test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Is it really Cryptic or does Star Trek just not translate well to video games?

1235»

Comments

  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Star Trek can translate well to games. Too bad Developers these days seem to not be bothered to even try to make their game reflect the IP it is based on. To their mind, all they need to do is slap the IP name on the label and it's gold.

    But let me put this out there:

    How many episodes of Star Trek were about exploration?

    How many episodes focused on them going from planet to planet cataloguing this and that and scanning stuff. Yes, they did that in episodes, but the episodes weren't ABOUT them doing it. they were ABOUT them dealing with things they discovered, or things that happened to them WHILE exploring.

    Exploring is what the crew did off the screen. Dealing with stuff is what we got to watch them do... This is why creating workable exploration content for STO is so difficult.

    I think this just underscores what drives the faction content disparity and some of the un-Trek feeling in the game.

    We get sent around based on orders rather than acting based on character motivation like the series captains did.

    Let me illustrate:

    WoW has many times the budget of STO and yet a huge chunk of their content is faction agnostic and a large volume of it deals with quests that are issued by items or, as of Cataclysm, self-issued. And beyond that, issued by parties who are not fully affiliated with the government that you serve. (Tuskarr, centaurs, Cenarion Circle, Pandarens, etc. etc. etc.) This results in content that is naturally cross faction rather than feeling as though it's written for one faction and rescripted or content that is absent for opposing governments and factions. (An interesting component of WoW is also that the two factions are each made up of seven racial mini-factions now.) I think it's interesting that a game with many times the budget of STO took some of these shortcuts and STO didn't.

    I think a fruitful exercise would be to look at the episodes from the shows and determine who the guestgivers for each story are and what quests they gave.
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Where No Man Has Gone Before
    Quests:
    Starfleet: Attempt to bypass galactic barrier. (Breadcrumbs quest)
    Spock: Kill Gary Mitchell (optional quest, declined)
    Self-Initiated Quest: Defeat Gary Mitchell

    Charlie X
    Quests:
    Starfleet: Transport Charlie Evans to Alpha IV
    Self-Initiated/Rand Initiated: Mentor Charlie Evans in Combat
    Self-Initiated: Survive Charlie Evans' games

    The Man Trap
    Quests:
    Starfleet: Perform Medical Exam on Archaeologists (Breadcrumbs Quest)
    Darnell's dead body: Investigate Crewman Darnell's death
    Self-Initiated: Remain to further investigate Darnell's death
    Crater's dead body: Defeat salt creature

    The Naked Time:
    Quests:
    Starfleet: Retrieve researchers from Psi 2000 and Observe Planetary Disintegration
    McCoy (Your CMO): Investigate Tormolen's Death/Save the Ship

    It might be interesting to look further but my overall observation here is that faction orders are breadcrumbs quests that get you into a situation that isn't really faction specific and also that the bulk of the stories take place aboard your own ship.

    If a Klingon ship wound up transporting Charlie Evans or traveling to M113, they'd experience the same basic chain of events from there. The faction stuff is just what gets you to a location and once there, you accept or decline quests from independent natives, your crew, or your own observations.
  • foxfire2000foxfire2000 Member Posts: 160 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Star Trek can translate well to games. Too bad Developers these days seem to not be bothered to even try to make their game reflect the IP it is based on. To their mind, all they need to do is slap the IP name on the label and it's gold.

    Yeap......the Trek gaming franchise in the late 90s was a gold mine....it was not until we started getting any old **** with the Trek name on it that the whole franchise became a dead horse, with lazy publishers beating the horses dead corpse with mind numbing **** like Starship creator 1/2, ST Away team, ST Conquest...to name a few of the turds thrown towards trek fans.

    At this stage its not really changed much in 10 years since Activision sued vicom for allowing the franchise to die,as we have seen in the last few years the gaming franchise is still allowing poor games to be produced when they appear........ST legacy, ST DAC and now STO, which suffers from the same issue of having so much potential yet TPTB are simply unwilling to put the effort and cash into the game....and that's a shame because STO at the beginning looked like it could reignite the whole Trek gaming franchise the way The 25th Anniversay did way back in 1992..........but as we now see it will boldly go where all other poor trek games have gone before.

    Shame really.
  • centersolacecentersolace Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    It might be interesting to look further but my overall observation here is that faction orders are breadcrumbs quests that get you into a situation that isn't really faction specific and also that the bulk of the stories take place aboard your own ship.

    If a Klingon ship wound up transporting Charlie Evans or traveling to M113, they'd experience the same basic chain of events from there. The faction stuff is just what gets you to a location and once there, you accept or decline quests from independent natives, your crew, or your own observations.

    That's an interesting way of putting it, and a mission structure like this would help improve the Trek feeling, enable the quick production of episodes and (finally) allow for non-violent solutions.

