Sandbox isn't really quite the right approach, though things certainly do need to change. Personally I'd like to see things that other games have that we don't - a housing system, more than three classes, etc. I'd also like to see a bit more customization and usefulness in your ship's bridge and interior. The endgame needs to be COMPLETELY overhauled, as well. STFs should be about as long as average dungeon runs rather than being just about 5 minutes each, and should reward a lot more marks. Dilithium should no longer be used for EVERYTHInG, and the ridiculous amount of timegating, and grind in general, should be reduced.
exactly what are the queues for PVP now? the queues have a long wait.. not because the pipes are full, but because no one is queuing. I'm sure one reason PVP has received no love is because the subscriber bas has not supported it. if the PVP queues had the traffic STF queues do, there would be ad eicated dev team to expanding/improving it.
So it's fair to say that if people do not eat foul tasting sandwiches, it must be that they just don't like sandwiches?
and for the roleplayers who are Vadm and are flying the T2 cruiser or the voyager fanboy would be at the mercy of up to 5 escort jockeys per sector? no thanks.
I saw in sector chat yesterday "only chumps are not in fleets" IMHO, there is absolutely no reason to be IN a fleet unless you want to PVP or have to have the best toys.
same with PVP if I want to PVP I'll join the queue. now if they wanted to add a sector that was PVP oriented, like age of conan did, then that would be fine. don't want to PVP , don't go there. or at least give the player the choice to toggle PVP on and off
And what of the PvP roleplayer? How can they remain immersed in their role, when players from enemy factions are sitting next to them, flaunting their immunity from attack?
Theres a nice and simple solution for those who want some kind of Open PvP Area's... You *Flag* yourself for PvP that way no one who isn't interested in PvP gets ganked for fun and can go about their business like normal but anyone who is interested can PvP their little hearts out
and just as a side note it wouldn't be turning it into EVE since in Eve you'd lose all your stuff if you died. STO would be a kinder more soft version of it that hands your toys back to you while done lol
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
No Drama, No Fuss, Just good old fashioned pew pew!
They changed SWG in such a way that talents, classes and all that were made more 'WoW' like. From what i hear SWG used to be really complex, and the changes simplified things. But the change ended up pissing a lot of people off, and a lot of them quit. Here is a short exchange between someone interviewing John Smedley, who from what i can tell was one responsible for the decision to change SWG.
I sort of disagree with this assessment. The CU released in April '05 and NGE in November '05. The servers shut down in December '11. So although these 2 releases weren't positively received by the player base, the game still lasted another 6 years (2x as long as STO has been online total). In the end their servers weren't shut off because of lack of players, some players started petitions and even went to court to keep the servers turned on because they wanted to keep playing the game. In the end the servers were turned off on December 15, 2011 because on December 20, 2011 the servers for TOR were turned on. At least that's how I remember it.
and just as a side note it wouldn't be turning it into EVE since in Eve you'd lose all your stuff if you died. STO would be a kinder more soft version of it that hands your toys back to you while done lol
Yeah, there was even a high-profile incident in EVE a few months ago where someone had a ship worth $9K in real money, then had it destroyed in a matter of seconds in an ambush. That's not going to happen in STO.
Regarding IP-based games, it seems to me the real problem with them is that they have to try to serve two masters: IP-agnostic gamers looking for a good gaming experience, and diehard fans of the IP looking for an IP-immersive experience. If I were to compile a list of everything that happens in STO for the sake of gameplay that would never have happened in the Star Trek TV series or movies (never mind real life), the length of the resulting tome would be up there with the later Harry Potter books.
I sort of disagree with this assessment. The CU released in April '05 and NGE in November '05. The servers shut down in December '11. So although these 2 releases weren't positively received by the player base, the game still lasted another 6 years (2x as long as STO has been online total). In the end their servers weren't shut off because of lack of players, some players started petitions and even went to court to keep the servers turned on because they wanted to keep playing the game. In the end the servers were turned off on December 15, 2011 because on December 20, 2011 the servers for TOR were turned on. At least that's how I remember it.
Lucasart and it owners may have decided that keeping the servers on is the best way to avoid damaging the brand, rather than shutting them down arbitrarily.
Yeah, there was even a high-profile incident in EVE a few months ago where someone had a ship worth $9K in real money, then had it destroyed in a matter of seconds in an ambush. That's not going to happen in STO.
