When Paramount had the IP, they wanted to keep TOS and TNG/VOY/DS9 as separate licenses. This is in part because the Decipher game (which began as a TNG-only game and added DS9 before eventually getting the others) was successful but seen as prohibitively complicated. So Paramount licensed TOS to a much larger company with a fatter wallet.
Then, when "Trials and Tribble-ations" happened, Decipher claimed that gave them the rights to use Kirk and company as DS9 characters.
Lawyers were consulted. Paramount conceded this point.
Legally, there is no Star Trek universe.
Legally, there are 726 episodes of television and 11 movies, which can be owned in whole or in part by different people.
CBS owns the better part of the 726 episodes and 10 films -- ALTHOUGH there are, I believe, some elements even on the shows which CBS does not own due to contractual arrangements. In general, this excludes the music and most of the actor likenesses but includes actors in heavy makeup (depending on their contract) and some promotional stock photography of the actors. Also excluded would be some things of dubious legality like the Millenium Falcon (which appeared in First Contact).
There is nothing that holds these episodes together. Each is separate property. In theory, CBS could sell 5 episodes and 5 episodes only to someone else.
For simplicity's sake, CBS tends to sell them as series bundles.
However, STO having a TNG/DS9/Voyager/Enterprise/TOS/Films license does not guarantee access to everything there, only what CBS owns and allows them to use. (And there are things in episodes that CBS doesn't own. For example, sets that were built for other shows and recycled. I think, for example, that TNG reused some Blade Runner stuff. Some writers own concepts they created, per contract.)
Moreover, Cryptic does not have exclusive rights. CBS licensed another company DS9 (as I understand it ONLY DS9) rights to produce a browser MMO, Star Trek: Infinite Space. Had that taken off, CBS might have discouraged Cryptic from using DS9 assets because they'd want both games to be healthy so they get too healthy royalty checks.
If CBS is interested in a game whose primary draw is flying a TOS Connie, they might not want the TOS Connie to be prominent here. This would be so that both licensees generate healthy revenue for CBS. The presence of a TOS Connie here might damage the ability of CBS to license a second Trek MMO set in TOS era, which I could frankly see them considering.
Unless CBS decided they were too Connie-like and told Cryptic not to add any more of them.
This isn't something where Cryptic is in a bargaining position with CBS on.
If it's purely about the Connie, then maybe a compromise could be struck for the Exeter/etc.
If it's about CBS holding back the Connie profile to build a licensing deal with someone else, they can reject anything Connie-like.
In that case Cryptic could still tell us what is happening. But I have trouble seeing the Excalibur and Vesper as too similar to the Constitution. The Excalibur looks more like something you'd get if you leave an Ambassador and a Sovereign alone at ESD for a night and the Vesper is more inspired by the Excelsior than the Constitution. The only thing that could be mistaken for a Constitution when seen from another galaxy would be the Exeter. Until you realize that it has a freakishly large saucer.:D
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
In that case Cryptic could still tell us what is happening.
Cryptic could just be trying to avoid looking like they're politely saying "CBS is being a huge **** about this", with regards to the Connie/Cruisers.
They've acknowledged that CBS is in control of many things, and that one of those things was using the Connie at Endgame. That was way before the whole Fleet Retrofits and Starbases were even a thing; now players are latching onto that information as the only possible reason that the T2 Cruisers are being left out, with no comment from Cryptic.
If Cryptic is trying to negotiate using some or all of these ships at T5, hopping onto the forums reaffirming that CBS is holding them back would hamper those negotiations. It's kind of like complaining on your Facebook that a client or boss is being a **** to you: eventually, word's gonna reach them and it'll bite you in the TRIBBLE. They'd be well advised to keep their mouths shut on the issue until they have actual news to report, if they're still working out the licensing.
Cryptic could just be trying to avoid looking like they're politely saying "CBS is being a huge **** about this", with regards to the Connie/Cruisers.
That's pretty much what they already say every time they repeat that we can't have a Constitution because of CBS. Wrecking a Negh'var or D'deridex with a Constitution? No problem. Playing a contemporary or 100 year older ship at T5? No problem. Playing a Constitution at T5? No way.