    P.S. Activision ruins everything. This is scientifically proven fact.
  • tebsutebsu Member Posts: 372 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    geoff484 wrote: »
    I was thinking about the age old criticism that STO isn't "Star Trek enough" and I'm personally 50/50 on that - I think there is some missions/episodes that do have a very Trek feel to them. I've read quite a bit of posts claiming that this game is all pew pew, but what would you really do in a Star Trek game to make it fun?

    Exploration is one option, sure, but once you discover a system or whatever, what then? What would the payoff be?

    Personally Trek always seemed to be mostly a dialogue driven franchise to me, but maybe that's a false observation. I loved watching the characters, I'd love to be in one of the characters position - but as far as game play? Not so much.

    Honestly, I think the best way to make it more Trek is to have more puzzles. To me that's what the shows were usually all about, them trying to figure things out. I remember the old Trek game for NES (25th anniversary) it was mostly ground stuff, you figuring out how to get things done - It was mostly puzzles and it felt very Trek. The best part of that is the one space combat mission it had was effing great, but I think it was great because the game didn't evolve around it. I might be going a little off subject, but I think that's why video games and movies alike are kinda going down hill and getting redundant - There's no build up any more. When something awesome happens it should be occasional, otherwise it becomes boring quick.


    To me that's what the biggest element this game is missing - Trek was a thinking man's show, I don't ever have to think at all in this game (minus a few awesome FEs). In the age of Call of Duty, Halo, and movies that have to rush right into the action just to keep the generations audience from throwing temper tantrums because they need something shiney to look at every 2 minutes, I just don't think Trek can translate well into a game (or for a new movie for that matter).

    This isn't me complaining by the way, I have my beefs with this game but this isn't really one of them, just a topic I wanted to engage in.


    star trek elite force 2 +
    star trek bridge commander +
    freelancer
    = your answer to what i would like to have instead of sto. i dont understand how a game that is only 3 years old is not able to do better than a few like 10 year old games..
    What ? Calaway.
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    tebsu wrote: »
    star trek elite force 2 +
    star trek bridge commander +
    freelancer
    = your answer to what i would like to have instead of sto. i dont understand how a game that is only 3 years old is not able to do better than a few like 10 year old games..

    The short answer is:

    Different technical limitations.
    Different genre of game.
    Different budget.
    Ongoing game vs. closed ended.

    Elite Force had over 50 developers who made it in around a year.

    That's upwards of $4,000,000 in today's money before licensing fees or hiring actors. Probably upwards of $10 million to produce that game today. For 8 missions with unique maps and cutscenes.

    A stock analyst calculated Cryptic's revenue goals at around $2.4 million for a seven month period following Season 6.

    In short, an ambitious MMO might manage to produce something on par with EF and pretty much then only if they could do it as a non-profit. MMOs, by their nature, target more money out of fewer paying players and have benefits and drawbacks resulting from a smaller base.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    tebsu wrote: »
    star trek elite force 2 +
    star trek bridge commander +
    freelancer
    = your answer to what i would like to have instead of sto.
    If so, then why dont you just do it?:)
    Don't missunderstand me now, if i had the talent and knowledge, nothing could keep me from making such a game, even if it where just a 2D game or something like that.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    I think for all the games it's been more of a dev and company then the idea. they always screwup the implementation of the idea. now a good number over come this fault but some don't
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    typhoncal wrote: »
    3. STLegacy ? A Complete shamble of a title, nothing new nothing real substantial in its release, hell it was released with no multiple connection. Again, modders stepped up and made it a semi-successful but very limited and gave the player nothing new.

    Stock Legacy yes but if you got the Ultimate Universe Mod you could have alot of fun and with UUM the ship detail is better than sto.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Yeap......the Trek gaming franchise in the late 90s was a gold mine....it was not until we started getting any old **** with the Trek name on it that the whole franchise became a dead horse, with lazy publishers beating the horses dead corpse with mind numbing **** like Starship creator 1/2, ST Away team, ST Conquest...to name a few of the turds thrown towards trek fans.

    At this stage its not really changed much in 10 years since Activision sued vicom for allowing the franchise to die,as we have seen in the last few years the gaming franchise is still allowing poor games to be produced when they appear........ST legacy, ST DAC and now STO, which suffers from the same issue of having so much potential yet TPTB are simply unwilling to put the effort and cash into the game....and that's a shame because STO at the beginning looked like it could reignite the whole Trek gaming franchise the way The 25th Anniversay did way back in 1992..........but as we now see it will boldly go where all other poor trek games have gone before.

    Shame really.
    I absolutely agree with you.
    I know i shouldn't blame cyptic, or cryptics designers, because obviously they can't do any better.

