Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 91
09-11-2008, 03:48 PM
Whenever I watch the Star Trek shows there is almost always some form of fight going on be it ship combat or phaser combat. I think most casual fans of the Trek series are going to want to play for that aspect, but it doesn't necessarily mean its going to be an all combat game. Will there be a focus on it? That's what I'm not sure about. I'm reserving judgment until more information is released.

I do like that they are putting time into combat systems because that's one of the main problems I had with EvE Online. It's shallow combat system left much to be desired, requiring no skill or just buttloads of time to achieve anything combat worthy.

I don't know how people can say combat was never a focus in Star Trek when the entire series has several episodes tied to someone shooting something.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 92
09-11-2008, 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dustnite View Post
Whenever I watch the Star Trek shows there is almost always some form of fight going on be it ship combat or phaser combat. I think most casual fans of the Trek series are going to want to play for that aspect, but it doesn't necessarily mean its going to be an all combat game. Will there be a focus on it? That's what I'm not sure about. I'm reserving judgment until more information is released.

I do like that they are putting time into combat systems because that's one of the main problems I had with EvE Online. It's shallow combat system left much to be desired, requiring no skill or just buttloads of time to achieve anything combat worthy.

I don't know how people can say combat was never a focus in Star Trek when the entire series has several episodes tied to someone shooting something.
DS9, voyager and Enterprise perhaps, but that wasn't so much the case with TNG and TOS, which represent the real "roots" of Star Trek, or as it boils down to, the Trek which Gene Roddenberry still had a hand of control over. Once he passed on, Trek became very combative, and drifted away from the original vision.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 93 nice
09-11-2008, 05:17 PM
sounds like an awesome game in the making. I would love to play this when it comes out. Im sick of the grind fests that are out there now and i dont care too much for the space mmo's out there. They all seem too pvp for my liking with no or little story element
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 94
09-11-2008, 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomRedshirt View Post
DS9, voyager and Enterprise perhaps, but that wasn't so much the case with TNG and TOS, which represent the real "roots" of Star Trek, or as it boils down to, the Trek which Gene Roddenberry still had a hand of control over. Once he passed on, Trek became very combative, and drifted away from the original vision.
Who decides what the real roots of Star Trek are? Is there a focus group hiding in your basement?

I mean TNG was leading up to the combative things we saw in the following Trek series and it showed other aspects of Star Trek. I personally love the Voyager series more than any other more for the trying to get home aspect than anything else.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 95
09-11-2008, 05:50 PM
I'm extremely satisfied with the Lead Designer Al Rivera. I think he has the requirements to take this game in new directions, well above his previous work in titles. An underdog for sure who I feel will get the job done above expectations.

Thanks for the article!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 96
09-11-2008, 06:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dustnite View Post
Who decides what the real roots of Star Trek are?
Are you serious?

I'm not even going to bother answering this, because any Trek fan can answer this.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 97
09-11-2008, 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomRedshirt View Post
Are you serious?

I'm not even going to bother answering this, because any Trek fan can answer this.
Not that you need to, that just proves you don't know what the hell your talking about then.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 98
09-11-2008, 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dustnite View Post
Not that you need to, that just proves you don't know what the hell your talking about then.
Oh really?

Who determines the roots of Trek? Simple. Gene Roddenberry.

TOS and TNG up to the time of his death. That is the roots of Star Trek. Period.

Everything that came after Gene's passing doesn't represent the roots. DS9 and Voyager was Rick Berman's vision of Trek, not Gene's. In fact, Gene wouldn't buy off on DS9 while he was alive because it was too dark, too gritty and wasn't the Trek he wanted to portray. So, when did DS9 go forward? Once Gene had passed, and wasn't there to object anymore.

So yes, I do know what the hell I'm talking about.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 99
09-11-2008, 06:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomRedshirt View Post
Oh really?

Who determines the roots of Trek? Simple. Gene Roddenberry.

TOS and TNG up to the time of his death. That is the roots of Star Trek. Period.

Everything that came after Gene's passing doesn't represent the roots. DS9 and Voyager was Rick Berman's vision of Trek, not Gene's. In fact, Gene wouldn't buy off on DS9 while he was alive because it was too dark, too gritty and wasn't the Trek he wanted to portray. So, when did DS9 go forward? Once Gene had passed, and wasn't there to object anymore.

So yes, I do know what the hell I'm talking about.
See that wasn't so hard to answer was it

So now that that's out in the open. If we're really looking at the spirit of Star Trek and not the creative control of Gene Roddenberry (which would be hard since he is not living anymore), what would we really be expecting out of this game?

Well rounded out combat, exploration, political intrigue, engaging storyline. These are all things people want, its just one piece of the puzzle. No need to take things entirely out of context.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 100
09-12-2008, 01:57 AM
I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that this game isn't just about Star Trek. It's about creating a great game to play. This might be someone's first introduction to Star Trek, Cryptic can't count on Roddenberry love to get them over the flaws as a game.
What you're asking of them is to write you a brand new Star Trek script for every single mission. That's not their job, and if it was, this game would never get made. Their job is to produce an enjoyable game with the right ships, the right visual appeal and the right atmosphere, so that as wide an audience as possible can enjoy the game as a game. It's then our duty as a community to give this game a Star Trek feel.

At the end of the day, Combat, and especially PvP, is a really fun experience for a lot of people, and not focusing on Starship Combat, which is not a particularly well-mined area of MMORPG's, would be a bone-head decision. I mean we're talking about a major selling point for the game here. I doubt they'll be able to do better than WoW, but Space Combat better than Eve? There's a pretty good chance that they'll at least be able to provide a different experience.
The number of fans who won't pick this up because the combat's a major point compared to the number won't pick it up if the combat's no fun is smaller by a factor of thousands.

But obviously, if you don't like combat, there is no reason for you to enter PvP areas. There's no reason for you to go on base assault missions. There are ALWAYS other things you can do instead.

Off the top of my head, here is a brilliant way to play the game as if you were in the TOS era:
This will be a massive galaxy, with a huge amount of content.
Explore areas where the PvPer's aren't interested in going. Spend your time on self-designed missions, where you produce a list of all the planets, their life-forms, and the in-game missions ("research opportunities") available there, exactly as if you were on one of those sector mapping missions that are always getting interrupted by planets exploding or Q turning up for a pint of shandy. You might not get the fanciest ships that way, but maybe that shouldn't matter. Certainly it's realistic, in that the way a captain makes his name is through risky strategies. That's how Kirk and Picard got the Enterprise, and that's how Sisko made Captain. Playing it safe and just doing mapping is how "Tapestry Picard" ended up stuck never progressing into command.

Here's another one:
Obviously, there are going to be many, many ships. You could do R&D on these ships. Work out what works best under what circumstances. Try and find exploits in the game engine to produce odd effects, as if you were researching new ways to "warp subspace". Research all the different aliens out there, and as that's customisable, that'll be really interesting to people thinking about designing their own race.

If you don't want the game to be about combat, what do you want the game's killer hook to be instead? Because chances are, even if they don't include it, with a little ingenuity, you can create it yourself. Incidentally, "It's Star Trek" is not a killer hook. That line of thinking is what makes shoddy games that only sell to the die-hard fans. A killer hook is something that makes a game great, no matter where it's set.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:20 PM.