warrior29.

As for doughnut ships, those were PE's words, not mine. They never produced any artwork for their idea, which seems to make little sense. They basically want to make the centers of saucers hollow or flat. The only benefit of such a starship design would be less ship interior space, which makes sense since PE is too stupid to put them in for player ships.

Well, again, they were the words of Veteran Star Trek Production Illustrator and Designer, John Eaves. In turn, your viewpoint is rather narrow. Are the designers of every single Starfleet ship 'too stupid' not to have made them cubes, since the only benefit of a ship that isn't a cube is less interior space, right? Never mind that little thing called aesthetics, though.

 

have hyped up STO beyond belief

No, they haven't. As you've been so keen on pointing out for the last 12 months, warrior. They've been pretty damned silent about it, you think 20 or so interviews across three years and some concept art and a few engine detail shots is hype beyond belief? Right.

To date we have been told that there will be no PLAYER ship interiors.

I agree and have been annoyed that they have sidestepped the question of PSIs. They have not though definitively ruled them out, as such you challenge him to provide a link, can you provide one to support the above statement?

Suricata, I hope you did not come down here again to try to get another thread locked, because it threatens the rosy image of PE?

Just an observation, but I seem to remember that last time he came here, it was after you started a thread to bash the site he is a part of, quoted him specifically and called him some fierce names, and then trolled everything he had to say when he did post here? 

Answer this, why is PE so SILENT right now about STO?

Because they have no obligation not to be, whatsoever? Anything they've said about their game so far has been at their courtesy. 

 

 

 

 

 

  User Deleted
11/12/07 6:46:36 PM#23
Originally posted by GrumpyMel

Guys, I once again re-iterate. What makes you assume that PE "decided" anything about releasing G&H?

There is nothing to indicate they had any more of a "decision" to make then when you and I "decide" we must obey the laws of gravity.

When a project gets to the phase they were at with G&H and a company just decides to shelve it on it's own..... you're going to have investors screaming lawsuit.

Investors don't make a dime of thier money back until a product releases and starts pulling in revenue. There is no way those sort of people fork over cash if the developer gets to yank the plug at the last minute when they feel like it. Contracts like that just don't get signed. That's not how business works.

I don't have any insider info, but the only way what happaned makes any sense is if PE's investors for G&H bailed on them before the final round of funding... and PE spent itself dry trying to find alternate funding and failed to secure it. They didn't have enough cash reserve to pay for Production costs.... so they had to shelve the project and can most of the staff that was assigned to it.

Try to spin it any way you like, but there is no way what happaned with G&H comes out looking good for PE. Companies don't just decide to shelve projects out of concern for gamers pocket books.  If they do, they end up in front of judges trying to explain why they took investors money, and didn't deliver anything in return. That's reality.


And if the game was shelved because their fully content complete game couldn't get the interest of other investors, that says even more about the crappy game than anything else.

  User Deleted
11/12/07 9:33:26 PM#24

 

 

This is all too funny. I can see it now... gazing in to the future....

The critics of PE, myself included, will continue to grumble about PE even if they do manage to launch STO.

While at the same time, those that are cheering for PE will continue to do so, much like the few Auto Assault die-hards that were so vocal at the end, no matter how the game turns out.

Its obvious that no one is going to change anyones mind on the subject of PE's ability to create MMO, but PE.

I say they can't do it, others say they can. We'll all find out eventually, if we don't start dying off from old age waiting on PE to actually produce a product.

  Coward92

Novice Member

Joined: 10/23/07
Posts: 39

REDRUM!

 
OP  11/12/07 11:51:19 PM#25

My god, you should go to STO-NET right now, PE just posted their latest dev blog. It consists of nothing but a grade school level question and answer session about favorite Trek trivia.

Seriously, the Q and A could be taken out of a grade school yesarbook. Any insight into actual development in the DEV BLOG? NOPE. Any screenshots? NOPE. Just another vague concept art.

Yet, the STO-NET people are all fanning over it. Jeez. there was a time, long ago, when gamers on STO-NET actually received meaningful info from PE and there was intelligent discussion.

It seems PE has created a cult, a dumbed-down PE worship cult. It is sickening.

Just look at Infinity Ward's COD 4 sequel. Now THAT'S a professional product and organization. Indeed, these PE people are clowns and STO-NET are pandering to them.

REDRUM!!

  Graff

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/07
Posts: 95

11/13/07 5:03:47 AM#26

Daron has roundly dismissed the interests of the community and as a former WoW developer and a self-admitted fan of it, Daron is aiming for the WoW audience.

as a former WoW developer? Check your facts, warrior.