    I blame CBS, they seem not to care at all about Star Trek games, they seem not to be interested in making qualitative good Star Trek games, they seem only to care for the fast money. If Star Trek wouldn't have that many loyal fans it would have been dead for years. Just look at the various Star Trek games: Elite Force I+II, Armada I+II, Starfleet Command I-III, Away team, Bridge Commander, Legacy, Conquest, Invasion, Klingon Academy, Starfleet Academy, Tactical Assault and so on.
    All those games where about some sort of war, obviously creating a Star Trek themed game without making it a war game must be extremely hard, or game companies are just lazy/afraid in creating other types of games.
    I don't say that (some of) those games aren't fun, but it is just monotonous.
    What Star Trek needs is something new and groundbreaking, just like "The 25th Anniversay" in it's days. Not that it was a completely new game concept but it was the by far more fitting game type for a Star Trek game.

    I think a mix between RPG, Simulation and Adventure type of games would fit much better to Star Trek than making another RTS wargame. Game companies should finally understand that Star Treks strenght lies in it's characters (including the ship itself) and not how many other ships have been blown up.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • centersolacecentersolace Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    yreodred wrote: »
    All those games where about some sort of war, obviously creating a Star Trek themed game without making it a war game must be extremely hard, or game companies are just lazy/afraid in creating other types of games.

    It's this. Game companies seem to think that Star Trek fans are all "OoooooOOOoo! Explosions!!!" type gamers, and the slower paced, methodical people are a niche. Any Star Trek fan will tell you it's reversed.
    yreodred wrote: »
    I think a mix between RPG, Simulation and Adventure type of games would fit much better to Star Trek than making another RTS wargame. Game companies should finally understand that Star Treks strenght lies in it's characters (including the ship itself) and not how many other ships have been blown up.

    I agree. I adore explosions, booms, bangs, fury and flame, but sometimes I just want to travel the universe and poke at stuff. :P
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    It's this. Game companies seem to think that Star Trek fans are all "OoooooOOOoo! Explosions!!!" type gamers, and the slower paced, methodical people are a niche. Any Star Trek fan will tell you it's reversed.



    I agree. I adore explosions, booms, bangs, fury and flame, but sometimes I just want to travel the universe and poke at stuff. :P

    I think last night's podcast UGC had some nice discussion on novels vs. games. I've wrestled with that in my own missions and sometimes strayed too far into the novel territory. Overall, I can still break 4 stars on the strength of my writing but I do instinctively feel that tug that says, "If it's not brilliant, cut it and add more explosions."

    That said, I think it's possible for Cryptic to try for brilliance that warrants more reading and puzzles and that they don't take enough chances on the quality of their writing or consider the writing closely enough sometimes.

    And I think Jesse Heinig kinda nailed that point when he was talking about where the game could improve, when he was in Vegas.

    I totally get Kestrel running with that limitation where people tell her to cut when she hits three paragraphs. And it's fair. But I think you can "earn" those three paragraphs from players if the paragraphs are good.

    Part of that means writers conscious of this who try to earn their right to be wordy with a new bar for quality... And part of that means producers and content folks willing to take that chance.

    It's not that text is bad. It's that the more of it there is, the better it needs to be... And it really shouldn't pop up at a point when there's no time to read it.
  • centersolacecentersolace Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    It's not that text is bad. It's that the more of it there is, the better it needs to be... And it really shouldn't pop up at a point when there's no time to read it.

    You don't always need writing or explosions.

    I'm waiting for a mission where you have to keep an angry mob calm while someone tries to prevent a massive bomb from exploding. (We have embassies now.) :P
  • captainjk740captainjk740 Member Posts: 60 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    It seems like the people making these games do not understand the Star Trek motto: "to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before."

    When Star Trek fans see a new game, they are let down after the new wears off. Star Trek is about exploring space and discovering new civilizations. The Star Trek games that are produced do not really include the exploration aspect. Instead of games focusing on exploration with combat on the side, many developers put exploration as a side line activity to space and ground battles.
  • oldkhemaraaoldkhemaraa Member Posts: 1,039 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Now I gotta disagree on a couple points of the original poster comments..

    Back when Interplay was around and had the trek licence they put together some awesome trek games. The classic Startrek 25th anniversery, and Final Unity were wonderfull quest/puzzle games with fantastic stories to them and a very tv show feel.

    Starfleet Academy and Klingon Academy were absolutly fantastic (and still very playable even today)

    Bridge Commander strongly captured the feel of starship command though it was a definate system hog and could be very balky at times.

    And then when you wanted just pure starship combat there was the Starfleet Command series. Based off the Starfleet Battles table top game rules it translated very very well into a real time space combat computer game. a 4 game series, the first was just excellent. SFC-II empires at war expanded the numbers of ships availible and added some new systems to the games engine. SFC-II Orion Pirates added yet a few more goodies. SFC-III departed from the SFB base core and I personally wasn't very pleased with the way players could customize thier ships but it did have some rather unique features (I especially liked the way cloaking worked).. ((the studio was purchased by Activision (Activision/Atari I belive.. sound familier?).. who insisted on the specific changes... many of the previous SFC series players didn't like SFC-III at all.. myself being one of them))

    If I could turn the way back machine on I'd use the highly tactical SFC-II game system for space combat with prebuilt ships. There would be more starships availible, and player-Bridge Officer skills would simply be combat modifiers.. the one change I would definatly incorporate would be full 360 degree combat.. In tactical combat players would manage thier energy generation to balance combat capabilities, shield reinforcement, and movement. Toss in an electronic warefare system and suddenly space combat is seriously rocking.

