The only way we will ever see Star Trek Online 2 is if Paramount decides to sell that IP to some other developer....and that is a possibility though I am not sure of the wording in the contract they have with Perfect World so its probably unlikely as well.
I'm looking toward the future, near future. I mean with the latest hardware in the market, the game engine is kinda stale don't you think?
Considering that someone mentioned that the game hasn't even left Beta yet, whatever that means, I think a new infrastructure for this game is in order.
The difference between the LoR expansion and the rest of the game is like night and day, a mismatched of quality.
It would be nice if they re-built the game from the ground up, starting with Ground mechanics and physics. Star Trek Online 1 is far too gone for any adequate fix, its the buggiest game to date. Aside from the BUGS, its best to start working on a sequel.
And yes MMO's do have sequels, Case in point Guild Wars 2
Some MMOs have sequels. However, from what I know (which I will admit isn't much), that's typically essentially building an entirely new MMO and slapping the same label on it with some common story elements. Not a way to make happy customers, telling them the game mechanics they got used to and all the stuff they bought are completely useless.
So far as I know MMO's work more off of the expansion pack/patch model, which is what we've seen in STO. Chances are if there is to be an upgrade to the engine, it's going to be more incremental. This would make a lot of sense, since the same core code base is the basis for, AFAIK, all Cryptic's games and a few other games out there.
Plus, STO has manpower problems. Even with the doubled-up staff they still have manpower problems. Moving the entire game to a new engine is probably just not viable right now. So they would likely need something fully backwards compatible, which would take time.
I could see it happening in terms of an upgraded engine, but I don't think the company is over-eager to dump everything they've got, and everything the players have, in order to stick in a new, relatively untested engine and a game that would have to repeat all the growing pains this one has gone through. All while presumably running STO the original, because if they shut that down they would have a lot of really angry customers with no desire to come to the shiny new STO2 when it's completed two years from now. In all likelihood even a lot of the Trek die hards would have moved on to others by then with a sour taste in their mouth from the rug pulling.
In terms of the "beta" comment, there are a lot of very cynical people on this forum. Some have good reason to be. It's probably a reference to the fact that STO has quite a few small to medium importance bugs lying around that seem to stick. It seems that with the new staff they are cleaning up some of these, but I don't know how many they've done or how effective it's been. Calling it "still in beta" is a bit much IMO - considering how many patches Windows gets on a regular basis, I'd say that "beta" is the new "release quality' for much of the software industry, and chances are some bugs will never be fixed, ergo it will never get past the criteria of some as "beta."
My guess is that they will progress to helping to fix up a lot of the older missions over time. There will however always be differences in quality, as the demand for new content and what is likely an active desire NOT to throw out a few hundred thousand dollars of content development will prevent completely redoing all the missions.
I could see it happening in terms of an upgraded engine, but I don't think the company is over-eager to dump everything they've got, and everything the players have, in order to stick in a new, relatively untested engine and a game that would have to repeat all the growing pains this one has gone through. All while presumably running STO the original, because if they shut that down they would have a lot of really angry customers with no desire to come to the shiny new STO2 when it's completed two years from now. In all likelihood even a lot of the Trek die hards would have moved on to others by then with a sour taste in their mouth from the rug pulling.
While generally I agree completely, a game I was quite fond of is doing this actually.
Global Agenda, the company that made it didn't really do things too well, believe it or not, they screwed up by listening to the community too much, when they finally realized all of their content had become watered down and stale due to straying from their original plans, they completely abandoned Global Agenda in favor of their other games, Tribes Ascend and Smite, only to then announce they were going to start work on Global Agenda 2, planning to do it exactly as they originally planned to make the first Global Agenda.
Worst part to me, most of the community, instead of being rightfully angry over their game being blatantly abandoned, is making jumps of joy and excitement over this sequel.
The messy situation I described above is exactly why I prefer for a company to have a set course as to how they want to do things, yes, community input can always be good, but they should remain steadfast in their own plans, otherwise you get half assed functions added that weren't originally supposed to be in the game, in the case of the game above, open world zones are the main example of this.
