Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 111
04-29-2010, 01:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alecto View Post
Even though Phoxe stated numerous times that the DP would not work optionally and then they changed their mind stating that they had made it optional.
Actually, his statement is correct. It is tied to the difficulty slider. Technically, they didn't remove it from normal setting. All they did was set an integer that determines whether an injury takes place from some small figure like .000001 to 0. That's not removing it per say, it's changing one figure.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 112
04-29-2010, 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alecto View Post
So you honestly think that Cryptic will ignore a majority vote as well as the votes for their proposed changes as well as the votes for no changes?
A majority of what? Less than 10% of the player base actually post on the forums. That's partially why they came up with that lame council idea. This isn't Falcon 4.0, this isn't Star Wars, this isn't even Ace Combat. It's Star Trek where the majority of ships don't do the things you keep asking for.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 113
04-29-2010, 01:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alecto View Post
So my original point still stands, that if the majority of players want something, the Devs consistently state that they will make it so or find a reasonable compromise
They have made a reasonable compromise. The man told you he is putting the 85 degree pitch angle into the works and possibly adding in "click manuerving".
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 114
04-29-2010, 02:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestalence_XC View Post
Have you even considered that it is CBS behind this decision by Cryptic and you are barking up the wrong tree?
No I haven't considered that, I would suggest that evidence from posts from teh STO Dev team suggest that it has nothing to do with CBS at all, as dstahl specifically stated that "we" do not want 3D Starship movement.

Which I personally believe is the worst thing he has ever posted in these forums, this is the only topic I know of that they have not made any effort to get feedback from teh player base before making a decision.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupgoblin View Post
if you read the colored text you will plainly see that dstahl asked for people to focus their discussions in a productive manner (i.e. on the items they would consider changing, not on allowing inverted flight.

They have made the effort for a compromise (85 degree movement and the possibility of keyed flight deviations). Yes, they are flight deviations, unnecessary for gameplay
That's what they want, he attemted to eliminate any opposing force and ignore every opposing voice, no effort made to ask the player base for their feedback.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupgoblin View Post
Also consider that voting is not tied to IP address, I have voted 3 times already, your poll is an absolute joke

100 people are not a majority it is a drop in the bucket.
Have you been changing your IP address, because the poll won't allow the same IP address to vote more than once, I thought you said you were a mature 40 something year old?

Now your talking like a cheating and scheming child, breaking a valid poll that was made to allow a fair vote from all players.

Also, sure the poll only has just over a hundred votes, but that will change over time and after i get the word out.

You can make it easy for me and tell me which votes of yours are not-valid, or I can do it the hard way, or are you scared something might come out of this poll, is that why your attempting to sabotage the results.

You make me sick and would not be worthy of joining Starfleet if it existed.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupgoblin View Post
I guess you just glossed over the fact that an older audience will not deal well with the change from Star Trek style flight to an acrobatic flight sim. Do you want people to leave because they would be physically unable to handle the motion? Doesn't sound like someone who is acting in the best interest of the group.
I've already come up with a solution for that, are you not reading the previous posts?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Soupgoblin View Post
I won't discuss it on the forums, but if you need help finding a game that is more of a flight simulator than a Star Trek styled "tall ships" flight style, PM me and I can give you a dozen or so suggestions on the topic.
I will continue to play Star Trek bridge Commander until STO has a 3D Starship movement system.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 115
04-29-2010, 02:04 PM
You are starting off with flawed reasoning which could invalidate any conclusions you might come to with the poll.

People who vote in your poll will be:
a subset (only a portion) of those who decide to click the link to an unofficial poll.
those will be a subset of the people who read this thread.
those will be a subset of forum visitors.
those will be a subset of site visitors.
those will be a subset of STO players and non-players who still follow the game/new developments.

the people who vote in your poll will in no way be a "majority of STO players". You continue to express this view in other posts as well.

I know your intent is not to mislead or come to erronous conclusions, so it would probably be helpful to get yourself into the mindset of "majority of poll respondants want xxxxxx" rather than "majority of STO players want xxxxx". It may seem minor, but this type of phrasing error can detract significantly from any credibility you may try to attain with the poll results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alecto View Post
The reason this thread exists is to determine which Starship movement system the majority of players would like to use in Star Trek Online, it's very simple as well as very fair to everyone, and Cryptic will not create a poll, so I have.

All you have to do as a player is answer the question as truthfully as possible, just thinking of yourself and no one else.

I have to go do some painting now, but I'll be back in about an hour, and everyone is entitled to voice their opinions and make a choice, so everyone is entitled to take part in the poll, which will hopefully result in accurate feedback.

Regards,

Alecto
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alecto View Post
Which part of your post was "the ACTUAL issue" as I was addressing your response to the game not being a Space Simulator, which is the topic that our discussion started on.

Is it the part where some players don't like 3D combat?

I've addressed that already, I've stated that I was thinking whether or not it would be possible simply to allow 3D movement for the Elite difficulty only, eliminating the players who don't like 3D Starship movement from the equation and I also stated that dstahls compromise should only go to the Advanced difficulty setting as not all players want any changes at all.

If that is possible and could be done, all issues would be solved.