    The current ground combat system isn't to bad in STO, but I'd prefer a more tactical feel to it.
    I'd also prefer it to be something players would want to avaiod because its DANGEROUS..DEADLY, and is a great way to fail an assignment due to getting killed.

    In Startrek lore Space Combat is a deadly dangerous business. STO doesn't feel like trek in this regard. There is simply way to much combat going on. Theres no bluffing the bad guys, or getting them to back off and consider that its not a good day to die.

    STO isn't bad.. but IMO its far from great.

    The F2P transition has been to me a dissapointment due to the concentration on creating things that push the players to spend more money, and less time spent creating great Trek.

    There have been several hundred trek based short storied, novella, and full novels produced and in print and most of them are about people solving problems. My all time favorite Trek Novels are Ford "Final Reflection" which takes place in the prime universe prior to TOS ((and gives a good explination as to why Klingons are so varied.. apparently Klingon have a small issue with raceism them selves)) and Decondito "How much for just the planet" which is a delightfull romp following a planet discovered to have a huge amount of dilithium deposits with colony of writers, artists, and generally creative folks who do not want to be over run by either the federation or the klingons, and arrange to set up the situation in such a way as the.. well... you'll just have to read the story.. think Gilbert and Sullivan, plus a bit of Sun-tsu.. you'll love the pie fight at the end. SO folks definatly manage to get the better of James Tiberius Kirk and the Klingon Empire.. and.. oh yea.. nowbody gets killed.. though Scotty on the Golf Course is a great bit of fun too.

    Those stories are Trek.. one is serious, the other very light hearted, but mostly they're about people. STO is not about people.. STO at to many levels is about getting the latest and greatest shiny's and thats why I don't play very much any more. I bought a LTM way back when on the promise that this would be awesome. But Atari had the game and didn't know what they had or really what to do with it.. and most certainly didn't understand MMO's. Perrfect world negociated for the game not so much for trek as to get Cryptic Studio's. The money the game makes goes to PWI, and Cryptic get some back as a budget. PWI does indeed know how to do F2P MMO's, and in some ways the change of ownership has been very very good for the game and for cryptic. In other ways though its been very very very bad for the game.

    Monitization: More money faster.. unfortunatly most of the money does not go back into developing the game. As a matter of fact most of the money likely goes to paying PWI shareholders, and covering paychecks for staff.

    I really wish Cryptic had chosen to go independent and used a mix of F2P and subscription.. including rasing monthly subs if needed.

    Crome Content vs Story Content: To much of the former, and insufficient of the latter. I'm definatly NOT happy with it. While the Duty officers, Fleet starbase, and upcoming Reputaion sub systems and great stuff in thier own right, soncentration on these have left making great missions in the hands of the players in the form of foundry authors... who really need to be subscribed players.. So.. to make content for the game they have to actually pay.. right, ok, we can live with that.. yet.. mission rewards for player to play the foundry content is.. well.. not very good. Honestly I don't understand why prolific foundry authors that write great missions are even paying for the game.. not only should they get to play for free as proven entities they should be getting copioous amounts of free ZEN as a thank you from PWI and Cryptic if for no other reason then for doing what the owners and developers should be doing themselves. Its rather shamefull to me really.

    The greatest amount of crome content though is Starships and visual mods in the form of uniforms (which one faction has a great deal of, and theother is a poor, ignored red headed unwanted step child says the evidence.) and this content is strongly monitized. $25 to $50 for the latest and greatest.. (Dont get me started on the Vesta.. wonderfull and all that but all the way live pay to win and overpowered. PvP is simply unrewarding to players that don't have a copious amounts of cash to spend. Its all part of the F2P monitizing and it makes copious amounts of cash. Its does NOT how ever make a great game, or an MMO)

    I don't actually play STO any more.. I log in to hang out with people not play the game. I haven't run a mission in months. And to though that would respond to "Well your just a *fill in the blank* please to note.. LIFE TIME MEMBERSHIP.. .. 1000 day veteran. ALso KDF oriented players.. You betcha I got some gripes..

    In closing. I don't see the current trend changing in any way any time within the next two years. More monitizing will happen. Shineys that must be purchased with Zen will be trotted out, and When they have finally run out of things to torture the fed player base with THEN and only THEN will the KDF faction get the love.. Expect to shell out hundreds of dollars KDF players. Whenthe KDF is finally on par more or less with the fed faction (they never will be entirely) then the Romulan Faction will start getting developed. At that point STO should likely be at year 6, and have about 2-4 more years to run. With the game now in a mature state staff will be moved to neverwinter (or what ever else is going on by then) and very little new development will happen. A small team of mission writers and artists will stay in place to continue generating FE type content, but at that point the game will have matured and there just wont be a whole lot more that can be added.