They've acknowledged that CBS is in control of many things, and that one of those things was using the Connie at Endgame. That was way before the whole Fleet Retrofits and Starbases were even a thing; now players are latching onto that information as the only possible reason that the T2 Cruisers are being left out, with no comment from Cryptic.
Fleet retrofits were announced ages ago in an Ask Cryptic. Ironically when someone asked if he could upgrade his Miranda as far as I remember. That there won't be a Constitution among those was announced later. Fortunately it seems all evidence was destroyed with the website move to PWE.
If Cryptic is trying to negotiate using some or all of these ships at T5, hopping onto the forums reaffirming that CBS is holding them back would hamper those negotiations. It's kind of like complaining on your Facebook that a client or boss is being a **** to you: eventually, word's gonna reach them and it'll bite you in the TRIBBLE. They'd be well advised to keep their mouths shut on the issue until they have actual news to report, if they're still working out the licensing.
They have been constantly reaffirming that CBS is holding the Constitution back, when asked for the others they either repeated that there won't be a Constitution or ignored the question, so you can't really call that "reaffirming". They never said anything about there being a problem in the first place.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Fortunately the Excal/Vesper/Exeter arent connies, so there is no reason they cannot be in the fleet store as long as the connie skin isnt an option.
Lots of people agree with this. Excal/Vesper/Exeter are connie variants and I bet a lot off people would love these at endgame. Id love to know exactly what cbs said about the connie and if it only refers to the Connie and its TMP refit
Unless CBS decided they were too Connie-like and told Cryptic not to add any more of them.
This isn't something where Cryptic is in a bargaining position with CBS on.
Actually, in a recent interview Geko said CBS really didnt even want the connie in game at all, but Cryptic was still able to get it in. That would suggest they are in fact able to "bargain" with CBS to some degree.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
I really don't get the tight-lipped Area 51 level of secrecy on this question.
It should be easy enough for the devs to poke their heads into one of the many threads on this topic and say:
"Yes, we will have a Excal/Vesper/Exeter Fleet Cruiser Refit. We simply haven't got around to it yet. Please be patient."
- or -
"No, we will not have a Excal/Vesper/Exeter Fleet Cruiser Refit, and here is why...."
- or -
"Maybe. We are still discussing with CBS, and will let you guys knoiw when we know."
Alot of people lay into Cryptic for poor customer service and lack of communication. Not answering questions on topics that alot of people are wondering about, kinda reinforces that sterotype of Cryptic it would seem.
We'd just like to have a question answered. Not be ignored.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Well I have been a gamer for a long time and i know that when Devs don't answer you on a sublect its because they cannot give you the answer that you will like ..period...
I have not been playing a long time true but I would rather have them make ships that they have rights to instead of refitting ships that another company has rights to do you see what i am saying instead of fighting for the Connie fight for a whole new design....Might even do a promo for a new design and the folks who help make the new ship 50 will get it free ..play smarter not harder put your efforts into something that will futher the game and make it better for us all not just those of you who want a Connie refit......
I have not been playing a long time true but I would rather have them make ships that they have rights to instead of refitting ships that another company has rights to
Fortunately Cryptic *does* have the rights to the Excal/Vesper/Exeter. That said, CBS has final say on *all* ships that go in game, including the ones designed by Cryptic.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Well I have been a gamer for a long time and i know that when Devs don't answer you on a sublect its because they cannot give you the answer that you will like ..period...
I have not been playing a long time true but I would rather have them make ships that they have rights to instead of refitting ships that another company has rights to do you see what i am saying instead of fighting for the Connie fight for a whole new design....Might even do a promo for a new design and the folks who help make the new ship 50 will get it free ..play smarter not harder put your efforts into something that will futher the game and make it better for us all not just those of you who want a Connie refit......
You seem to be in the wrong thread. No one here asked for a Constitution, refit or otherwise. We are asking for the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter. All original Cryptic designs. So if they don't have the rights for them no one does.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Well, now that we know that Cryptic would earn 20 $ for each Fleet cruiser retrofit that is built the question becomes even more interesting.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Probably till the topic slides a few pages back and into the dustbin of forum history.
Then they won't have to ignore it. They will just pretend it never happened.
Cryptic, the silence is deafening.