Regarding IP-based games, it seems to me the real problem with them is that they have to try to serve two masters: IP-agnostic gamers looking for a good gaming experience, and diehard fans of the IP looking for an IP-immersive experience. If I were to compile a list of everything that happens in STO for the sake of gameplay that would never have happened in the Star Trek TV series or movies (never mind real life), the length of the resulting tome would be up there with the later Harry Potter books.
I haven't played, so this might already be in there, but I am surprise that EVE hasn't introduce insurance mechanic, similar to the one in Grand theft Auto v online but probably more expensive and less generous pay out.
I haven't played, so this might already be in there, but I am surprise that EVE hasn't introduce insurance mechanic, similar to the one in Grand theft Auto v online but probably more expensive and less generous pay out.
well as I remember it they said they insured the Titan, so they're fine.
I haven't played, so this might already be in there, but I am surprise that EVE hasn't introduce insurance mechanic, similar to the one in Grand theft Auto v online but probably more expensive and less generous pay out.
EVE does have an insurance mechanic, but it doesnt cover the full amount you paid for the ship. Reason for that is to prevent insurance fraud type incidents. IIRC insurance payout prices and cost to get it activated is even adjusted by devs depending on market prices on ships.
a little lesson on how eve money and irl money relate to each other:
When a new story from something like yahoo.com or whatever says a player lost an EVE ship for $6000 dollars that doesnt necessarily mean someone paid 6000 dollars for a virtual ship, which then got blown up. It is possible, but unlikely.
CCP, the developers of EVE, sell 30 day game subscription tokens called plex. PLEX can be bought with real money for @ $15 dollars and it can be redeemed in game as a token. You can put it in your inventory, put it up on the auction house where other people can buy it, and you can fly the token around in your cargo ship where it can get blown up (or rather WILL get blown up). Flying around with the token is generally a stupid thing to do cause people can scan your ship and people DO stake out jumpgates specifically to gank people carrying that kind of stuff. Luckily for you the token can be redeemed anywhere you want...so you can fly to the auction house space station first THEN redeem it.
So you can buy a PLEX-30 day sub token from CCP (legit) and sell it to another player for in game credits called ISK in EVE, which is also legit. So pretty much like this:
Person A has no ISK (in game money) they have $15 dollars real money
Person B has 500 million ISK, no real money (or doesnt want to spend it in game)
Person A buys a PLEX or 15 dollars
Person A puts the PLEX on the Auction House/Market for 500 million ISK
Person B buys the PLEX on the Auction House for 500 million ISK
Person A now has 500 million ISK to spend on a new ship
Person B now has a PLEX/30 day sub token and they can keep on playing the game
Because of this interaction that CCP allows, in game currency actually does have an equivalent real dollar value. You cannot turn your in game currency to IRL money, just IRL money to in game currency using the Person A/B method i just mentioned. The market values for PLEX tokens is just like any other item on the player driven auction house. Its prices can fluctuate...when i played it was between 350-450 million in value for a PLEX.
That's pretty much what the people on these NEWS sites dont explain. A lot of readers assume that the player who got their $6000 ship blown up paid for that ship entirely with cash. But it could very well be that the player probably with help from guildies earned enough in game credits to buy the ship.
Lets say for example the current cost of a PLEX on the auction house is 500 million ISK. That means 500 million ISK is equivalent to about $15 real dollars. One billion ISK is equivalent to $30 dollars, 2 billion ISK is equivalent to 60 dollars...and 200 billion ISK is equivalent to $6000 dollars. You can earn ISK several different ways...by actually playing the game or by buying PLEX and selling it for ISK. I doubt that the $6000 ship was paid for entirely with credits earned by playing the game. A small portion of the credits may have been earned by somebody buying some plex and selling it. But unless the person(s) is crazy or just rich i doubt that they bought $6000 dollars worth of PLEX sold it for all for ISK. Buying @ 400 PLEX tokens and putting them on the market is in itself a gamble and affects the market as well, but i wont go into that.
I know many won't agree, but it's just an idea. Why keep PVP in a stupid arena when in actuality all of space is a battle ground for PVP? How often did Klingon's cruise through Federation controlled space without someone questioning their presence?
Maybe because the vast majority of players are not PvPers and would not enjoy such a system.
This, however, would be a good argument for a PvP server if enough demand is there.
basically Transition Phase means the transition from the old MMORPG style game to the new age style MMORPG, where the three class system, point and click, etc have been phased out.
No offense, but what are you even talking about?