    Sorry for the long post folks.. this one started writing its self.
    "I aim to misbehave" - Malcolm Reynolds
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    yreodred wrote: »
    I absolutely agree with you.
    I know i shouldn't blame cyptic, or cryptics designers, because obviously they can't do any better.

    I blame CBS, they seem not to care at all about Star Trek games, they seem not to be interested in making qualitative good Star Trek games, they seem only to care for the fast money. If Star Trek wouldn't have that many loyal fans it would have been dead for years. Just look at the various Star Trek games: Elite Force I+II, Armada I+II, Starfleet Command I-III, Away team, Bridge Commander, Legacy, Conquest, Invasion, Klingon Academy, Starfleet Academy, Tactical Assault and so on.
    All those games where about some sort of war, obviously creating a Star Trek themed game without making it a war game must be extremely hard, or game companies are just lazy/afraid in creating other types of games.
    I don't say that (some of) those games aren't fun, but it is just monotonous.
    What Star Trek needs is something new and groundbreaking, just like "The 25th Anniversay" in it's days. Not that it was a completely new game concept but it was the by far more fitting game type for a Star Trek game.

    I think a mix between RPG, Simulation and Adventure type of games would fit much better to Star Trek than making another RTS wargame. Game companies should finally understand that Star Treks strenght lies in it's characters (including the ship itself) and not how many other ships have been blown up.
    I wouldn't really blame CBS but those who Capt. the franchise in Bandon and Braga.CBS doesn't make the game just issues the license although the starTrek Online was suppose to be played from a bridge with you friends or clan.

    When it come to Armanda and EF blame it on Activison,Bethesda not so much Interplay.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • andy5789andy5789 Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    what Star Trek needs is a real sand box, think EvE Online style, massive galaxy no click to go here, you should actually have to explore and find things then make a bookmark of the location so you can return with friends or whatever
  • centersolacecentersolace Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    andy5789 wrote: »
    what Star Trek needs is a real sand box, think EvE Online style, massive galaxy no click to go here, you should actually have to explore and find things then make a bookmark of the location so you can return with friends or whatever

    I think the biggest problem with STO is how small it is. Space is BIG. The Star Trek Universe is MASSIVE. The game needs to reflect that.
  • typhoncaltyphoncal Member Posts: 247 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    I think the biggest problem with STO is how small it is. Space is BIG. The Star Trek Universe is MASSIVE. The game needs to reflect that.

    That is my biggest problem, STO is simply too small and the Universe which is Star Trek is massive like you stated.
    Commander Shran - You tell Archer, that is three the pink skin owes me!
  • tobar26thtobar26th Member Posts: 799 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    It's this. Game companies seem to think that Star Trek fans are all "OoooooOOOoo! Explosions!!!" type gamers, and the slower paced, methodical people are a niche. Any Star Trek fan will tell you it's reversed.



    I agree. I adore explosions, booms, bangs, fury and flame, but sometimes I just want to travel the universe and poke at stuff. :P

    Yeah, I agree. My favourite Star Trek games were Final Unity and Elite Force (with Armada a close third)

    Final Unity was a great puzzler, and nothing's come close to it in that sense, it had the real trek feel to it and when you hit combat you sort of went 'oh wow I get to fire a phaser!'


    Elite Force was definitely more zergy shooty, perhaps in a First Contact style I guess, that said it had nice role playish elements in there, exploring the ships, talking to crew, which really gave it a Star Trek feel.


    Star Trek style games are hard to put out, particularly when a game has to have replay value these days, and puzzle games have less than most.

    It's a tough balance, STO does an acceptable job, it's not the best Trek game ever, but it does what it can, with the IP, in the Genre it is.
  • jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,831 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    I haven't read any of the first 12 pages but I'm going to say, it's Cryptic. There are Star Trek games I have enjoyed and thought were well done. Bridge Commander and Elite Force 1 and 2 were all excellent games! STO and the team at Cryptic lack accountability for their work! What I mean by that is, things that are constantly reported as bugs and graphical glitches almost never get fixed. The very few that do, take almost a year. That is ridiculous! I, personally would have a lot less complaints about this game if they stopped using Holodeck for a test server, finally implemented DX10 and 11 in finished ways, and fixed bugs! Once that is done, working on something that isn't a boring repetative grind and money pit would be greatly appreciated as well!

    Lets take a look at this thread. Many people, myself included took the time to go through parts of this game to find graphical issues to be fixed. Some of them have been fixed but the bulk of them are not and there are more. I gave up on contributing to the thread because tacofangs, CaptainGeko, and the rest that are responsible for these graphical errors don't show any interest at all in fixing them. Ignoring the issues isn't going to make them mysteriously disappear! STO literally lives upto the effort those behind the scenes put into it. Sadly, that translates into, not as good as it could be!
  • johnny111971johnny111971 Member Posts: 1,300 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    typhoncal wrote: »
    That is my biggest problem, STO is simply too small and the Universe which is Star Trek is massive like you stated.

