Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
So I was bored and decided to play Star Trek Voyager Elite Force, and as i was strolling through voyagers corridors i realized that, even though the people were kinda blocky, a game released back in 2000 has a ship interior more authentic then every ship interior except for the constitution class on star trek online, this is not good. i mean its bad enough he intrepid class bridge from the c-store is completely wrong, but with the exception of the belfast and constitution class interior, the bridge is the only thing I've seen differ in ship interiors. i think a shuttlebay where you can use a system similar to the trophy system in the mess hall to display your shuttles, and a cargo bay, and that the rest of each ship should atleast slightly resemble the bridge they belong to. AND FIX THE INTREPID BRIDGE1
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
02-19-2012, 10:42 AM
We've been waiting for a less laughable interior for a long time. The paid one they just released is not it (to me) even remotely. I don't think this will ever happen.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
02-19-2012, 10:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curs0r View Post
We've been waiting for a less laughable interior for a long time. The paid one they just released is not it (to me) even remotely. I don't think this will ever happen.
i think its unfair, i mean i ould be using an intrepid lass starship with small layout and it still feels like im in a starbase when walking down the hallways, the only good interior is constitution and i havent bought the belfast so i wouldnt know about that one
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
02-19-2012, 10:58 AM
When it comes right down to it, I'd rather the graphics folks concentrated on new missions and new ships, rather than interiors.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
02-19-2012, 11:01 AM
They claimed for a long time it was a camera thing, then the TOS set came out and blew that up. Since then, not a sound. Personally I'd like them to fix them, for those who RP its just annoying as hell to have a lounge the size of Texas on a Defiant.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
02-19-2012, 11:05 AM
ironically the've taken away all functionality to visiting your bridge ( not that there was a lot before) so without even having to go there to replay missions, the only reason to visit is ti RP....

I'd rather they add functionality to the interiors first, then work on the aesthetics secondly.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
02-19-2012, 11:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by breakout View Post
...I'd rather they add functionality to the interiors first, then work on the aesthetics secondly.
In a typical game-design workflow, the base model has to be crafted first before function tags can be placed on the map. Therefore, aesthetics must be the first step. Once functionality is added, there's no going backwards without starting over from scratch.

Unfortunately, Cryptic lacks either the ability or the will to make it right. It seems we're stuck with what we have - - which is why I don't buy anything. Cryptic continues to release poor representations of famous sets and locations, despite 700 hours or television reference and 2 years of mediochre reviews from the very customers they're trying to please. Sales could be SO much higher if they just took a moment and understood their audience's wishes.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
02-19-2012, 11:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by General_Devon View Post
So I was bored and decided to play Star Trek Voyager Elite Force, and as i was strolling through voyagers corridors i realized that, even though the people were kinda blocky, a game released back in 2000 has a ship interior more authentic then every ship interior except for the constitution class on star trek online, this is not good.
You've just revived a very old debate, where Dstahl called me a troll for posting this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40d-SpClc5Q

That game is now over a decade old, although these sets were made mid-2000s with a ugc tool 8000x more powerful than the Foundry.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
02-19-2012, 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkfat View Post
You've just revived a very old debate, where Dstahl called me a troll for posting this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40d-SpClc5Q

That game is now over a decade old, although these sets were made mid-2000s with a ugc tool 8000x more powerful than the Foundry.
How dare you shed light on their inadequacies?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
02-19-2012, 11:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkjedi View Post
In a typical game-design workflow, the base model has to be crafted first before function tags can be placed on the map. Therefore, aesthetics must be the first step. Once functionality is added, there's no going backwards without starting over from scratch.

Unfortunately, Cryptic lacks either the ability or the will to make it right. It seems we're stuck with what we have - - which is why I don't buy anything. Cryptic continues to release poor representations of famous sets and locations, despite 700 hours or television reference and 2 years of mediochre reviews from the very customers they're trying to please. Sales could be SO much higher if they just took a moment and understood their audience's wishes.
Agreed.

Interesting: "It seems we're stuck with what we have" - This is a phrase dropped by the Devs, e.g. Tumerboy, more than once^^
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 01:59 PM.