Old style MMO? New style MMO? I think you should probably elaborate more, because to some, "old style MMO" refers to the days when dying meant dropping your entire inventory payload to the ground for anyone to loot, as well as a slew of other penalties, and a minimalistic questing system.
Three class system? You mean the 3 basic roles: Tank, dps, healer? Most of the boss encounters I see in games without the 3 roles are pretty much "hi, I'm a boss who throws out random damage and has no really interesting mechanics other than "don't stand in the ____." The 3-role system allows developers to get really creative in their encounters. If everyone can do all 3 roles on their own, then boss encounters pretty much turn into "throw as many warm bodies at it as you can--each of you warm bodies, make like you're playing oldschool Dragon Warrior! Nuke the boss, heal yourself when low, repeat until the loot drops. Oh, and don't stand in the fire."
Point and click? Phase that out? How are you supposed to target your enemies/allies, then? There's more than enough "action MMOs" out there already, and all they've really shown me is that you basically trade strategy with "point the center of your screen at the dragon and pound away at your keyboard." Neverwinter in particular has shown me that trying to play a healer/support role in an action mmo is utterly loathesome.
Point and click vs the action mmo gimmick is definitely a preference. Part of why I play STO (but not Neverwinter) is because "shooter mode" is optional rather than mandatory. On the other hand, people who like that mechanic will certainly end up sticking with Neverwinter.
but the old 3 class system is still here, the point and click combat is still here, the old engine limitations is still present, limiting real growth.
You're being pretty vague. How does the 3-role system or point-and-click vs action-mmo-targeting limit growth? The only limitation to growth I've seen has been an adherence to the flawed design philosophy that endless grindfests constitute valid endgame content.
does anyone think Cryptic should get a Do over with this? taking what assets they already have, and putting STO on a newer engine which can take some good upgrades over the year?
or should we wait until this short wick has burned out?
Or they could do what they've been doing--keep upgrading the engine as new content rolls out.
Just because a game has things you dislike--in this case, the point-and-click targeting system and the 3-role pve system--that doesn't mean it's outdated, falling short, or what have you.
The only real way this game falls short is something I've seen many different people say--it lacks a compelling endgame experience. "So I just hit level 50! Now what? Oh right, time to grind the same STFs over and over. And over. And. Over."
Three class system? You mean the 3 basic roles: Tank, dps, healer? Most of the boss encounters I see in games without the 3 roles are pretty much "hi, I'm a boss who throws out random damage and has no really interesting mechanics other than "don't stand in the ____." The 3-role system allows developers to get really creative in their encounters. If everyone can do all 3 roles on their own, then boss encounters pretty much turn into "throw as many warm bodies at it as you can--each of you warm bodies, make like you're playing oldschool Dragon Warrior! Nuke the boss, heal yourself when low, repeat until the loot drops. Oh, and don't stand in the fire."
Getting rid of the class structure does not mean that roles cannot be defined or that every character would be able to fill every role. Where a player put their skill points as they advance and what gear they choose to use can result in diverse abilities to fill various roles.
The class system doesn't foster creativity. It stifles it.
Getting rid of the class structure does not mean that roles cannot be defined or that every character would be able to fill every role. Where a player put their skill points as they advance and what gear they choose to use can result in diverse abilities to fill various roles.
The class system doesn't foster creativity. It stifles it.
I used to be all for classless systems, but experience has taught me that they can be just as stifling, leading to a game full of vanilla fighter/mage builds that are all more or less identical because that's what works.
In an MMO environment, it would probably lead to a bunch of wishy-washy generalist builds, and maybe two or three specialized builds in each role that are actually competitive, usually centered around broken powers.
Plus, this isn't a fantasy game: this is a Star Trek game. Star Trek is a series about officers on a ship with assigned duties and specialties. Doctor McCoy is a doctor, and while he might have basic combat training, his role is to be a doctor, and so sh has no business specializing in building phaser turrets or hurling photon grenades.
Now, I could see making class less important or have less of an impact on what skills you can choose, but getting rid of it entirely is removing something from the game that actually is Star Trek.
I used to be all for classless systems, but experience has taught me that they can be just as stifling, leading to a game full of vanilla fighter/mage builds that are all more or less identical because that's what works.
In an MMO environment, it would probably lead to a bunch of wishy-washy generalist builds, and maybe two or three specialized builds in each role that are actually competitive, usually centered around broken powers.