Star Trek Online 1 is far too gone for any adequate fix, its the buggiest game to date.
Ah, then STO must be the 2nd or 3rd MMO you've ever played in order to come up with one of the most uninformed opinions I've read so far this week. I could rattle off dozens of games that are far buggier and packed with exploits. Simply put, this thread and your convoluted ideas are a waste of time.
Some MMOs have sequels. However, from what I know (which I will admit isn't much), that's typically essentially building an entirely new MMO and slapping the same label on it with some common story elements. Not a way to make happy customers, telling them the game mechanics they got used to and all the stuff they bought are completely useless.
So far as I know MMO's work more off of the expansion pack/patch model, which is what we've seen in STO. Chances are if there is to be an upgrade to the engine, it's going to be more incremental. This would make a lot of sense, since the same core code base is the basis for, AFAIK, all Cryptic's games and a few other games out there.
Plus, STO has manpower problems. Even with the doubled-up staff they still have manpower problems. Moving the entire game to a new engine is probably just not viable right now. So they would likely need something fully backwards compatible, which would take time.
I could see it happening in terms of an upgraded engine, but I don't think the company is over-eager to dump everything they've got, and everything the players have, in order to stick in a new, relatively untested engine and a game that would have to repeat all the growing pains this one has gone through. All while presumably running STO the original, because if they shut that down they would have a lot of really angry customers with no desire to come to the shiny new STO2 when it's completed two years from now. In all likelihood even a lot of the Trek die hards would have moved on to others by then with a sour taste in their mouth from the rug pulling.
In terms of the "beta" comment, there are a lot of very cynical people on this forum. Some have good reason to be. It's probably a reference to the fact that STO has quite a few small to medium importance bugs lying around that seem to stick. It seems that with the new staff they are cleaning up some of these, but I don't know how many they've done or how effective it's been. Calling it "still in beta" is a bit much IMO - considering how many patches Windows gets on a regular basis, I'd say that "beta" is the new "release quality' for much of the software industry, and chances are some bugs will never be fixed, ergo it will never get past the criteria of some as "beta."
My guess is that they will progress to helping to fix up a lot of the older missions over time. There will however always be differences in quality, as the demand for new content and what is likely an active desire NOT to throw out a few hundred thousand dollars of content development will prevent completely redoing all the missions.
Actually I think he was referring to my post. MMOs until they reach "maintenance mode" (which is when there is no longer and new content being added) are considered "Beta" this allows applies to Social networking games as well.
In this case it's not referring to a state of development such as "alpha testing, beta testing, but a state of the game's life cycle.
At this point in time, I feel what would be best for STO would be competition. As far as I can tell, there are no other Star Trek MMO games out there, and there might be 1-2 other games that are based off the JJ-Trek universe (there's a FPS that I saw a trailer for, at least).
The Star Trek franchise is gradually resurging, I feel. The JJ Trek stuff has brought attention back to it after a 5-10 year cooldown after the extremely busy 90's period.
I would personally like to see more singleplayer/limited multiplayer games akin to Starfleet Command and whatnot. A decent turn-based strategy game would be nice, something like Birth of the Federation but not as clunky, and with better battle mechanics.
Just give us options, something that STO can compete against. Right now STO essentially has a monopoly on Star Trek-based gaming. There's nothing else current aside from the FPS I mentioned. This results in a lot of players (die-hard Trekkies like myself) staying with STO because 'that's all there is to play when it comes to Star Trek'. We'll complain and whatnot, but we'll generally stay.
Actually I think he was referring to my post. MMOs until they reach "maintenance mode" (which is when there is no longer and new content being added) are considered "Beta" this allows applies to Social networking games as well.
In this case it's not referring to a state of development such as "alpha testing, beta testing, but a state of the game's life cycle.
Examples of such games include: Shattered Galaxy, Global Agenda and off course Cryptic's very own Champions Online.