I intend to keep asking, whether its in threads like this, the next Ask Cryptic, or podcast interviews that take community submitted questions. I'll also bring it up in threads regarding S6 in general, since the fleet store is just as much a part of S6 as the other things.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Nonsense. There are lots of people who would be willing to compromise and make do with the T5 Excalibur/Vesper/Exeter. They would be happy and it would cut the number of people who complain at least by half. Basic divide and conquer.
However, the longer Cryptic ignores the question the more I doubt the story about the Constitution ban. That CBS allows the D7, B'rel, Excelsior and D'kyr at T5 but not the Constitution COULD be believed. After all there would be a true to scale Constitution standing in Vegas if not for one stupid Paramount executive. However CBS banning the Constitution from T5 and Cryptic ignoring all questions after the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter? That's just fishy.
WHAT??? A true to scale Constitution????? How did that NOT happen??? That would be so EPIC AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From reading the dev tracker I see that branflakes is still "passing along" feedback to the devs. I wonder why he refuses to do so about this issue?
There are a few possibilities. One is that he simply hasnt seen it, but I find that highly unlikely. Another is that he personally doesnt like the idea. However that would be very disturbing, as that would mean his personal preferences are dictating what feedback gets to the Devs. I really hope that isnt the case.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
There are a few possibilities. One is that he simply hasnt seen it, but I find that highly unlikely. Another is that he personally doesnt like the idea. However that would be very disturbing, as that would mean his personal preferences are dictating what feedback gets to the Devs. I really hope that isnt the case.
I get the impression that the Devs are under to strict orders (though not really sure from who) to ignore ANY conversation remotely tied to T5 Connies. The exception being of course if the convo gets out of hand or turns into a flamefest. Then they shut it down.
No proof of this mind you. Just a hunch.
Frankly, I think they want us all to just forget about it and never bring it up again. You can tell in Gekos last interview, he didn't really want to talk about the T5 Connie, but rather got blindsided by the topic by an off-hand remark and had no choice but to defuse it.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I get the impression that the Devs are under to strict orders (though not really sure from who) to ignore ANY conversation remotely tied to T5 Connies. The exception being of course if the convo gets out of hand or turns into a flamefest. Then they shut it down.
No proof of this mind you. Just a hunch.
Frankly, I think they want us all to just forget about it and never bring it up again. You can tell in Gekos last interview, he didn't really want to talk about the T5 Connie, but rather got blindsided by the topic by an off-hand remark and had no choice but to defuse it.
I'm not really sure what you mean by "had no choice but to defuse it". Its not like some bomb was about to go off; he didnt have to say what he did, he chose to. If they really werent allowed to discuss it he wouldnt have done that.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
I'm getting really peeved about this. Show me proof that CBS said "No T5 Connie". I've not seen it anywhere.
The fact that it isn't in game is all the proof you need. Its been proven that devs personal opinion doesn't matter when it comes to making money. They can make money on this easily, so if they were allowed to it would have been in game a long time ago.
The fact that it isn't in game is all the proof you need. Its been proven that devs personal opinion doesn't matter when it comes to making money. They can make money on this easily, so if they were allowed to it would have been in game a long time ago.
That is false because they are allowed to make the Ambassador class but it still isnt in game yet.
That is false because they are allowed to make the Ambassador class but it still isnt in game yet.
Exactly. While they claim that they will do it at some point with proper story introduction that is nonsense. Who needed a big introduction for the Excelsior or the D'kyr? There are ships the devs don't like. Geko complained that the Ambassador wouldn't fit into the tier system and that he would not want to make a T5 refit for it because it's not cool enough.
While it is believable that someone as CBS is stupid enough to tell them that they can't have a Constitution at endgame that does simply not explain that they don't do anything with the other skins.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Comments
Welcome to licensing.
When Paramount had the IP, they wanted to keep TOS and TNG/VOY/DS9 as separate licenses. This is in part because the Decipher game (which began as a TNG-only game and added DS9 before eventually getting the others) was successful but seen as prohibitively complicated. So Paramount licensed TOS to a much larger company with a fatter wallet.
Then, when "Trials and Tribble-ations" happened, Decipher claimed that gave them the rights to use Kirk and company as DS9 characters.
Lawyers were consulted. Paramount conceded this point.
