Thank God for that - goodbye. Seriously, if you can't get over reading a single sentence you don't like your input is really not required.
Claiming that his proof is null and void since he was able to accurately judge you and your argument with only a single line only serves as proof for his claims about you
Originally Posted by jester2186
Precisely! If you're going to call a game something as broad as 'Star Trek Online' it should be a true representation of every facet of that name and not just a few token bits and pieces. An MMO of STO, conceptually, should be as close to a ST Sim as you can get.
Um, where have you been these past couple years? Since when has ANY game based on a preexisting well known IP been a "true representation". There are always things that can't be done, no matter how you try. A game about a show that is supposed to be about exploration will have more action than the TV show, explanations for certain things might not be written like they were written in the show (and since the writers of the show aren't necessarily available to be the writers of the game, this is BOUND to happen), and coding limits what you can do in the game. If you think you can do a better job than veterans in the MMO industtry, go right ahead. Make a Star Trek game with a better story, where exploration takes precedence over combat, and where space is indeed endless. It should be pretty easy for a person who knows as much about Star Trek and game programming as you do.
I just have to ask, what Star Trek game is all just diplomacy and exploration? I loved the original NES 25th anniversary game, it had a lot of puzzles but what kept it exciting was the little battles. same goes with the Interplay 25th Anniversary game too. The SNES and SEGA game, Starfleet Academy: Bridge Simulator, was possibly one of the best Star Trek games ever made (IMHO) and all it was,was combat. Same goes for Klingon Academy, Bridge Commander, Armada's 1 and 2. ALL COMBAT HEAVY Star Trek games that rocked!
So,if STO was like how the OP wants it to be I think this game would suck. Sure there are a few things I would love added to the game like more puzzles and definitly more exploration and story. But this is a process and if you take the way the game is right now and released it on consoles STO would be up there with all those games I listed before. Actually I've been playing this game for over 800 days now and probably played it each and every single one of those days, more than any of those other games, so they must be doing something right!
Q: [quoting Hartley] "Nothing reveals Humanity so well as the games it plays..."
Anyone who thinks they can establish a complete understanding of anything based on their reading a single sentence is a moron.
I am no programmer and nor am I a script writer. I am a gamer, and I appreciate sci-fi entertainment in all it's forms.
This form says one thing on the box and inside is something else. The sad thing is, I do feel that if I'd been working for Cryptic at the time of development, it would have been a better product. Sadly my life took a different direction.
This thread and my OP are not trying to make you feel bad for enjoying playing this game. I hope you do enjoy it. All I'm trying to do is say why I think it isn't as good as it could or should have been. If I had the resources of Cryptic at my disposal, ur damn right I'd make a better ST game.
I also never said the game should be exclusively about exploration and diplomacy. As I've make clear in my subsequent posts, violence and destruction are elements of Star Trek - look at the Klingon Empire. What I am saying is the morality of Star Trek's Federation, and the founding principles of the Federation and Starfleet, are not emphasised nearly enough in this game. Fighting and defeating your enemies is one thing - the Borg should get what's coming to them - but making it the entire basis for a game that claims to be an online version of a TV series about exploration isn't my idea of franchise integrity.
There's really no need to put me down by suggesting I'm 'oh so smart and clever'. Your words are very witty and cutting, but they're also hurtful and unnecessary. If you disagree and don't want my OP to gain undeserved attention, just say so and stop giving it so much of your time.
Glanced over this thread, and I'm kind of bored this morning. So I thought I'd address some points. I don't really expect it to go anywhere, since the thread start has more or less already made his mind up on the issue. Not to say he's right or wrong, it's not my call. That said, moving right along.
True representation of Star Trek. Yes, Star Trek has had exploration, discovery, and diplomacy at the forefront from the very beginning. That said, there absolutely no person who is qualified to say with absolute certainty what a true representation of Star Trek is. Everyone has their own opinions on what makes Star Trek... well, Star Trek.
As someone has said, Star Trek Online is not a Star Trek simulator. It's an MMO. As much as I'd personally enjoy more exploration and whatnot, a very large portion of the playerbase wants to shoot and kill things. That's part of what makes an MMO an MMO. Star Trek Online does not cater to one specific crowd of fans, but it does try to cater to MMO players.
