Star Trek and its vision created by Gene in many ways is far ahead of our time. So I believe that we haven't yet truly grasped the morals, ethics and philosophies of Star Trek. People are trying to understand and have noble ideas and concepts about Star Trek. All this looks great in fictional stories but we are still primitive and savage race and we have yet to discover what something like prime directive from Star Trek truly is.
150-200 years ago we had slavery in the US, in terms of the timeline it's like it was almost yesterday. There is a saying "that before you learn how to run you must first learn how to walk and then learn to run. ST prime directive is like sprinting and we still haven't learn how to walk. So we still have a long time to go to really understand and then to put it to practical use. That is if it's ever going to happen, because we may not even exist in the future.
Going back to STO I would enjoy diplomacy based on or similar to what we've seen in star trek movies and tv series. However, I don't think that many players would like it as those diplomatic mission would have to be really complicated. I don't even think that STO game engine is capable of having complex diplomatic missions like that.
I will attempt to create more advanced diplomatic missions with STO Foundry. But I don't think I can have multiple wining and failing objectives that would still give you rewards whether you fail or not. I'd like to see missions in STO that despite your failure you would still go on but with consequences due to your failure. Like in real life we make mistakes and we go on, perhaps wiser perhaps not but we don't fail our lives because of that or we don't get to do the same exact situation over and over again. I know it's a game but I like the concept of karma and something players see in games like Fallout3. That the world in general is seeing the player based on his/her actions.
PS. In conclusion to prime directive I'd say mind your business Mr.Spock
Let me begin by stating that you put that across very well, and thank you for your opinion. Now, to mine...
As sfdebris (the reviewer) stated, the Prime Directive isn't the problem. That in fact, the Prime Directive is a good thing. However, in practice is where it fails. There are some Captains, such as Jean-Luc Picard or James T. Kirk, who always chose to ignore the Prime Directive because the situation called for such an action as "tainting" a Pre-Warp Civilization necessary for that Civilization's survival. It is important to note that it was Gene at the Helm with those two Captains. It seemed to me, that Gene viewed the Prime Directive for what it really is... A Moral Incentive.
It seems that Janeway, and Archer both treated the Prime Directive as a Sacred Proclamation that should NEVER be disobeyed. Which made whenever they did disobey it a real farce. In the examples given, Janeway seemed to be okay with letting an entire civilization die, but not allowing another civilization to be extorted or enslaved. It seemed as though they broke the Prime Directive when they felt like it, not when it was logical or applicable.
So, as sfdebris stated, it's not the Prime Directive that's the problem it's the execution.
As far as STO is considered. I would love to see more diplomatic missions in the fashion in which you suggested. If we had more missions like that it would give more weight and substance in our roles as Captains.
I think the prime directive needs a bit of a revision in of itself. To hammer out the details of what it should actually stand for. As it stands, it is very unmoral on many occasions, and even worse, it doesn't apply to civilians or non federation entities. When Jane way removed the two ferangies from the pre-warp civilization, she actually broke the prime directive, becasue the prime directive prevents the federation from actually getting involved even if others have gotten involved. To make matters worse, the prime directive prevents the federation from lending a helping hand to those in need, or when they can do something to stop a catastrophe. And not becasue of the moral rights or wrongs, but becasue of the fear of changing some"grand plan" that might exist.
What the prime directive should stand for.
*do not introduce advance knowledge or technology to a pre-warp civilization, or tell said civilization how they should act and work. Minimize cultural contamination when possible, until that culture shows an interest in other cultures, and seeks it on their own accords.
*Do not get involved in the politics of other cultures, nor get involved in their conflicts. offer medical and relief aid is acceptable, unless such aid will bring the federation into the conflict.
*do not give federation technology to any one outside of the federation or it's trade allies.
*Do not impose federation beliefs on other cultures outside of the Federation. Also, do not get involved in the internal workings of planetary government out side of the federations members.
*Offer aid to all those who request it, or need it, so long as the previous tenets are not not broken in the process.
*Above all else, do what is morally right. If a captain has doubts to the moral involvement in a situation, Star fleet command should be contacted for advisement on the correct decision to make.
Like SF Debris said. If you see a child locking in a burning car, would you try to help them, or stand by and watch? and if you stand by and watch, would you tell your friends that it was the only moral thing to do? Hero's of any story should do the right thing, and standing by while a civilization they could help is wiped out, simple becasue a piece of doctrine says so, is morally repugnant, and turns our hero's into the villains.
I think that is why the prime directive is broken so often by some of the greatest captains. It was not done properly,and it's implementation is even worse.