test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Feedback› The Art of Star Trek Online

Fix The Prometheus!!!

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited June 2011 in The Art of Star Trek Online
Please fix the Prometheus eyesore of hull geometry already!

50% of the entire "lower hull" looks NOTHING even REMOTELY like it should!!!
http://alexraptor.com/images/PrometheusHullgeom.jpg

Here's how the same section looks when seperated.... and it really does not look good and becomes instantly even more noticable.
http://alexraptor.com/images/PromGamma.jpg

I have been fighting for this since like the Beta and Cryptic has yet to even acknowledge the error!!!
Despite having done extensive work on both the Galaxy, Sovereign, Intrepid and Defiant.

I do not think its an unreasonable demand at all given that the new MVAM console is going to cost 500 emblems as well as be a C-Store item.
The very least that can be done here is at least make the Prometheus look presentable.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I honestly still don't see an issue. The ship looks pretty epic to me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    You may not see it, but it's definitely there.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Alright, I'll admit, I see how the back end of the lower hull does not flatten out how it should.
    I see how the hull/deflector part is not all that cylindrical.
    And I see how the deflector part should end in kind of a "top of a silo" fashion.

    I guess its the gamer in me that doesn't feel like there's an issue.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The aft ventral there is the most glaring issue of all, the gometry is nothing at all even similar to what it should be.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    It does need to be tweeked.

    I wish MVAM was out already so we can check to see if the geometry is the same.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Azurian wrote: »
    It does need to be tweeked.

    I wish MVAM was out already so we can check to see if the geometry is the same.

    Its on Tribble now.
    And yes, the Geometry still is the same, I.E still borked.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Agreed. Cryptic, please take all the dollars you're going to make from the console, and reinvest it into paying somebody to pull overtime to fix the Prometheus model. Thx.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    It has been nearly 40 years since the original design. In 40 years, the odds are that some things would have changed a bit

    I look at it that way for most of the ships.

    Changes happen... cut them some slack.

    The model is in no way as bad as the Galaxy class was when it came out (shudder) or such. They will most likely get to it sometime. Captain Logan is the bomb and I have no doubt that it will be done at some time.

    But, if they have to choose between flattening out the back of the ship... or making new game content.......
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Jaruslothran wrote: »
    It has been nearly 40 years since the original design. In 40 years, the odds are that some things would have changed a bit

    I look at it that way for most of the ships.

    Changes happen... cut them some slack.

    The model is in no way as bad as the Galaxy class was when it came out (shudder) or such. They will most likely get to it sometime. Captain Logan is the bomb and I have no doubt that it will be done at some time.

    But, if they have to choose between flattening out the back of the ship... or making new game content.......

    Please, that argument became invalid the moment they started fixing up other canon ships to painstaking detail.
    To add a C-Store item to this ship without correcting serious model flaws is just unacceptable.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Alexraptor wrote: »
    To add a C-Store item to this ship without correcting serious model flaws is just unacceptable.

    No, it is called game development,
    Honestly I've been a fan of the Prometheus since it was on screen, and these errors do not bother me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Alexraptor does make a good point though - considering they put the effort in to improving the model of the Akira, a Tier 3 ship, it's only fair to give the same love and attention to an end-game ship (and one which a lot of people will now be paying RL cash for).

    It's not really a lot to ask for, Capn Logan does great work and seems to take great joy and care in that work - all we're asking is for him to take a little time out from spamming us with endless new Cruisers and Sci Ships, to give a model that's been severely inaccurate since launch a little touch-up. ;-)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Indeed, its not like were nitpicking here.
    This is a serious and major flaw in geometry, not something tiny like a missing RCS thruster or something.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Alexraptor wrote: »
    Please, that argument became invalid the moment they started fixing up other canon ships to painstaking detail.
    To add a C-Store item to this ship without correcting serious model flaws is just unacceptable.

    Uhh.. yeah. Not that I want to trivialize your concern, but... I can't think of a way to finish that sentence.

    The Guramba, a *$25* ship, went right into the C-Store with a pretty major graphical bug that was pointed out while it was still on tribble, *and has yet to be fixed*. So, good luck!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Alexraptor wrote: »
    Indeed, its not like were nitpicking here.
    This is a serious and major flaw in geometry, not something tiny like a missing RCS thruster or something.

    I don't see how that is a serious flaw, I look at your comparison picture, all I really see is that it is missing a flat spot at the bottom of the shuttle bay 'lip'

    It is not that serious.