Your experience is just that, your experience. It is limited to the circumstances of that experience. The results of that experience are not necessarily the results to be expected from a different set of circumstances.
And this argument has already been refuted in other threads, where it has been noted that if, players were so inclined to follow one build, then we would have just one class being played in the game currently.
Plus, this isn't a fantasy game: this is a Star Trek game. Star Trek is a series about officers on a ship with assigned duties and specialties. Doctor McCoy is a doctor, and while he might have basic combat training, his role is to be a doctor, and so sh has no business specializing in building phaser turrets or hurling photon grenades.
Now, I could see making class less important or have less of an impact on what skills you can choose, but getting rid of it entirely is removing something from the game that actually is Star Trek.
Actually I find the thought of telling an individual that they have no business in pursuing training in an area outside of their current field to be very unlike Star Trek, where personal development and individual freedom have been cited as the foundation of Federation culture.
Justifying the status quo. Defending tradition for the fear of change. It's irrational, but that's who we are.
Maybe because the vast majority of players are not PvPers and would not enjoy such a system.
This, however, would be a good argument for a PvP server if enough demand is there.
No need for a PvP server, you can just make it so people can /PvP so they are flagged for PvP with the enemy, while other games that have this option tend to be on non instanced maps, they could make it like the old Deep space encounter's where you get pulled in to a zone to PvP. If you don't want to PvP then don't flag yourself for it. Yes I'm sure it would be much more complicated to add than I'm making out but hey, I'm not a programmer
To me, EVERY MMO in existance is in a transition era. They are supposed to be. Otherwise it would NOT be an MMO. To a lot of us, "transition" means "changing". An MMO is ALWAYS supposed to be changing. Growing. Developing and become different all the time. Otherwise it is not an MMO, but just an online version of some single player game that gets old quick.
Slightly related to this thread, I also see people constantly complaining that things ARE changing. To those people my one bit of advice is to quit playing MMO games LOL.
The only real way this game falls short is something I've seen many different people say--it lacks a compelling endgame experience. "So I just hit level 50! Now what? Oh right, time to grind the same STFs over and over. And over. And. Over."
If you're looking for content, there's always the Foundry. Try not treating the missions as grinding opportunities and paying attention to the story missions instead.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
And this argument has already been refuted in other threads, where it has been noted that if, players were so inclined to follow one build, then we would have just one class being played in the game currently.
There is a "One build to rule them all" in game right now, being discussed in the PvP and Builds sections. I don't use it, because I expect it to eventually be nerfed.
Maybe that is just my experience, but shouting "NUH-UH!" to what I feel to be a legitimate game design concern isn't really much of a debating tool either. A classless game needs to be designed to reward specialization over generalization. Otherwise, you might as well just skip the character choices completely and give the player everything right at the start.
Actually I find the thought of telling an individual that they have no business in pursuing training in an area outside of their current field to be very unlike Star Trek, where personal development and individual freedom have been cited as the foundation of Federation culture.
Right. You can train yourself on the holodeck to be a tactical officer, a pilot, a crack phaser shot, a cowboy, or Sherlock Holmes. That doesn't change the fact that Starfleet has divisions and departments, or that manning a station on a starship requires years of specialized training at the Academy.
Divisions belong in this game, either as classes, or as something else.
There is a "One build to rule them all" in game right now, being discussed in the PvP and Builds sections. I don't use it, because I expect it to eventually be nerfed.
I see. The rest of us will become clones of this build, but you won't. You're special.
Maybe that is just my experience, but shouting "NUH-UH!" to what I feel to be a legitimate game design concern isn't really much of a debating tool either.
Did you really miss the point of my post or are you intentionally misrepresenting it?
A classless game needs to be designed to reward specialization over generalization.
Then you agree. A classless game does not necessarily lead to homogenous character builds.
Otherwise, you might as well just skip the character choices completely and give the player everything right at the start.
I don't see that as necessary consequence either.
Right. You can train yourself on the holodeck to be a tactical officer, a pilot, a crack phaser shot, a cowboy, or Sherlock Holmes. That doesn't change the fact that Starfleet has divisions and departments, or that manning a station on a starship requires years of specialized training at the Academy.
We're not talking about manning stations. That's what Bridge Officers do. We're talking about starship captains.
Divisions belong in this game, either as classes, or as something else.
I see. The rest of us will become clones of this build, but you won't. You're special.
Look. This is obviously something you're very emotionally involved in. I am not. If you want to have a discussion, fine. If you want to have a fight, find someone else because I'm not going to play games over such a pointless discussion.