Legally, there is no Star Trek universe.
Legally, there are 726 episodes of television and 11 movies, which can be owned in whole or in part by different people.
CBS owns the better part of the 726 episodes and 10 films -- ALTHOUGH there are, I believe, some elements even on the shows which CBS does not own due to contractual arrangements. In general, this excludes the music and most of the actor likenesses but includes actors in heavy makeup (depending on their contract) and some promotional stock photography of the actors. Also excluded would be some things of dubious legality like the Millenium Falcon (which appeared in First Contact).
There is nothing that holds these episodes together. Each is separate property. In theory, CBS could sell 5 episodes and 5 episodes only to someone else.
For simplicity's sake, CBS tends to sell them as series bundles.
However, STO having a TNG/DS9/Voyager/Enterprise/TOS/Films license does not guarantee access to everything there, only what CBS owns and allows them to use. (And there are things in episodes that CBS doesn't own. For example, sets that were built for other shows and recycled. I think, for example, that TNG reused some Blade Runner stuff. Some writers own concepts they created, per contract.)
Moreover, Cryptic does not have exclusive rights. CBS licensed another company DS9 (as I understand it ONLY DS9) rights to produce a browser MMO, Star Trek: Infinite Space. Had that taken off, CBS might have discouraged Cryptic from using DS9 assets because they'd want both games to be healthy so they get too healthy royalty checks.
If CBS is interested in a game whose primary draw is flying a TOS Connie, they might not want the TOS Connie to be prominent here. This would be so that both licensees generate healthy revenue for CBS. The presence of a TOS Connie here might damage the ability of CBS to license a second Trek MMO set in TOS era, which I could frankly see them considering.
Fortunately the Excal/Vesper/Exeter arent connies, so there is no reason they cannot be in the fleet store as long as the connie skin isnt an option.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Unless CBS decided they were too Connie-like and told Cryptic not to add any more of them.
This isn't something where Cryptic is in a bargaining position with CBS on.
If it's purely about the Connie, then maybe a compromise could be struck for the Exeter/etc.
If it's about CBS holding back the Connie profile to build a licensing deal with someone else, they can reject anything Connie-like.
Thanks for stating the obvious.:)
In that case Cryptic could still tell us what is happening. But I have trouble seeing the Excalibur and Vesper as too similar to the Constitution. The Excalibur looks more like something you'd get if you leave an Ambassador and a Sovereign alone at ESD for a night and the Vesper is more inspired by the Excelsior than the Constitution. The only thing that could be mistaken for a Constitution when seen from another galaxy would be the Exeter. Until you realize that it has a freakishly large saucer.:D
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Cryptic could just be trying to avoid looking like they're politely saying "CBS is being a huge **** about this", with regards to the Connie/Cruisers.
They've acknowledged that CBS is in control of many things, and that one of those things was using the Connie at Endgame. That was way before the whole Fleet Retrofits and Starbases were even a thing; now players are latching onto that information as the only possible reason that the T2 Cruisers are being left out, with no comment from Cryptic.
If Cryptic is trying to negotiate using some or all of these ships at T5, hopping onto the forums reaffirming that CBS is holding them back would hamper those negotiations. It's kind of like complaining on your Facebook that a client or boss is being a **** to you: eventually, word's gonna reach them and it'll bite you in the TRIBBLE. They'd be well advised to keep their mouths shut on the issue until they have actual news to report, if they're still working out the licensing.
That's pretty much what they already say every time they repeat that we can't have a Constitution because of CBS. Wrecking a Negh'var or D'deridex with a Constitution? No problem. Playing a contemporary or 100 year older ship at T5? No problem. Playing a Constitution at T5? No way.
Fleet retrofits were announced ages ago in an Ask Cryptic. Ironically when someone asked if he could upgrade his Miranda as far as I remember. That there won't be a Constitution among those was announced later. Fortunately it seems all evidence was destroyed with the website move to PWE.
