Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 51
03-17-2009, 09:37 AM
Player crews: Not a bad idea, but not one that can be implemented properly until a later update/patch. Besides, id rather have control over my own missions than get involved with a massive crew whos doesnt keep the same schedule that I do. Virtual Crews will work fine on this behalf.

Bridges: It will happen, just not at the start. Id rather see the design work properly and look decent than a thrown together "generic bridge #14" set that has clipping issues.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 52
03-17-2009, 11:08 AM
Well, he makes a good case. IMO, he should have posted it a little earlier, though... It might have lessened the uproar a little bit when they announced it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 53
03-17-2009, 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatfingers View Post
For the record, I (still) respectfully disagree with the decision.

In my judgement -- for whatever it's worth -- playing as part of a crew in one familiar ship is one of the most essential and defining elements of Star Trek. A MMORPG intended to be based on Star Trek that fails to implement this iconic element of the IP starts out with one huge strike against it.

About that, several points.

1. I don't say this because I have some burning personal desire to experience player crew gameplay and just can't take "not now" for an answer. I have no interest in playing in groups of any kind. I restate my opinion on this subject because I want the whole game to succeed wildly, because I believe that a player crew feature is an important step in that direction, and because I haven't seen anyone else express this reservation regarding Craig's remarks on the subject.

2. I think Craig did exactly the right thing in providing an explanation for the "no player crews at launch" decision as his very first MMORPG.com devblog entry. People won't be any happier about it later; might as well get it out of the way now.

3. I do take exception to part of the post:



I emphatically do not agree that this is an "undisputed fact." I dispute it, for one. It does not jibe with my personal experience and observation of people generally and of online gamers specifically.

Not every person innately feels a need to always be the center of attention or source of control. Not "almost EVERYONE" feels that way. Some do, certainly. But there are many, many people in this world whose happiness and satisfaction come naturally from serving other persons... and some of these service-oriented people play MMORPGs.

<snip>

--Flatfingers

While I respect your opinion, I think you are not seeing that it is just one of many opinions.

To paraphrase Craig Z, Star Trek is many things to many people -- so I would say it is incorrect to say that 'Player Crews' is a *Must* for Star Trek. It is a must for you and those that share your opinion, but that is not everyone.

*My Star Trek* does not contain player crews. Such a game mechanic is completely unappealing to me. Infact, I would rather be an engineer on an AI controlled ship, than one controlled by other players. While I do not mind 'Pugging', I am familiar with all its faults, and would never want to play a game that would be so dependant on Proper group play. I know others share that exact feeling.

An MMO cannot satisfy everyone. We all have to 'give' something, and hope we 'get' something. There are aspects of 'star Trek' that I think are important, but will not be in the game. There are things that will be in the game that I dislike. And there will be things in the game I want and like. Its the deal with MMOs -- its not being designed for me alone, but for many people.

Craigs comments in this Blog reflect that point -- where they have decided to focus on things Loekii likes, instead of going with what you FlatFingers want.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 54
03-17-2009, 02:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by trapline View Post
Imagine piloting your ship, you pass by an anomaly, you have points assigned in your science officers scanning stats or something and your communicator goes off, a mini animated pic of your science officer pops up and reports the anomaly, some star trek gibber science and you are offered a response tree like
That sounds great for a single player game. But why shouldn't that science officer who pops up be another player? More to the point, why not at least make that option available?

Is it because the science officer wouldn't have anything to do until called upon?

Well, I categorically reject the assumption that "minigames" would have to be implemented for every crew position, and thus take inordinate amounts of development time.

In the current design of the game, the Captain will have to perform certain tasks. By simply dividing those tasks among multiple players, without any other additions to the game, those of us who want to, at least sometimes, play a single supporting character instead of an entire ship's complement would be satisfied, with very little development cost.

That's all I want. Just the ability to have my character sit on someone else's bridge and collaborate together to solve a problem and complete a mission. I don't need a minigame to keep me busy; that's what roleplaying is for. Would it be nice? Maybe. But it's not essential to allowing this type of gameplay from launch.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Loekii View Post
While I do not mind 'Pugging', I am familiar with all its faults, and would never want to play a game that would be so dependant on Proper group play.
I do not see where anyone has suggested that PC crews means everyone must use PC crews. At least not in the last several months. All we want is the option, while still (very properly) allowing players to Captain a ship alone if they like.

The only argument against allowing this option is development time, but we're not asking for a huge investment, as I point out above. Just the ability to sit on the bridge and be a valuable member of the crew instead of taking on all the roles ourselves. All that takes is some imaginative roleplaying and a little support from the Devs, not a whole expansion-sized subsystem.

And that's what Craig doesn't get.


Powers &8^]
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 55
03-17-2009, 03:51 PM
While it wasn't the answer most of the hard core Pro-Player Crew people were hoping for, I think this article should at the very least be pretty uplifting for all gamers on the subject. Why? Because this shows that at least some of the developers wanted it too. It at least makes me think that we're more likely to get the Player Crews after launch as well instead of something they say they may add and never do.

I still think, as much as with Star Trek as any other setting, you've got to kind of compare what makes an mmo work as opposed to bad additions in other mmos as well though. My point of view being a gamer rather than a designer obviously; but it just makes sense to me. Use what worked in terms of mechanics and stay true to your setting at the same time.