    While I don't disagree with this sentiment, I do find it funny. There was a time where Transwarp and Quantum Slipstream didn't exist... an often voicedt complaint... it takes to long to get from point A to point B.

    Now we come full circle, we can quickly zip from one end of STO in to the other in seconds... game is too small.

    The challenge that any game developer has is making a game that appeals to a large audience. The axiom is that you can't please everybody, and that is an understatement. Just spend some time going through the forums here and see all the requests out there. Some are licking windows kinda crazy... but they are customers as well.

    As to this thread... you're right, a dire hard Trekkie would like a true Star Trek-esque experience. But, in the end... a game company is just that... a company... in business to make money. The Trekkie buys the game because its Trek... but the company also wants to attract the non-Trekkie. So they verge off the course of they add elements of the most popular games out... combat.

    This is a business, like any other... the read market reports, have meetings regarding capturing more market share. Even CBS looks at the IP and discusses how to revive the Star Trek Community, and make it more appealing to a new generation/new markets.

    The nature of business is that business must evolve or perish... it must look for additional revenue streams, it must look to attract as many people as possible.

    Saying something isn't Trek jsut doesn't hold water... Trek is what the owners of the IP (CBS) say it is... they will continue to develop the IP... they hope not to offend any long time Trekkies (customer retention), but also realize they have to attract new customers.

    Star Trek Online, Now with out the Trek....
  • andy5789andy5789 Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    While I don't disagree with this sentiment, I do find it funny. There was a time where Transwarp and Quantum Slipstream didn't exist... an often voicedt complaint... it takes to long to get from point A to point B.

    Now we come full circle, we can quickly zip from one end of STO in to the other in seconds... game is too small.

    The challenge that any game developer has is making a game that appeals to a large audience. The axiom is that you can't please everybody, and that is an understatement. Just spend some time going through the forums here and see all the requests out there. Some are licking windows kinda crazy... but they are customers as well.

    As to this thread... you're right, a dire hard Trekkie would like a true Star Trek-esque experience. But, in the end... a game company is just that... a company... in business to make money. The Trekkie buys the game because its Trek... but the company also wants to attract the non-Trekkie. So they verge off the course of they add elements of the most popular games out... combat.

    This is a business, like any other... the read market reports, have meetings regarding capturing more market share. Even CBS looks at the IP and discusses how to revive the Star Trek Community, and make it more appealing to a new generation/new markets.

    The nature of business is that business must evolve or perish... it must look for additional revenue streams, it must look to attract as many people as possible.

    Saying something isn't Trek jsut doesn't hold water... Trek is what the owners of the IP (CBS) say it is... they will continue to develop the IP... they hope not to offend any long time Trekkies (customer retention), but also realize they have to attract new customers.

    taking time to get around does not equal a large galaxy, actually what we had was a tiny galaxy that took awhile to move around, speeding up or slowing travel time does not change the size of the galaxy

    they really should of made a massive sand box, doing missions and special events is fine but you can only do them so many times, the game really is to much about grinding the same TRIBBLE over and over and they call it end game

    i'd love to actually explore a massive galaxy, they could have farming areas spread around, random encounters such as a station or ship near by sending a distress signal and you would have to fly to that location and assist with whatever issue, some could be done solo and others would require a group

    also neutral zones should be open pvp areas between players within those factions, maybe have some reserved for fleets and they could fight to control parts of the neutral zones

    they really should of took a hard look at eve at the X series and brought aspects of it over to STO
  • glorthoxglorthox Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Whats STO missing, well things that stay true to star trek would be the one thing I don't like. Tri-cobalts doing more dmg that transphasics. Certain weapons should do more than others. The star trek story in series' always evolves, same thing as weapons and ships. If the game has a transwarp gate, then why can't we explore the gamma's and delta quaderants? Kazan and other races we would see more of.
  • centersolacecentersolace Member Posts: 11,178 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    While I don't disagree with this sentiment, I do find it funny. There was a time where Transwarp and Quantum Slipstream didn't exist... an often voicedt complaint... it takes to long to get from point A to point B.

    Now we come full circle, we can quickly zip from one end of STO in to the other in seconds... game is too small.

    This is not the problem. Getting from place to place instantly does not make the game feel small. Just look at Skyrim, there's a fast travel system in place, but the game still feels massive.

    The problems I have is:

    1. There isn't a whole lot of 3D movement.

    Sure, you can, but the game doesn't encourage it because everything is more or less on the same plane.

    2. The planets are really small.

    While I understand the reasoning behind making it possible to "Orbit" planets, it really doesn't look or feel right. I'm in SPACE for gods sake, I should feel small and insignificant. I don't. My ship is bigger than quite a few "planets" and "moons".