Then you agree. A classless game does not necessarily lead to homogenous character builds.
No. Bad ones do. There are a lot of bad ones. Classlessness, like any class system, is a means to an end: a game full of diverse and interesting character choices. Without careful design choices, it can fail at that goal. Classes and roles create a system in which characters have to fill different niches for the sake of teamwork.
Yes, it limits player choice in some respects, but then, I don't always think that more choice is a good thing, either. Look at a lot of PNP games, like some editions of Dungeons and Dragons. You have 9 million choices every time you level up, but 8.99 million of them are functionally useless and only exist to fill out page space in expensive splatbooks. Things like that take away from truly skillful gameplay and reward systems mastery instead.*
So, I'm sorry, but I have to disagree that classless systems are superior because they are classless. Good classless systems are fine.
We're not talking about manning stations. That's what Bridge Officers do. We're talking about starship captains.
BOffs are part of the class system, too. So are starships. So are kits. You already get a ton of power customization options through those. Virtually all of your powers are equipment based. Class in the traditional sense is very deluded across multiple layers of customization in this game, which you can chalk up to "transition", I guess.
Your captain is not supposed to be the one person on her ship doing everything. She's supposed to be the leader of a team, the crew of a starship, each of whom contribute to your performance. From that perspective, it doesn't really make sense to have her somehow know how to do everything everyone else on the bridge can do.
If you really need Attack Pattern Alpha in every build, there are ways to change the current system to accomplish that; say, with an XO or a kit revamp, as has been previously discussed.
*This is a problem with the current game, but it's more of a documentation problem than anything else.
Comments
In all honesty, I think your perception is skewed.
So it's fair to say that if people do not eat foul tasting sandwiches, it must be that they just don't like sandwiches?
And what of the PvP roleplayer? How can they remain immersed in their role, when players from enemy factions are sitting next to them, flaunting their immunity from attack?
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . ~Bluegeek
This post has been re-edited to clarify the intended point, while remaining in compliance with the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . ~Roxbad
and just as a side note it wouldn't be turning it into EVE since in Eve you'd lose all your stuff if you died. STO would be a kinder more soft version of it that hands your toys back to you while done lol
I sort of disagree with this assessment. The CU released in April '05 and NGE in November '05. The servers shut down in December '11. So although these 2 releases weren't positively received by the player base, the game still lasted another 6 years (2x as long as STO has been online total). In the end their servers weren't shut off because of lack of players, some players started petitions and even went to court to keep the servers turned on because they wanted to keep playing the game. In the end the servers were turned off on December 15, 2011 because on December 20, 2011 the servers for TOR were turned on. At least that's how I remember it.
Yeah, there was even a high-profile incident in EVE a few months ago where someone had a ship worth $9K in real money, then had it destroyed in a matter of seconds in an ambush. That's not going to happen in STO.
Regarding IP-based games, it seems to me the real problem with them is that they have to try to serve two masters: IP-agnostic gamers looking for a good gaming experience, and diehard fans of the IP looking for an IP-immersive experience. If I were to compile a list of everything that happens in STO for the sake of gameplay that would never have happened in the Star Trek TV series or movies (never mind real life), the length of the resulting tome would be up there with the later Harry Potter books.
My Foundry missions | My STO Wiki page | My Twitter home page
well as I remember it they said they insured the Titan, so they're fine.
EVE does have an insurance mechanic, but it doesnt cover the full amount you paid for the ship. Reason for that is to prevent insurance fraud type incidents. IIRC insurance payout prices and cost to get it activated is even adjusted by devs depending on market prices on ships.
a little lesson on how eve money and irl money relate to each other:
When a new story from something like yahoo.com or whatever says a player lost an EVE ship for $6000 dollars that doesnt necessarily mean someone paid 6000 dollars for a virtual ship, which then got blown up. It is possible, but unlikely.
CCP, the developers of EVE, sell 30 day game subscription tokens called plex. PLEX can be bought with real money for @ $15 dollars and it can be redeemed in game as a token. You can put it in your inventory, put it up on the auction house where other people can buy it, and you can fly the token around in your cargo ship where it can get blown up (or rather WILL get blown up). Flying around with the token is generally a stupid thing to do cause people can scan your ship and people DO stake out jumpgates specifically to gank people carrying that kind of stuff. Luckily for you the token can be redeemed anywhere you want...so you can fly to the auction house space station first THEN redeem it.