Some say maintenance mode is better then no game, I disagree, I see it like someone refusing to let go of a loved one who is essentially only being kept alive by the hospital's life support systems, ergo, brain dead. (I mean no personal disrespect to anyone with this example)
Let it go so you can begin to mourn your loss and eventually move on, take City of Heroes, would people have prefered a long maintenance mode over the closure it got, I wouldn't.
At this point in time, I feel what would be best for STO would be competition. As far as I can tell, there are no other Star Trek MMO games out there, and there might be 1-2 other games that are based off the JJ-Trek universe (there's a FPS that I saw a trailer for, at least).
The Star Trek franchise is gradually resurging, I feel. The JJ Trek stuff has brought attention back to it after a 5-10 year cooldown after the extremely busy 90's period.
I would personally like to see more singleplayer/limited multiplayer games akin to Starfleet Command and whatnot. A decent turn-based strategy game would be nice, something like Birth of the Federation but not as clunky, and with better battle mechanics.
Just give us options, something that STO can compete against. Right now STO essentially has a monopoly on Star Trek-based gaming. There's nothing else current aside from the FPS I mentioned. This results in a lot of players (die-hard Trekkies like myself) staying with STO because 'that's all there is to play when it comes to Star Trek'. We'll complain and whatnot, but we'll generally stay.
Star Trek is a franchise, not a genre, generally more then one MMO based on a specific franchise doesn't happen, especially not with one as big as Star Trek, do you see multiple Star Wars MMO's?
And for the record, I do mean currently active MMO's, not closed or canceled ones.
Actually I think he was referring to my post. MMOs until they reach "maintenance mode" (which is when there is no longer and new content being added) are considered "Beta" this allows applies to Social networking games as well.
In this case it's not referring to a state of development such as "alpha testing, beta testing, but a state of the game's life cycle.
Interesting. I was not aware of this nomenclature. Thank you for clarifying.
The Flux engine used for Independence Was 2 Edge of Chaos would make STO Space Game play look and feel very spectacular, while allowing for the vast feel of space. They would have to recreate their models and maps but considering they already have versions of the models it wouldn't be too difficult to convert to new formats and increase detail for the new engine.
They would have to design the subsystems and implement them in their build but it can be done.
Further they could use the Unreal engine used for "Mass Effect" for ground and in ship game play to enhance the overall experience.
They could use a single server array that can serve PC and console clients that way all gamers can get in on the STO experience. Using these engines they could make NPC bots more intelligent create system traffic, and add distinct character to the game environment.
I had been trying to do something like this for years but it's beyond me and maybe these guys can solve some of the problems I had with server swapping, and client capacity. Check out the screenshots and gameplay of Independence War 2 at http://i-wars.com/
Comments
Some MMOs have sequels. However, from what I know (which I will admit isn't much), that's typically essentially building an entirely new MMO and slapping the same label on it with some common story elements. Not a way to make happy customers, telling them the game mechanics they got used to and all the stuff they bought are completely useless.
So far as I know MMO's work more off of the expansion pack/patch model, which is what we've seen in STO. Chances are if there is to be an upgrade to the engine, it's going to be more incremental. This would make a lot of sense, since the same core code base is the basis for, AFAIK, all Cryptic's games and a few other games out there.
Plus, STO has manpower problems. Even with the doubled-up staff they still have manpower problems. Moving the entire game to a new engine is probably just not viable right now. So they would likely need something fully backwards compatible, which would take time.
I could see it happening in terms of an upgraded engine, but I don't think the company is over-eager to dump everything they've got, and everything the players have, in order to stick in a new, relatively untested engine and a game that would have to repeat all the growing pains this one has gone through. All while presumably running STO the original, because if they shut that down they would have a lot of really angry customers with no desire to come to the shiny new STO2 when it's completed two years from now. In all likelihood even a lot of the Trek die hards would have moved on to others by then with a sour taste in their mouth from the rug pulling.
