Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
03-08-2010, 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tcsola2003
All model changes can be explained in-story as is: It's been 40 years and redesigns are possible/inevitable (and yes, that is a valid excuse snarky comment earlier aside). Don't forget that what you're flying isn't the Enterprise-D. Considering that we can mix and match colors/parts so that our Galaxy looks different from someone else's Galaxy, who's to say that the design differences were just an old trend that they shifted out of?

Besides, saying that they're ignoring the problem assumes that they view it as one. The majority of the players wouldn't even notice the small nuances, so even if it was classified as a ticket, it's definitely going to be a very low priority one.
Yeah?
So the Neck sticking up above the Saucer was by intent? Just like the pylons jutting below the secondary hull? And the windows and meshes not ... meshing well, that's standard on the 30 year refit right?

If those were all crisp we'd probably all resign ourselves to, "guess this is what a galaxy looks like in the 25th century" as you suggest we do.

But those clear errors are there, right in front of us, in one of the most recognizable ships to ever bear the name Enterprise. That tells me, and clearly others, that this model didn't get much more than a first pass. That fact is a red flag. Had it gotten a second or third, those OBVIOUS errors would not be there. And since that second pass never came, it's not hard to believe that other oddities are only in because the artist didn't have the time to go back, revise, resculp and add the things he/she knew were iconic to a Galaxy.

Pasting in some torpedo tubes onto the side of the deflector dish instead of having a legit forward torpedo tube could be a 25th century refit... but could also have been not having time to go back and add it onto the neck.

I can totally imagine someone saying to the artist,
"When is that Galaxy gonna get in, management wants to see it."
"Still need to tweak a bunch of things sir"
"Just get it in, you can touch it up later..."

So the neck got hastily drawn up, the aft torpedo area received little love and poor artist got assigned other pending tasks and the Galaxy stayed in that state until the end because it was "good enough"

If you think they sat down in a meeting and said,
"So lets talk about what the Galaxy will look like 30+ years post Picard"
I think you're kidding yourself.
There was no moment where they said,
"You know, to hell with that impule drive sitting comfortably at the corner of the neck and the hull, it's should totally be an extruded (____) and place it higher up."
At no point were they discusing the Iconic main phaser array and conclude,
"Yeah, let's get rid of the end point for it and make it the same color as the hull."
Nor did they, after debate, conclude
"Let's not have any other phaser arrays on the Galaxy at all."

It was rushed. It's incomplete. The obvious errors are proof of that. And the lack of / erroneous details are a symptom of that lack of completion, not a stylistic decision.

If I walk up to cryptic today, and they are fully honest with me...
...if I ask, "With all the time and all the money, is this how you see the Galaxy portrayed in the 25th Century?"
The answer will be no. They'd want everything we've pointed out so far... and perhaps some REAL stylistic points to be added with purposeful intent...

Saying, "It's a refit, that's how they look now" is a lazy cop-out and everyone knows it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
03-08-2010, 10:50 AM
Quote:
I've always said before that catering to fans, gamers, sci-fi, whatever, is never a good thing as even if you get 99% of something right, you'll still have the hardcore base whining about how they missed that 1%.
If it was only 1% i would be happy and never say anything, because i could not stop myself from playing! ...but somehow i spend more time in the forums then in the game.

This game does not fully satisfy as an MMO and it does barely fill the lack of any Star Trek games at all for the past few years.

But beeing a Nerd and a Fanboy i'll stick to it until the end, hoping it get's better somehow... (or until my one year sub runs out and i decide it did not get better)
without constructive criticism things will never change, and you Sir are only pessimistic, not constructive.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ProfessorSTAFF
If you want to talk accuracy, the ship shouldn't be allowed to be called 'Primal Fear.'
Whats wrong with the name?
i have a
USS HammerFall,
USS Sonata Arcitca
and now USS Primal Fear
next one may be USS Iron Maiden or some other Metal Band... at least im not doing the 25th USS Saratoga :p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
03-08-2010, 10:57 AM
1. The model parts that're sticking out weirdly (at least some of them) is a result of allowing us to swap parts in and out. That said, I didn't have a problem with this part of the OP. I was going to write that on my earlier post but I forgot.

2. The window thing isn't just the Galaxy's problem. If they do get around to fixing that, they'll probably have to change it for the other ships too at the same time if only for the sake of other ship fans not whining

3. Your entire thing about it not having anything more than a first pass may be true, but you don't really have anything to back it up other than conjecture.

4. "At no point were they discusing the Iconic main phaser array and conclude"
The only iconic thing about the Galaxy is its shape and that it was one of the Enterprises. Ask anyone who knows Star Trek but doesn't live and breathe it and if they even know what a Galaxy is, they'll mention one or the other. Most don't know that it's carrying Type X phaser arrays or burst photon torpedo tubes, they just know that it has a huge saucer that crashed awesomely and that it shoot lazers and balls of light. Likewise, if you show them the in-game model, they wouldn't notice the nuances pointed out by the OP except for maybe the missing paint on the nacelles.

Quote:
without constructive criticism things will never change, and you Sir are only pessimistic, not constructive
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~ Phoxe
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
03-08-2010, 11:07 AM
FIX THIS NAO, mostly because should be fairly simple compared to other things and it shows cryptic cares
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
03-08-2010, 11:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tcsola2003
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~ Phoxe
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~ Phoxe
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
03-08-2010, 11:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z3R0B4NG View Post
Cryptic please give this Picture to the Art Department-Guy(s) who made the Galaxy Class, thx

http://www.imagebanana.com/img/44nwk...alaxyClass.jpg


... i dont think that needs further explenation?



....oh and just for that one guy who allways comes into my threads to say that the link doesnt work
here is a mirror just for you:
http://s5b.directupload.net/images/100308/4fg6nq4z.jpg
wow i wish i had done what you just did when i flew my galaxy it always felt wrong to me. horribly done. hopefully cryptic will address this in someone
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
03-08-2010, 11:24 AM
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~ Phoxe
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
03-08-2010, 11:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by USSZenica
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~ Phoxe
i still remember mr craig zincinvich saying if they fans agree strongly it will be so....havent seen that once.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
03-08-2010, 11:31 AM
This Galaxy class is not a one-off model like the show model was.

This one has to be built in component parts that can be easily swapped out for other components of the other ships of that class of Exploration Cruiser.

There will be differences in the model as a result. But as I mentioned already, this is because the STO Galaxy model must be more flexible and more interchangeable than the model from the show, which just had to look good.

Now put your calipers away before you break them.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
03-08-2010, 11:34 AM
Ship models def need some love. I dont feel that the issues you show are 'game-breaking' but they sure are a sign of a lower leve QA on the models (ie they look rushed). I would appreciate at some point they re-issue all the ship models with more details and higher poly-counts.
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 07:31 AM.