    Serious was the Galaxy missing all of its windows on the bottom of the saucer for the first 4 months the game was out.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Then you need glasses because the Geometry is WAY off in pretty much every way.

    Its even been admitted that the original ship models, which includes the Prometheus, were modeled by someone who "didn't care".

    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showpost.php?p=2707664&postcount=42
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Alexraptor wrote: »
    Then you need glasses because the Geometry is WAY off in pretty much every way.

    Its even been admitted that the original ship models, which includes the Prometheus, were modeled by someone who "didn't care".

    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showpost.php?p=2707664&postcount=42

    Yes, and the purpose of this thread is to make them care, since they've already touched up other ships. No offense devs. >_> (And the Siege Destroyer could also use some love if it really does still have a problem.)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Wow, what a nit picker, if I remember right, the Original Prometheus Ship in the TV shows was a prototype, they could of chanced the design of the ship in later models. Good lord, look at some of the things now days, a prototype can look one way, and then when they show it off to the top brass, the top brass could say "Uh, we don't like the shape of the bottom of the hull, make it more round!", also remember STO takes place YEARS after the first Prometheus ship, so the ships design could chance to fit the need, look at the first Jeeps, and look at the new Jeeps. I really hope the maker of this thread is some kid who has yet to finish high school, if not, I hope he's not in any field of work that needs him to design any thing.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    WeirdStealth wrote:
    Wow, what a nit picker, if I remember right, the Original Prometheus Ship in the TV shows was a prototype, they could of chanced the design of the ship in later models. Good lord, look at some of the things now days, a prototype can look one way, and then when they show it off to the top brass, the top brass could say "Uh, we don't like the shape of the bottom of the hull, make it more round!", also remember STO takes place YEARS after the first Prometheus ship, so the ships design could chance to fit the need, look at the first Jeeps, and look at the new Jeeps. I really hope the maker of this thread is some kid who has yet to finish high school, if not, I hope he's not in any field of work that needs him to design any thing.

    Ah yes, here comes another Cryptic apologist trying to make excuses for a "sloppy" model.
    Your argument is weak and is one that has lost validity a long time ago.
    People made the exact same arguments about the Galaxy, Intrepid, Defiant and Sovereign, but what happened? Cryptic actually bothered to listen to the fanbase and made improvements and corrections to make them more "canon"

    If i was whining about a missing RCS thruster then that would be nitpicking, but as stands a "quarter" of the entire ship does not even resemble what its supposed to look like.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Ok, lets say I'm right, lets say I'm a Cryptic apologist, and I'm just making ****ing excuses.
    Here's my two questions to you.
    Who are you to even make them try to fix it just because you're complaining about it?
    Why do you give two s**ts about the model not being just like it was in the TV show?

    I wasn't trying to make up an excuse, I was mostly trying to point out that it doesn't really mater.
    #1: this is a game.
    #2: Changes in things happen, if they didn't the computer at your desk would still be the size of a small room and have less memory than your watch.
    #3: The game has been out for 2 to 3 years, and if you've been battling this sense the beta, even if you held some weight in what Cryptic does, don't you think they would of fixed it by now?
    #4: it's not a sloppy model, I've seen sloppy modes, the model of this doesn't have holes in it, or random spikes poking out of it, and at lest it's shape is 90% the same as the Original design for the Prometheus.
    #5: if the problem you're worrying about is on the bottom of the ship, WHY DOES IT MATTER, it's on the bottom of the ship, you'll rarely see it, so why would it bother you.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    WeirdStealth wrote:
    Ok, lets say I'm right, lets say I'm a Cryptic apologist, and I'm just making ****ing excuses.
    Here's my two questions to you.
    Who are you to even make them try to fix it just because you're complaining about it? A Paying customer, thats who.
    Why do you give two s**ts about the model not being just like it was in the TV show?Because if i want to fly the Prometheus i want it damn and well to actually look like the Prometheus