Cryptic Studios has tried to take facets from every part of Star Trek and put them together. This undertaking in of itself is extremely difficult to pull off. You simply can not blend every facet of the Star Trek franchise together and make it the Star Trek every individual player wants. Compromises have to be made, immersion has to be broken at some point, and yes... the Star Trek you want the game to be is sadly not.
However, there is stuff for TOS fans. There is stuff for TNG fans. There is stuff for DS9 fans. There is stuff for Voyager fans. There is stuff for Enterprise fans. There is stuff for movie fans. There is even stuff for fans of soft canon (stuff not covered in a tv series or movie).
Every series had their own little thing going for them. TOS and TNG were primarily about exploration. DS9 was decidedly less so, and it focused on war and a darker side of the Star Trek universe. Voyager was... well... it was Lost in Space. Enterprise was an attempt at some kind of prequel and helped establish the beginnings of Star Trek while at the same time trying to fix plot holes in the other series, while introducing new story elements, and blah blah blah. So on and so forth.
The fact is... not every person who loves Star Trek loves Star Trek for the same reasons as everyone else. Some people love the aliens. Some people love the ships. Some people love the dark and realistic war theme DS9 had. Some people love tribbles. Some people just love Seven of Nine's assets. Some people love the Borg. Some people love the Klingons.
Star Trek Online is a game that has something for every kind of fan of Star Trek, but doesn't cater to any single specific type of fan. It can't please everyone, but it can try to offer something for everyone.
On top of all that, it has to be an MMO. Warfare is not new in Star Trek. The Earth-Romulan War, the Xindi Conflict, the Dominion War, whatever. Whether combat should be at the forefront of STO? Personally, I say no. But I'm very aware my opinions are not the same as everyone else's. And the fact is... people play MMO's to blow stuff up.
Star Trek Online is a very appropriate title, because it is in fact Star Trek Online. It's not TOS Online. It's not TNG Online. It's not DS9 Online. It's not Voyager Online. It's not Enterprise Online. It's a very broad stroke trying to encompass every element of the Star Trek franchise in some form, and puts the game in an era that's only been lightly touched upon in the future, putting a brand new spin on Star Trek after Berman and Braga were done poisoning it.
The c-store? Microtransactions are an evolution of the MMO industry. I'm sorry, but even as a veteran MMO player (I've been playing MMO's since high school), evolution can not be stopped. Microtransactions are here to stay. Cash stores are here to stay. The old system of subscriptions alone simply do not work anymore as more and more games go to a f2p method. f2p and microtransactions are quickly solidifying to be the industry standard. You either adapt and evolve, or your business dies.
Sorry OP, but this is a computer based game that has a different set of challenges then those faced by TV and movies.
Think of it as the difference between passive entertainment and interactive entertainment. Thats why we get the pew-pew and not the exploration/diplomacy game. You should maybe try Civ 5...
You do realise that this last suggestion completely undermines your assertion that computer based games must be all pew-pew, all the time, right?
STO, from my perspective, has the same problem as JJ Trek; it's changed the balance of ingredients to the point where the result just doesn't "taste right", if you'll allow me to continue stretching that metaphor. And frankly, it pisses me off, because there are already umpteen "IMMA FIRIN MA PHAZER"-style sci-fi properties out there, in every entertainment format, but you guys that like a bit of the old ultraviolence have to try and take over Trek as well. The action-adventure aspect of Trek was a shell, a vehicle for the meat of the franchise, and in that role it worked well because it allowed the writers to use violence as a narrative device, and because it allowed even pew-pew fans such as yourself to get into the spirit of things. It was one aspect which existed as part of a greater whole.
I just hate this trend in entertainment towards homogenizing everything; if I wanted to watch fun pew-pew action sci-fi, I watched Stargate; if I wanted to watch borderline-magic sci-fantasy I watched Star Wars; I watched Star Trek because it was NOT those things. Now Star Trek is pew-pew mindless action, Star Wars is...well, prequels, 'nuff said, and Stargate is DoA after their stupid attempt to turn it into a soap opera.
EDIT: Iconians, you seem to have forgotten one group of fans that STO doesn't cater to; Star Trek fans. I don't have a favourite crew, or a favourite series, I like Star Trek. I like the blend of different themes, I like the contrast, I like the nuance, I like the ethical conundrums, I even like the technobabble despite it occasionally being painful to listen to for a physicist. For my money, if you sweep big chunks of that blend off into a dusty corner and neglect it, while at the same time waving around the new "Gold Pressed Latinum-coated Super-Duper-Wooper-Elite Borg-murderalizin' Ultraultrapurple MK75 Hand Phaser - only 5000cpoints"(I know, I know; hyperbole), then you're not interested in serving all the fans as you say, you're interested in serving bored F2P MMO gamers with a passing interest in Trek or sci-fi.