How can you think that I don't care about every players Starship movement choice, when I've set up a poll that allows everyone to give accurate feedback and have asked for nothing, other than the question of taking an Official poll to the entire player base which Cryptic ignored.




Prolific poster, I don't actually know what that means but thanks for apologizing for the accusation you made against me.

Also, I remember all of the statements dstahl made very well, no need to repost them, I posted and highlighted his statements in post #2 in this thread.

I am not wrong in starting a discussion and a poll that allows every STO player to voice their opinion as well as vote for their choice, when Cryptic would not even make the effort to do so or attempt to explore a better compromise than what they have come up with, which really annoys me, as they have only stated what they want and not what the majority of players what, because they don't know, as they never made the effort to find out.

I will not be silenced until the majority of players have had their say and an appropriate compromise has been established.

Also, the second post of the thread rather makes the poll seem pointless, as it points out what Cryptic will NOT do and what things they are already doing or may look into.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 116
04-29-2010, 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alecto View Post

Even though Phoxe stated numerous times that the DP would not work optionally and then they changed their mind stating that they had made it optional.
Wrong.. Phoxe stated the DP was optional

People interpretation of Optional was based on 1 definition of the work Optional, not considering the other definitions available in an unabridged dictionary.

Cryptics definition of Optional was the Option to select the level of the DP.. not the ability to turn DP on and off.

there was originally no option for DP as based on the State of the Game from Feb. 25, 2010.. They suprised us stating the DP would be optional.

even now Cryptics definition of Optional has not changed.. You still have 3 levels of DP to choose from (options) Normal Mode with no DP, Advanced mode with light DP and Elite mode with heavy DP.

Cryptic still has not given a switch to turn DP on and off.. as such, it is still their original design disguised to please the community.

so Cryptic was using definition #2 of the word Optional, which is to give multiple selections of a thing.. which is what they have done 2 times with the DP, one variation of a selection to appease the community as a compromise..

However they stayed True to their word every step of the way.

If you did not know multiple definitions of the word Optional, that is your own failure for Reading Comprehension, not cryptics failure for not inculding an on/off switch for the DP.

Cryptics Optional DP was the option of Severity.. it was stated clearly by Phoxe in the leong thread about the DP.

People still don't have a choice on DP.. they have a choice on the difficulty level which in turn adjusts the severity of the DP.. there is no ON/Off switch (thank goodness)..

So Cryptic stayed true to their design while making the player base happy with the Normal mode.

Same will happen with the movement system.. the system will not change, however they will tweak the movement system in place to make the community happy.. that means no 3D or 360 degree movement, but 2D movement with some effects thrown in every once in a while.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 117
04-29-2010, 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shard-Warrior View Post
Actually, his statement is correct. It is tied to the difficulty slider. Technically, they didn't remove it from normal setting.
CRYPTIC COMPLETELY REMOVED THE DP FROM THE NORMAL DIFFICULTY SETTING!

Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
Based on your comments, we're going to put the following changes onto Tribble:

* Normal Difficulty will not have any Injury System.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akikisaragi
A majority of what? Less than 10% of the player base actually post on the forums.
The poll has only recently started, it will take time but I will ensure that this poll receives a large number of votes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shard-Warrior View Post
They have made a reasonable compromise.
For themselves yes they have, but not for every player who wants the freedom of a full realistic Star Trek 3D Starship movement system.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 118
04-29-2010, 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestalence_XC View Post
Wrong.. Phoxe stated the DP was optional
Some of you are really are annoying...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoxe
'Optional' Death Penalties don't really work. That's why none exist in any game I'm aware of currently. We had hopes that we could make something unique, which we did. Unfortunately, the injury system we came up with is not optional, but it is negligible for the average user.
Quoted from HERE.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 119
04-29-2010, 02:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pdt_the_confused View Post
I know your intent is not to mislead or come to erronous conclusions, so it would probably be helpful to get yourself into the mindset of "majority of poll respondants want xxxxxx" rather than "majority of STO players want xxxxx". It may seem minor, but this type of phrasing error can detract significantly from any credibility you may try to attain with the poll results.
THIS!

Seriously, though... well, put! You are not giving yourself enough credit when you say this is a minor thing. It is not minor at all, but the primary consideration in anything Cryptic has to consider with this game because, first and foremost, Star Trek is nothing more than a set of legal media cotnracts, licenses, copyrights, etc whose primry function is to generate monetary profits for the party/parties that own it.

The real reason for doing anything on STO must be "what will bring in the best, most stable and most growing revenue from the mass subscriber base." Not what may "make sense" to a relatively small number of very vocal players or what was voted for by the majority of a hundred or two hundred people who voted for in unofficial poll on the forums.

Anyway, well put, Pdt.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 120
04-29-2010, 02:20 PM
Alecto, why don't you post a few video clips from a Star Trek show or feature film that shows an extended battle sequence where two ships are fighting each other inverted?

I'm not talking about a 5 second "full axis rotation to port" clip or the Defiant doing it's barrel roll over the Lakota. Those are "COOL!" clips put in for the "WOW!" factor.

Show the developers an overwhelming precedence from a canon Trek source that ships fought each other inverted under normal conditions. That might get them to change their mind on their artistic interpretation of how combat works.

Good luck doing in finding them too.
Closed Thread

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 07:26 PM.