 

 

  Coman

Advanced Member

Joined: 8/29/04
Posts: 1956

11/13/07 5:27:03 AM#27

This may sound wierd to many, but I infact gained GREAT respect for PE. Duo to the fact they canceld G&H. How many companies would have done this? Almost none, most would have either finished it as an crappy product or released it directly and milk it dry.

PE however decided to close down the project and make a million dollar loss they will not get back from that project. It is like an chees factory trowing away million dollars worth of chees, becouse it does not taste as he wants it to taste, He could sell it and gain some from it still if he wanted.

On ST: O I simply can not put my finger on this game. I am not really much of an star trek fan, but defently looking for an good space MMO, like Freelancer and X1-3. If it has an star trek IP that would be fine (actualy I like the background of Star Trek). So I really hope it will come to somewhere close to these games. Shamefully though you can not walk in the ship, I was actualy looking forward to this as this would extreamly increase roleplay. However this is not the end, look at EvE. It does not even have the insides of space stations yet, but it is popular.

ST: O has an potentiol of becomeing something great, they already have an good and solid background, including races and stories and they aint a lot of Space MMOs on the market and the market could use an new Space MMO.

  shakey2005

Novice Member

Joined: 1/31/05
Posts: 60

Apparently I''m a bad man because AIDS is abundant around the world.

11/13/07 6:04:17 AM#28

Today I'm going to complain about flying cars. Sure, they haven't been made yet, but I deserve the right to complain and say they'll suck.

Down with flying cars. I know nothing about you, but death to you all.

  Xris375

Novice Member

Joined: 6/26/07
Posts: 1031

11/13/07 8:32:54 AM#29
Originally posted by shakey2005

Today I'm going to complain about flying cars. Sure, they haven't been made yet, but I deserve the right to complain and say they'll suck.

Down with flying cars. I know nothing about you, but death to you all.

Well, actually flying cars will be the death of us all if they fall from the sky!

---
And when we got more women on the team, it was like ‘No, no, no. We need puppies and horses in there.’ ”
John Smedley, SOE

  Dracus

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/04
Posts: 1451

"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars."
- Brian Littrell

11/13/07 9:40:52 AM#30

Originally posted by Coman

This may sound wierd to many, but I infact gained GREAT respect for PE. Duo to the fact they canceld G&H. How many companies would have done this? Almost none, most would have either finished it as an crappy product or released it directly and milk it dry.

That is because the money bucket went dry for PE.  As others have stated here, if no other investors were to continue funding Gods and Heroes, that should tell people something...

Look past the spin.

And that is why...

Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.

  Dracus

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/04
Posts: 1451

"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars."
- Brian Littrell

11/13/07 9:43:24 AM#31
Originally posted by Keogh

This is all too funny. I can see it now... gazing in to the future....

...

I say they can't do it, others say they can. We'll all find out eventually, if we don't start dying off from old age waiting on PE to actually produce a product.

And what would be funny, is if STO is canceled or bombs, some of the Pro-PE supporters will then say that the reason of failure was due to the negative people out there...

And that is why...

Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.

  Ghosthauk

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/10/04
Posts: 122

11/13/07 10:03:08 AM#32

Originally posted by Suricata

 Yes, GnH failed, but for all intents and purposes, the game was complete, does this not show that PE are capable of atleast making an MMO?

And while we are truly proud of and pleased with what we have created in Gods & Heroes, we also realize that achieving the level of quality and polish that we are committed to will take a significant investment.

 

From the front message on the godsandheroes.com page. It wasn't complete, they still needed significant investment to complete it. If it was even close to completion they would have released it and at least got back some money for their investors. I can only think of a couple MMO's that were canceled in the late stages, Mythica by Microsoft(moneybags), and Imperator by Mythic(to make Warhammer). Most companies will release a game

The investors for GnH pulled out of the project, and PE couldn't secure any more funds to complete the game which needed at least another six months(which is what they said a year ago as well I believe heh), that much is obvious from the letter. Who can blame investors too after seeing what happened to Vanguard this year.

I know you guys want to be eternally optimistic about STO, but could you not come in and try to spin stuff about PE. Some of us don't read sto.net anymore for a reason and it's so we don't have to listen to the stuff you mods like to spin in defense of PE in almost every thread. I don't agree with a good number of misconceptions on this boards either, some people just go far overboard, but at least some are trying to be realistic about the situation.

Does GnH show they can make a MMO? Yeah it does, albeit an incomplete one.