    3. Space is too full of TRIBBLE.

    Too many planets, too many asteroids, too many glowy lightning filled nebulae... Kind of like Number 2, space should be, well, full of space. Asteroid fields, nebulae, comets and the like should be rare rather than the norm. While they look cool, the fact that they're everywhere ruins the coolness factor. (Oh, I have to mask my energy signature in a nebula again?) If you want to make something cool and exciting. Make it rare. It's cheap, but it works.

    4. Battles are too flashy.

    This drives me absolutely nuts. Gunfire is everywhere, abilities are being thrown around left and right, ships are glowing purple. Like number 3 it just puts way too much TRIBBLE on screen. It looks silly.
  • leviathan99#2867 leviathan99 Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    This is not the problem. Getting from place to place instantly does not make the game feel small. Just look at Skyrim, there's a fast travel system in place, but the game still feels massive.

    The problems I have is:

    1. There isn't a whole lot of 3D movement.

    Sure, you can, but the game doesn't encourage it because everything is more or less on the same plane.

    2. The planets are really small.

    While I understand the reasoning behind making it possible to "Orbit" planets, it really doesn't look or feel right. I'm in SPACE for gods sake, I should feel small and insignificant. I don't. My ship is bigger than quite a few "planets" and "moons".

    3. Space is too full of TRIBBLE.


    Too many planets, too many asteroids, too many glowy lightning filled nebulae... Kind of like Number 2, space should be, well, full of space. Asteroid fields, nebulae, comets and the like should be rare rather than the norm. While they look cool, the fact that they're everywhere ruins the coolness factor. (Oh, I have to mask my energy signature in a nebula again?) If you want to make something cool and exciting. Make it rare. It's cheap, but it works.

    4. Battles are too flashy.

    This drives me absolutely nuts. Gunfire is everywhere, abilities are being thrown around left and right, ships are glowing purple. Like number 3 it just puts way too much TRIBBLE on screen. It looks silly.

    I really think ship interiors are what's missing to make the game feel big, because you'd never be conscious of the boxes or the walls in sector space if ship interiors were the transition method. The trick is making them feel social and I have some strong ideas on that, part of which includes some clever map tricks... But every time I bring them up, I feel like the response is that people don't get the idea of bridge hailing and travel cutscenes as a persistent gameplay and social gameplay feature.

    In many respects, I think the issue comes down to something Hav touched on in Podcast UGC this past week:

    There are things this engine doesn't do well. There are things any engine doesn't do well. When you find those things as a designer, you don't do them.

    I think the travel mapscreen we have in place is one of those points. It puts a lot of focus on something MMO engines don't do well. Games that do succeed at making space feel vast play tricks to de-emphasize technical limitations. Floating around a box emphasizes limitations and does so doubly when our focus gets directed towards the edges of the box. (In a mission map, our focus is rarely diverted to the edges. In sector space, our focus is almost always on the edges of the box.)
  • p2wsucksp2wsucks Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    ... Snip ...

    I think the travel mapscreen we have in place is one of those points. It puts a lot of focus on something MMO engines don't do well. Games that do succeed at making space feel vast play tricks to de-emphasize technical limitations. Floating around a box emphasizes limitations and does so doubly when our focus gets directed towards the edges of the box. (In a mission map, our focus is rarely diverted to the edges. In sector space, our focus is almost always on the edges of the box.)

    One of the best things about the design of EvE Online is there's NEVER a feeling of floating around in a box. Imo, STO should have borrowed heavily from EvE's space travel design and scaling in general.
    [Zone] Dack@****: cowards can't take a fed 1 on 1 crinckley cowards Hahahaha you smell like flowers
    Random Quote from Kerrat
    "Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
    C&H Fed banter
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    This is not the problem. Getting from place to place instantly does not make the game feel small. Just look at Skyrim, there's a fast travel system in place, but the game still feels massive.

    The problems I have is:

    1. There isn't a whole lot of 3D movement.

    Sure, you can, but the game doesn't encourage it because everything is more or less on the same plane.

    2. The planets are really small.

    While I understand the reasoning behind making it possible to "Orbit" planets, it really doesn't look or feel right. I'm in SPACE for gods sake, I should feel small and insignificant. I don't. My ship is bigger than quite a few "planets" and "moons".

    3. Space is too full of TRIBBLE.

    Too many planets, too many asteroids, too many glowy lightning filled nebulae... Kind of like Number 2, space should be, well, full of space. Asteroid fields, nebulae, comets and the like should be rare rather than the norm. While they look cool, the fact that they're everywhere ruins the coolness factor. (Oh, I have to mask my energy signature in a nebula again?) If you want to make something cool and exciting. Make it rare. It's cheap, but it works.

    4. Battles are too flashy.

    This drives me absolutely nuts. Gunfire is everywhere, abilities are being thrown around left and right, ships are glowing purple. Like number 3 it just puts way too much TRIBBLE on screen. It looks silly.
    I full agree with you on all points.