In terms of the "beta" comment, there are a lot of very cynical people on this forum. Some have good reason to be. It's probably a reference to the fact that STO has quite a few small to medium importance bugs lying around that seem to stick. It seems that with the new staff they are cleaning up some of these, but I don't know how many they've done or how effective it's been. Calling it "still in beta" is a bit much IMO - considering how many patches Windows gets on a regular basis, I'd say that "beta" is the new "release quality' for much of the software industry, and chances are some bugs will never be fixed, ergo it will never get past the criteria of some as "beta."
My guess is that they will progress to helping to fix up a lot of the older missions over time. There will however always be differences in quality, as the demand for new content and what is likely an active desire NOT to throw out a few hundred thousand dollars of content development will prevent completely redoing all the missions.
While generally I agree completely, a game I was quite fond of is doing this actually.
Global Agenda, the company that made it didn't really do things too well, believe it or not, they screwed up by listening to the community too much, when they finally realized all of their content had become watered down and stale due to straying from their original plans, they completely abandoned Global Agenda in favor of their other games, Tribes Ascend and Smite, only to then announce they were going to start work on Global Agenda 2, planning to do it exactly as they originally planned to make the first Global Agenda.
Worst part to me, most of the community, instead of being rightfully angry over their game being blatantly abandoned, is making jumps of joy and excitement over this sequel.
The messy situation I described above is exactly why I prefer for a company to have a set course as to how they want to do things, yes, community input can always be good, but they should remain steadfast in their own plans, otherwise you get half assed functions added that weren't originally supposed to be in the game, in the case of the game above, open world zones are the main example of this.
Ah, then STO must be the 2nd or 3rd MMO you've ever played in order to come up with one of the most uninformed opinions I've read so far this week. I could rattle off dozens of games that are far buggier and packed with exploits. Simply put, this thread and your convoluted ideas are a waste of time.
Actually I think he was referring to my post. MMOs until they reach "maintenance mode" (which is when there is no longer and new content being added) are considered "Beta" this allows applies to Social networking games as well.
In this case it's not referring to a state of development such as "alpha testing, beta testing, but a state of the game's life cycle.
The Star Trek franchise is gradually resurging, I feel. The JJ Trek stuff has brought attention back to it after a 5-10 year cooldown after the extremely busy 90's period.
I would personally like to see more singleplayer/limited multiplayer games akin to Starfleet Command and whatnot. A decent turn-based strategy game would be nice, something like Birth of the Federation but not as clunky, and with better battle mechanics.
Just give us options, something that STO can compete against. Right now STO essentially has a monopoly on Star Trek-based gaming. There's nothing else current aside from the FPS I mentioned. This results in a lot of players (die-hard Trekkies like myself) staying with STO because 'that's all there is to play when it comes to Star Trek'. We'll complain and whatnot, but we'll generally stay.
Examples of such games include: Shattered Galaxy, Global Agenda and off course Cryptic's very own Champions Online.
Some say maintenance mode is better then no game, I disagree, I see it like someone refusing to let go of a loved one who is essentially only being kept alive by the hospital's life support systems, ergo, brain dead. (I mean no personal disrespect to anyone with this example)
Let it go so you can begin to mourn your loss and eventually move on, take City of Heroes, would people have prefered a long maintenance mode over the closure it got, I wouldn't.
Star Trek is a franchise, not a genre, generally more then one MMO based on a specific franchise doesn't happen, especially not with one as big as Star Trek, do you see multiple Star Wars MMO's?
And for the record, I do mean currently active MMO's, not closed or canceled ones.
Interesting. I was not aware of this nomenclature. Thank you for clarifying.
They would have to design the subsystems and implement them in their build but it can be done.
Further they could use the Unreal engine used for "Mass Effect" for ground and in ship game play to enhance the overall experience.
They could use a single server array that can serve PC and console clients that way all gamers can get in on the STO experience. Using these engines they could make NPC bots more intelligent create system traffic, and add distinct character to the game environment.
I had been trying to do something like this for years but it's beyond me and maybe these guys can solve some of the problems I had with server swapping, and client capacity. Check out the screenshots and gameplay of Independence War 2 at http://i-wars.com/