I still have reservations on what is, or isn't, a mistake to do for launch but at least I can be very critical of one thing; Space. It's there. I've said it, as have others, that making a Sci-fi game with "Star" in the title but no space game at launch is kind of a killer for said game. In this case we can't say they did that wrong even if expectations were mixed on certain aspects of it. In other words... crewed ships.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 56
03-17-2009, 04:00 PM
The "Pets" v PC Crew -Issue has been explained to focus the ease of getting a game running while not waiting for an
Engineer to log on. a Valid point all the same.

Ideally sharing a Ride as you could in a B-17 for an Air Warriors Sim would be great.
They will still have common meeting interaction space at a Faction Space Stations like DS9 Quarks Bar.

Even be the Bartender I believe the DEV EXEC Pro.. Mr. Zinc said.. But the focus is getting people involved as Captains .As Captains of Said Ships we can interact with each other in inventive ways

If the MMO aspect is full on you could Team up on the Planets surface That's what they can do for us at launch

I see a Task Force of Ships working together that make joining Fleets [ie Guilds] Important but not a key to survival..

Unless a Mission means Capturing a Borg Cube with Landing/Away Parties of many Ships?

The Nature of Independent action remains so you aren't tied to a group obligated to go to a place you don't like as much as others.. in general terms. But still be available for trouble via the fast transit feature they speak of should you change your mind or they need help recovering a item?

To the 'Guest" on another ship issue why not? include the option as a Diplomatic Escort Mission>
A short term arrangment driven by Gozers or Kestrels Script for a Episode
to Deliver an Assistant to AMB Spock on Romulas?
But I believe thats for another day or Thread..

Mr CZ has given us excitment and drama to look forward to and as his interview -when the Cryptic office crowd wanted an amazing list of things. But, someone has to slow things down and make what is deliverd work and be playable fun and not thinned down.

I like that approach it is thoughtfull methodical and do-able. I personaly won't take a tricoarder out an knock them if the first Orion I see has a eyebrow 1cm off here or there. If I can survive getting to and from Orion
Thats a good start.

Thank you for your time..

-SB-
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 57
03-17-2009, 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisdanger View Post
Player crews: Not a bad idea, but not one that can be implemented properly until a later update/patch. Besides, id rather have control over my own missions than get involved with a massive crew whos doesnt keep the same schedule that I do. Virtual Crews will work fine on this behalf.

Bridges: It will happen, just not at the start. Id rather see the design work properly and look decent than a thrown together "generic bridge #14" set that has clipping issues.
yaaaa boy thats what i am talking about orion slave girls romulan ale phasers all the things that make life worth living for i agree 100% i dont like to hear waaa you didnt fire fast enough waaa you didnt turn the ship right like i said then they kick you off and you have to find a ship to serve on.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 58
03-17-2009, 09:23 PM
This is all very well written and a very good read. Personally I believe this is a very important thread. For a long time now I have been checking this site and checking how far it has come in Starting. STO has come a long way and all those involved should be congratulated! This is my own personal opinion, but in imagining how I see the game play was as many here have expressed.<player crews and all>. But…

The captain calls his Engineer, the screen changes to the Engineering Room. You see the Engineer, he says,”Aye Captain.” The Captain replies, “ I need more power and more warp speed, now!” He replies, “Aye, Aye Captain!” You move your mouse to the control that reads; <POWER LEVEL>The Engineer moves to the control and pushes a button….
The screen flashes to bridge. The captain orders the helmsman to, ’Engage!”
…I really don’t want to drag this out….But the engineer might not be called again for a while…Whats the engineer to do…Walk around the engine room. I’m trying to understand really. The XO, helmsman, the rest of the crew really what are they going to do? If they are not following orders from the Captain, do they walk around the ship chatting? Getting something to eat? Going to the Holodeck…that’s cool.

Ok, someone wants to beam aboard. “ Hi! What brings you here?” “Oh I just thought I’d beam over for a chat.” ‘Hey did you see the new lunchroom? Come with me I’ll show you.”

Going on a way-team, going down to a planet, starbase or going out in the star craft to manually gather space dust are things, I personally, in my opinion, would like. Player interaction with others.

Im an admiral, I can suggest to the captain on how he may approach a situation or how he may proceed, but really I cant tell him how to run his ship. I may give him orders of a mission or destination, but he runs the ship. I can respect the opinion of others and I don’t want to give the impression of any crew rank as less than or more than any other.

We are all members of Star Fleet and I believe it’s going to be a fantastic fun filled journey

eA
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 59
03-17-2009, 09:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powers

I do not see where anyone has suggested that PC crews means everyone must use PC crews. At least not in the last several months. All we want is the option, while still (very properly) allowing players to Captain a ship alone if they like.

The only argument against allowing this option is development time, but we're not asking for a huge investment, as I point out above. Just the ability to sit on the bridge and be a valuable member of the crew instead of taking on all the roles ourselves. All that takes is some imaginative roleplaying and a little support from the Devs, not a whole expansion-sized subsystem.

And that's what Craig doesn't get.


Powers &8^]
I think you vastly underestimate the amount of work it will entail to provide that option, let alone simple personal interiors. It basically is creating another game, rather than simply providing a 'different skin'.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 60
03-17-2009, 10:03 PM
Very interesting interview-gives a nice prospective of the challenges faced by the developers in creating Star Trek Online.

Keep up the good work developers! We can't wait to see the end result of your efforts to create a great online game and play it!

Live Long and Prosper
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 08:50 AM.