Lots of stuff about STO is cool beans, I wouldn't be here otherwise, but when I'm having to use most of my capacity for suspension of disbelief just to convince myself I'm playing a Star Trek game, rather than to convince myself I'm Captain Whoever exploring the galaxy with my trusty crew, there IS something lacking.
We are PWE. Your forums and game accounts will be added to our own. Your community will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
Last edited by sosolidshoe; 06-30-2012 at 09:35 AM.
You do realise that this last suggestion completely undermines your assertion that computer based games must be all pew-pew, all the time, right?
Don't get me wrong, I love the Civ games but there's a reason I've been playing STO for over 800 days now and have barely touched Civ 5 (other than the fact Civ 5 sucked compared to Civ 4 but that's neither here nor there) and that's because STO gives me all the things I like in STar Trek; Starships, Andorian's, big explosions and a few more explosions tinged with fried Borg.
It's not like combining Civilisation with Star Trek will work well, they already tried that with New Worlds and, to steal a line from Full Metal Jacket, it sucked so hard it could suck a golf ball through a garden hose. They're two different games that appeal to different people, it's not the fault of Cryptic that someone brought STO but expected a cross betwee New Worlds and The Sims.
Being offtopic here:
The Civ 5 Expansion did a lot of things right to make Civ5 a Civ-Game again...
Maybe you want to give it a second chance (and the devs even more money).
I'll see how it goes but I doubt I will. I just didn't get the feeling it was a 'real' Civilisation, I played Civ 3 and Civ 4 and instantly they grabbed me, Civ 5 just didn't for some reason despite trying multiple times to really get into it. If it had caught my interest the first time around I may have tried again but this one just didn't.
STO has failed to live up to the Star Trek franchise. In my opinion, these are the main reasons.
1. You made up a silly story to explain why Worf is now an enemy of the Federation just for the sake of introducing a competetive PvP element that wasn't any good and wasn't necessary. Some of your subscribers may have bought into it, but to Trek fans that story doesn't make any sense at all.
2. You didn't make the game about exploring, you made it about blowing stuff up. Star Trek was always about exploration with a bit of violence to keep it flowing. Your game gives no sense of the moral principles of the Federation, or the necessary 'wiley-ness' of the captains and crews.
3. Your idea of space in Star Trek was far too constrictive. Boundaries in space? Please. The point of space is it's big, endless, and apart from the immediate vicinity fundamentally unknown and unexplored. Obviously there will be frontiers between controlling factions, but there's so much stuff in between that u just didn't bother with.
4. You made us pay for stuff that was basically the same as other stuff with no clear explanation as to why this is free and this isn't. In fact, we could wrap the whole thing up by saying; the C-store - no, no, no, no, NO.
5. You sold the game for ?250 for lifetime subscriptions, and then made the game free anyway. Talk about a rip-off. Can u imagine buying a new PS3 for that money and then find out 18 months down the line they're giving them away??
There are a hundred other reasons why STO is a let down and a game that remains installed and updated in the hope of eventual evolution into something wonderful (tho meanwhile I never play) but this is the biggest reason why STO isn't any good:
YOU DIDN'T START WITH A PROPER CONCEPT OF THE STAR TREK UNIVERSE.
1. Worf wasn't the reason why Klingon's went to war. Klingons knew of Undine involvement, and aimed to elimanate it. Worf simply asked the Feds to help them, why they refused because they were jaded of the KDF's actions. So relucantly, he cut ties with them.
The reason may or may not be sufficent, but it is a reason.
2. The most popular Star Trek movies were about blowing stuff up. So there is some credence against this point.
3. Does engine limitations mean nothing to you? They had a deadline, and they didn't have time to make a system like that. And making one know would take so much more time than it's worth
4. This is basically what other MMO's do: offer basic stuff for free, offer more for a fee.
5. They had to make money, and they still do. And they didn't make the game free "anyway", they choose to after much consideration.
And if it makes you feel any better, only the shows and movies are canon. Anything else is soft canon at best (read: COULD be canon, but is up to the person)