    I just want to say something about point 4.
    One thing not everyone may agree, but i absolutely HATE the sound some cannons do. This disrupted sound makes me go nuts, i mean it's really annoying. I also think STO has a too big emphasis on cannons, Beam weapons are just second quality compared to them, which is really un trekkish, TBH. I find them just annoying (not only the sound they make).

    I also agree that Space battles look way too cartoonish, why on earth does my ship go pink just because i order "brace for impact" or something similar? This doesn't make sense, it makes the game feel cheap and silly.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • stark2kstark2k Member Posts: 1,467 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    tobar26th wrote: »

    ...

    It's a tough balance, STO does an acceptable job, it's not the best Trek game ever, but it does what it can, with the IP, in the Genre it is.

    Here is the thing about STO and the expectations of many players. It was said that STO was going to be a continuation of the Prime Universe. It is a telling of events that is transpiring in our (Trek Time) present timeline.

    Many Trekkers here wanted STO to be just that, a continuation of the Prime Universe, apart from the JJ Abram Trek timeline. It is the Prime Universe that many players have come to love and enjoy. This inspiration was further enhanced by STO's Recorded timeline of the Prime Universe in both the game and on the website.

    This is clearly not the case. :(

    Though CRYPTIC did not Officially come out and stated that their game is a continuation of the timeline, but made it that it takes place in the Prime Universe. However; There is an ongoing problem. That problem is maintaining a balance between Canon, Gameplay, and the real life issue of monetary gain.

    We all know the results now and how out of balance STO has become. CRYPTIC failed to preserve the sanctity of what is Canon for the sake of monetary gain, and at the additional cost of Gameplay. This has caused the game from being a pure Trek game per se, and has merely become a zombified version of Star Trek.

    Its not that Star Trek is a bad iP for a sci fi game, its in the company / Developer translation. The CRYPTIC team had the right ideas but failed in its delivery.

    It is true that a perfect Star Trek MMO is a difficult thing to do, but it can be done with the utilization of Brilliant writers & Programmers. If they had a balanced team between writers that embraced the Star Trek Lore and not merely used it, and a Brilliant team of programmers that know how to balance the gameplay mechanics, you can have a successful Star Trek game.

    By the way, success is NOT just measured by monetary gain, but how well the game is balanced and its survivability.
    StarTrekIronMan.jpg
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    stark2k wrote: »
    Here is the thing about STO and the expectations of many players. It was said that STO was going to be a continuation of the Prime Universe. It is a telling of events that is transpiring in our (Trek Time) present timeline.

    Many Trekkers here wanted STO to be just that, a continuation of the Prime Universe, apart from the JJ Abram Trek timeline. It is the Prime Universe that many players have come to love and enjoy. This inspiration was further enhanced by STO's Recorded timeline of the Prime Universe in both the game and on the website.

    This is clearly not the case. :(

    Though CRYPTIC did not Officially come out and stated that their game is a continuation of the timeline, but made it that it takes place in the Prime Universe. However; There is an ongoing problem. That problem is maintaining a balance between Canon, Gameplay, and the real life issue of monetary gain.

    We all know the results now and how out of balance STO has become. CRYPTIC failed to preserve the sanctity of what is Canon for the sake of monetary gain, and at the additional cost of Gameplay. This has caused the game from being a pure Trek game per se, and has merely become a zombified version of Star Trek.

    Its not that Star Trek is a bad iP for a sci fi game, its in the company / Developer translation. The CRYPTIC team had the right ideas but failed in its delivery.

    It is true that a perfect Star Trek MMO is a difficult thing to do, but it can be done with the utilization of Brilliant writers & Programmers. If they had a balanced team between writers that embraced the Star Trek Lore and not merely used it, and a Brilliant team of programmers that know how to balance the gameplay mechanics, you can have a successful Star Trek game.

    By the way, success is NOT just measured by monetary gain, but how well the game is balanced and its survivability.
    Very well spoken. I think that's exactly the point why STO has dissappointed so many Trek fans. I'm sure most Star Trek fans and STO players agree with you.

    I'll just want to add that i never really thought that Star Trek and MMOs fit together very well.

    I think that Cryptic has choosen a not realy optimal approach to Star Trek, alone the optical differences are too great. Not to speak about game mechanics. But Perpetuas (i always forget that name) visual concepts where even more weird.
    Maybe cryptic didn't have enough time to realize a better Star Trek universe, but i thing after two years one should see certain advances. Surely there have been some improvements, no doubt, but i think the game developed in a completely wrong direction. For example instead of making the game get more depth, it become almost a arcade shooter. Ground combat for example is way to hectic with virtuall no tactical action possible. Space combat on the other hand looks way to cartoonish, and has a way too high emphasis on pure firepower.

    Another example the games Story/timeline is way too chaotic. Everyone is at way with the federation, which itself behaves way out of character. I don't know about anyone else but in my understanding the Star Trek universe looks and works radical different.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
Sign In or Register to comment.