    I wasn't trying to make up an excuse, I was mostly trying to point out that it doesn't really mater.
    #1: this is a game. Correct, a Star Trek game which also contains "canon" ships
    #2: Changes in things happen, if they didn't the computer at your desk would still be the size of a small room and have less memory than your watch. That may be true in reality, but this is as you said, a game.
    #3: The game has been out for 2 to 3 years, and if you've been battling this sense the beta, even if you held some weight in what Cryptic does, don't you think they would of fixed it by now?Ummm what? This game has only been out for a little over "one" year, and there are still things glitched and broken since Beta which are actually planned to be fixed.
    #4: it's not a sloppy model, I've seen sloppy modes, the model of this doesn't have holes in it, or random spikes poking out of it, and at lest it's shape is 90% the same as the Original design for the Prometheus.Try 75% and its been confirmed that the original artist who created the ships, including the prometheus, did not care at all wether they were accurate or not.
    #5: if the problem you're worrying about is on the bottom of the ship, WHY DOES IT MATTER, it's on the bottom of the ship, you'll rarely see it, so why would it bother you.I see it whenever i attack a ship or look at anything above me, and i will see it eveven more when flying the Gamma section in MVAM

    If you have nothing at all constructive to add why even bother posting in this thread at all?
    You obviously don't care.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    This post has been edited to remove content which violates the [URL=" http://forums.startrekonline.com/announcement.php?f=70&a=2"]Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines[/URL] GMMeeko
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    So the guy is trying to give CapnLogan some constructive feedback and suggestions (alright, he's passionate about the issue, but we've all sorts of people around these forums who campaign for all sorts of little things which mean a lot to them ... particular uniforms, ships, gameplay areas, etc.). And all you can do is troll and flame him? Insult him for trying to engage with Cryptic (who have a strong record on listening to customer feedback)?

    The only one looking like a kid out of high school here, is you. If you have nothing constructive to say and don't care about the issue, go away and troll another thread.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Middlemore wrote:
    So the guy is trying to give CapnLogan some constructive feedback and suggestions (alright, he's passionate about the issue, but we've all sorts of people around these forums who campaign for all sorts of little things which mean a lot to them ... particular uniforms, ships, gameplay areas, etc.). And all you can do is troll and flame him? Insult him for trying to engage with Cryptic (who have a strong record on listening to customer feedback)?

    The only one looking like a kid out of high school here, is you. If you have nothing constructive to say and don't care about the issue, go away and troll another thread.

    Indeed the history between Cryptic and the fanbase has proven that persistence does pay off in the end, especially when it is a perfectly reasonable request such as this.

    And to get back on topic, this screenshot shows that this faulty geometry becomes even worse and far more noticable than even before with MVAM being added.
    Gamma Section in STO along with "canon" Gamma section.
    http://alexraptor.com/images/PromGamma.jpg
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    I want to see this fixed too, if its getting a big C-sore push then it needs to have a few fixes.

    The Prometheus is a fairly large ship in canon, in game however the lower hull geo mistakes coupled with far two few windows makes the ship seem small.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    This post is funny. It's one little curve. And the ship still looks awesome. I don't see why it's such a big deal.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    SeaCadt07 wrote: »
    This post is funny. It's one little curve. And the ship still looks awesome. I don't see why it's such a big deal.

    It is a lot more than one little curve, the whole hull geometry is off for almost that entire section of the hull.
    The very least a C-Store item can have is accurate "basic" hull geometry which this ship does not have.

    Honestly i fail to understand why people who obvious don't care even bother to post if they have nothing to useful to add.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Yea ima agree with the OP it is a little off and I'm glad other people pay attention to the little details. I do think they need to fix the animation and hull separation to match the color/design ofthe ship your flying. Thats my only big complaint same with the galaxie-Rs sauser separation.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The Prometheus definitely needs some graphical love but so do a lot of other ships, uniforms, and so on. The thing is, Cryptic tends to create a piece of content, releases it even though it's no where near perfect, and then leaves us stuck with the horrible abomination for ages. This greatly bothers me for content I've paid for as well, hence the Galaxy X and the AGT uniforms.

    Edit: Fixed!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    Ahh aahh, no "/Signed" posts please.
    The Moderators do not approve of that.
    WishStone wrote:
    Just to nip it in the bud: Please don't make /signed postings. If you wish to agree, please state how or what and what ideas you may have to add. We usually do not allow petition threads because all we get from them is "/signed".

    Thank you!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2011
    The impulse engines are also supposed to be light blue:

    http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/en/images/5/5d/Prometheus_class,_aft.jpg

    Mtattersall said a while back that they were gonna do a pass on this ship and fix the issues, but I think he got either laid off or moved to a different project...so I have no clue if we will see this anytime soon. If Capnlogan alone is handling all the ship design stuff then hes probably swamped with whatever he may be working on (Ambassador, Vesta, whatever)
Sign In or Register to comment.