Does GnH show they can make a top notch STO at this point, much less even release it? No, not really.

 

Personal ships will have limited interiors, as in they will probably have the bridge, but for those wanting a Star Trek experiance with interiors, they will be there, so to say they won't be is just spreading falsehoods.

So have they come out and stated that personal ships will have bridge interiors then? Or are you just contributing to the falsehood with your own? Please link wherever it was stated, a good number of us interested in personal ship interiors would be happy to have this misconception cleared up. Thanks.

  Suricata

Novice Member

Joined: 10/25/04
Posts: 89

Omnes ad unum

11/13/07 11:41:32 AM#33

Was from the Jeuxonline interview, now I look at it, it looks more like it will be like a bridge commander view, however, as pointed out the the STOgamona inteview, the dev team said they would look at player ship interiors once they'd finished the hub ships. Anyway, the part of teh article was :-

[JOL] According to recent interview and QnA, when you describe a space combat in STO, it seems the gameplay will be more like what we have seen in Star Trek Legacy (exterior view only) than in "Bridge Commander" for example (interior and/or exterior views), Am I right?

[Daron Stinnett] Gameplay is RPG style on ground and in space, which is a first for Star Trek gaming.  So it is hard to draw direct comparisons to any existing Star Trek game.  When it comes to your viewpoint while flying your ship, I would say that it will be similar to Bridge Commander and Legacy.  While Bridge Commander had an interior view available, most players preferred the exterior (tactical) view for combat operations.  Like Bridge Commander, we may offer an interior view, but we expect most players will choose the exterior viewpoint for improved situational awareness.

I'm sorry some people here don't like me posting on this site (to the point they send me 'very' offensive and vulgar private messages), I'm not purposely trying to spin any information, but when people make threads stateing things as fact, then I feel its only right to join the conversation and show the other side of the coin, more so when the 'facts' are speculative.

---- "Fate protects fools, little children and ships named Enterprise" ----

  Dracus

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/04
Posts: 1451

"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars."
- Brian Littrell

11/13/07 12:56:32 PM#34

Originally posted by Suricata
...

I'm sorry some people here don't like me posting on this site (to the point they send me 'very' offensive and vulgar private messages), ...


Don't apologize for stating your point of view (since it isn't offensive) and just ignore PM's, I do.  You'll live a lot longer.

That is what makes MMORPG.Com an interesting place, get many different view points.

For Pro-PE opinions, that is what Star Trek Online. net is for, and if I want harsh criticism, then I go to F13.net.

 

As for PSI's, Daron has also evaded the questions as well, going with, "There will be plenty of interiors" and to the effect of, "This is all I am going to say in mater."  Given the new time and budget constraints, PSI's are going to be off the table for launch.  Now if they are to be made available sometime after launch, that's fine.  PSI's could be bundled as an expansion pack or as a mega-patch of sorts.  But to state nothing or evade the question, implies that PSI's will not be used at all.

And that is why...

Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.

  Ghosthauk

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/10/04
Posts: 122

11/13/07 1:10:04 PM#35

It's fine if you want to come in and defend sto.net after someone comes in and bashes it, unfortunately we have a few people here who keep insisting on doing that.

My problem here is you're coming in here and trying to dispute someone elses opinion on the no personal ship interiors by saying they are in fact in, when the real answer to that really isn't out yet. Even in the interview, the answer was they will be doing exterior view that both Bridge Commander and Legacy had, and they "may" offer the interior view of Bridge Commander. Everyone is throwing around their speculative facts, makes it worse when mods try to dispute people's views with their own speculative facts. So when you come in here and claim that they "will" rather than "may" have interiors, that's easily seen as spin.

The only real true Fact is this, interiors for personal ships have not been confirmed to be in, they're still a "maybe", it can go either way down the road, so neither side is right or wrong at this time.

As for the people that keep saying interiors are in because Hubs will have them, the issue people have is with personal ships, not the hubs. Hubs will function like cities in other games, they are expected to have interiors. People want interiors on their personal ships, they are waiting on the definitive answer on whether they will be in or not, even if it's just the bridge. Star Trek ships are huge and a lot of focus of the shows and movies take place on these ships, people want to experience that as well in the mmog, they don't want them reduced to just functioning as mounts. If you can't understand this, then please just ignore the issue and move along.

 

  User Deleted
11/13/07 1:16:10 PM#36

Originally posted by Dracus

 

Don't apologize for stating your point of view (since it isn't offensive) and just ignore PM's, I do.  You'll live a lot longer.