They have been constantly reaffirming that CBS is holding the Constitution back, when asked for the others they either repeated that there won't be a Constitution or ignored the question, so you can't really call that "reaffirming". They never said anything about there being a problem in the first place.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Lots of people agree with this. Excal/Vesper/Exeter are connie variants and I bet a lot off people would love these at endgame. Id love to know exactly what cbs said about the connie and if it only refers to the Connie and its TMP refit
Actually, in a recent interview Geko said CBS really didnt even want the connie in game at all, but Cryptic was still able to get it in. That would suggest they are in fact able to "bargain" with CBS to some degree.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
It should be easy enough for the devs to poke their heads into one of the many threads on this topic and say:
"Yes, we will have a Excal/Vesper/Exeter Fleet Cruiser Refit. We simply haven't got around to it yet. Please be patient."
- or -
"No, we will not have a Excal/Vesper/Exeter Fleet Cruiser Refit, and here is why...."
- or -
"Maybe. We are still discussing with CBS, and will let you guys knoiw when we know."
Alot of people lay into Cryptic for poor customer service and lack of communication. Not answering questions on topics that alot of people are wondering about, kinda reinforces that sterotype of Cryptic it would seem.
We'd just like to have a question answered. Not be ignored.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I have not been playing a long time true but I would rather have them make ships that they have rights to instead of refitting ships that another company has rights to do you see what i am saying instead of fighting for the Connie fight for a whole new design....Might even do a promo for a new design and the folks who help make the new ship 50 will get it free ..play smarter not harder put your efforts into something that will futher the game and make it better for us all not just those of you who want a Connie refit......
Fortunately Cryptic *does* have the rights to the Excal/Vesper/Exeter. That said, CBS has final say on *all* ships that go in game, including the ones designed by Cryptic.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
You seem to be in the wrong thread. No one here asked for a Constitution, refit or otherwise. We are asking for the Excalibur, Vesper and Exeter. All original Cryptic designs. So if they don't have the rights for them no one does.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
You have a pretty good point there.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
Just not good enough to get a response, unfortunately.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Probably till the topic slides a few pages back and into the dustbin of forum history.
Then they won't have to ignore it. They will just pretend it never happened.
Cryptic, the silence is deafening.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I intend to keep asking, whether its in threads like this, the next Ask Cryptic, or podcast interviews that take community submitted questions. I'll also bring it up in threads regarding S6 in general, since the fleet store is just as much a part of S6 as the other things.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
WHAT???
[/SIGPIC]
There are a few possibilities. One is that he simply hasnt seen it, but I find that highly unlikely. Another is that he personally doesnt like the idea. However that would be very disturbing, as that would mean his personal preferences are dictating what feedback gets to the Devs. I really hope that isnt the case.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
I get the impression that the Devs are under to strict orders (though not really sure from who) to ignore ANY conversation remotely tied to T5 Connies. The exception being of course if the convo gets out of hand or turns into a flamefest. Then they shut it down.
No proof of this mind you. Just a hunch.
Frankly, I think they want us all to just forget about it and never bring it up again. You can tell in Gekos last interview, he didn't really want to talk about the T5 Connie, but rather got blindsided by the topic by an off-hand remark and had no choice but to defuse it.
"You shoot him, I shoot you, I leave both your bodies here and go out for a late night snack.
I'm thinking maybe pancakes." ~ John Casey
I'm not really sure what you mean by "had no choice but to defuse it". Its not like some bomb was about to go off; he didnt have to say what he did, he chose to. If they really werent allowed to discuss it he wouldnt have done that.
The.Grand.Nagus
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NPW Forums
Probably doesnt like the idea so he's ignoring it.
It's a sad story of a man who was afraid that no one would come to see it and that it then would be a big, eternal monument of Paramount's failure. <= Click for link.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
The fact that it isn't in game is all the proof you need. Its been proven that devs personal opinion doesn't matter when it comes to making money. They can make money on this easily, so if they were allowed to it would have been in game a long time ago.
That is false because they are allowed to make the Ambassador class but it still isnt in game yet.
Exactly. While they claim that they will do it at some point with proper story introduction that is nonsense. Who needed a big introduction for the Excelsior or the D'kyr? There are ships the devs don't like. Geko complained that the Ambassador wouldn't fit into the tier system and that he would not want to make a T5 refit for it because it's not cool enough.
While it is believable that someone as CBS is stupid enough to tell them that they can't have a Constitution at endgame that does simply not explain that they don't do anything with the other skins.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.