 

That is what makes MMORPG.Com an interesting place, get many different view points.

For Pro-PE opinions, that is what Star Trek Online. net is for, and if I want harsh criticism, then I go to F13.net.

 

As for PSI's, Daron has also evaded the questions as well, going with, "There will be plenty of interiors" and to the effect of, "This is all I am going to say in mater."  Given the new time and budget constraints, PSI's are going to be off the table for launch.  Now if they are to be made available sometime after launch, that's fine.  PSI's could be bundled as an expansion pack or as a mega-patch of sorts.  But to state nothing or evade the question, implies that PSI's will not be used at all.

 

A major caveat should be added to your hypothetical STO expansion. First, the core game that they launch with must be well received and generate enough long term subscriptions to justify an expansion.

  Graff

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/07
Posts: 95

11/13/07 1:57:15 PM#37

Seems pointless not to include at the very least a bridge or such with functioning consoles for those who want the choice to control a multi-crewed ship in that manner, I can't see any single reason not to do that, technical or otherwise and I hope they do- it's a base at least, as others have said, they can always expand on it in expansions. I still think there are certain people who wouldnt be satisfied with that, but it would be a step in the right direction.

 

  Seloth

Novice Member

Joined: 1/24/06
Posts: 388

11/13/07 3:08:34 PM#38

Originally posted by Suricata

[JOL] According to recent interview and QnA, when you describe a space combat in STO, it seems the gameplay will be more like what we have seen in Star Trek Legacy (exterior view only) than in "Bridge Commander" for example (interior and/or exterior views), Am I right?

[Daron Stinnett] Gameplay is RPG style on ground and in space, which is a first for Star Trek gaming.  So it is hard to draw direct comparisons to any existing Star Trek game.  When it comes to your viewpoint while flying your ship, I would say that it will be similar to Bridge Commander and Legacy.  While Bridge Commander had an interior view available, most players preferred the exterior (tactical) view for combat operations.  Like Bridge Commander, we may offer an interior view, but we expect most players will choose the exterior viewpoint for improved situational awareness.

Sir:

The reply here goes to the core of my personal problem with thier vision of the game. Unless you are talking about a shuttle or other small craft, the comment about  "when you are flying YOUR ship," is a huge problem for me.  They are missing out on the whole concept of star trek and the vistas that are open for role playing and player interactions, and player dependency. We are talking about STARSHIPS, not mounts with photons. Okay maybe they are thinking that way.

Again I stress personally here, it is a ship, it has a crew, it has a micro world inside. Why do they think everyone should be a captain? A captain of a vessel should be a career path just doctor, engineer, marine. How can they explain reasonably why/how star fleet issues a ship to a doctor to command?

They really do not seem able to get past this "well we have to make space an arcade game" mindset. I really have in my minds eye when i read thier concepts that i am NOT boldly going where no man has gone before. I am instead getting on my mount and riding over to outpost kbob that has a yellow ? over it to get a quest and then calling all my buds to form up this small armada that darron refered to, to able over the planet okaycorral so that each of us can beam down, well save that engineer that we keep arround to fix the armada.

Where is the dramatic tension of entering an unknown sector when everyone has a ship and are flying enmass about? Ship kirk to ship spock: so see anything? ship spock to ship kirk: nope i will move a bit more left just in case, might have ship mc coy go right. ship kirk to ship mccoy: hey move right a bit more. ship mccoy to ship kirk: sure why not can nto heal anything till we land any how.

This is Star Trek?

  Dracus

Novice Member

Joined: 7/14/04
Posts: 1451

"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars."
- Brian Littrell

11/13/07 4:42:00 PM#39

Originally posted by Keogh


A major caveat should be added to your hypothetical STO expansion. First, the core game that they launch with must be well received and generate enough long term subscriptions to justify an expansion.

  I do concur.  Though I believe STO will launch, but how well it will be received, I'll put it this way; even with two choices:

I see the train a comin',
it's rollin' round the bend,
and there ain't been laid railways since no one knows when...

or

I was pullin' up a hill that's known as the Devil's Crest,
haulin' 36 ton on a run called the Nitro Express.

And that is why...

Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.

  kjm2006

Novice Member

Joined: 12/01/06
Posts: 90

11/13/07 5:16:31 PM#40

I'm not going to write ST:O off just yet, gonna wait till I see it in beta 1st before I make a choice as to play or not play the game.

POTBS username:yohorumrunner
Guild:St George Squadron

3 Pages « 1 2 3 » Search