So you can buy a PLEX-30 day sub token from CCP (legit) and sell it to another player for in game credits called ISK in EVE, which is also legit. So pretty much like this:
Person A has no ISK (in game money) they have $15 dollars real money
Person B has 500 million ISK, no real money (or doesnt want to spend it in game)
Person A buys a PLEX or 15 dollars
Person A puts the PLEX on the Auction House/Market for 500 million ISK
Person B buys the PLEX on the Auction House for 500 million ISK
Person A now has 500 million ISK to spend on a new ship
Person B now has a PLEX/30 day sub token and they can keep on playing the game
Because of this interaction that CCP allows, in game currency actually does have an equivalent real dollar value. You cannot turn your in game currency to IRL money, just IRL money to in game currency using the Person A/B method i just mentioned. The market values for PLEX tokens is just like any other item on the player driven auction house. Its prices can fluctuate...when i played it was between 350-450 million in value for a PLEX.
That's pretty much what the people on these NEWS sites dont explain. A lot of readers assume that the player who got their $6000 ship blown up paid for that ship entirely with cash. But it could very well be that the player probably with help from guildies earned enough in game credits to buy the ship.
Lets say for example the current cost of a PLEX on the auction house is 500 million ISK. That means 500 million ISK is equivalent to about $15 real dollars. One billion ISK is equivalent to $30 dollars, 2 billion ISK is equivalent to 60 dollars...and 200 billion ISK is equivalent to $6000 dollars. You can earn ISK several different ways...by actually playing the game or by buying PLEX and selling it for ISK. I doubt that the $6000 ship was paid for entirely with credits earned by playing the game. A small portion of the credits may have been earned by somebody buying some plex and selling it. But unless the person(s) is crazy or just rich i doubt that they bought $6000 dollars worth of PLEX sold it for all for ISK. Buying @ 400 PLEX tokens and putting them on the market is in itself a gamble and affects the market as well, but i wont go into that.
Maybe because the vast majority of players are not PvPers and would not enjoy such a system.
This, however, would be a good argument for a PvP server if enough demand is there.
Old style MMO? New style MMO? I think you should probably elaborate more, because to some, "old style MMO" refers to the days when dying meant dropping your entire inventory payload to the ground for anyone to loot, as well as a slew of other penalties, and a minimalistic questing system.
Three class system? You mean the 3 basic roles: Tank, dps, healer? Most of the boss encounters I see in games without the 3 roles are pretty much "hi, I'm a boss who throws out random damage and has no really interesting mechanics other than "don't stand in the ____." The 3-role system allows developers to get really creative in their encounters. If everyone can do all 3 roles on their own, then boss encounters pretty much turn into "throw as many warm bodies at it as you can--each of you warm bodies, make like you're playing oldschool Dragon Warrior! Nuke the boss, heal yourself when low, repeat until the loot drops. Oh, and don't stand in the fire."
Point and click? Phase that out? How are you supposed to target your enemies/allies, then? There's more than enough "action MMOs" out there already, and all they've really shown me is that you basically trade strategy with "point the center of your screen at the dragon and pound away at your keyboard." Neverwinter in particular has shown me that trying to play a healer/support role in an action mmo is utterly loathesome.
Point and click vs the action mmo gimmick is definitely a preference. Part of why I play STO (but not Neverwinter) is because "shooter mode" is optional rather than mandatory. On the other hand, people who like that mechanic will certainly end up sticking with Neverwinter.
You're being pretty vague. How does the 3-role system or point-and-click vs action-mmo-targeting limit growth? The only limitation to growth I've seen has been an adherence to the flawed design philosophy that endless grindfests constitute valid endgame content.
Or they could do what they've been doing--keep upgrading the engine as new content rolls out.
Just because a game has things you dislike--in this case, the point-and-click targeting system and the 3-role pve system--that doesn't mean it's outdated, falling short, or what have you.
The only real way this game falls short is something I've seen many different people say--it lacks a compelling endgame experience. "So I just hit level 50! Now what? Oh right, time to grind the same STFs over and over. And over. And. Over."
Getting rid of the class structure does not mean that roles cannot be defined or that every character would be able to fill every role. Where a player put their skill points as they advance and what gear they choose to use can result in diverse abilities to fill various roles.
The class system doesn't foster creativity. It stifles it.
I used to be all for classless systems, but experience has taught me that they can be just as stifling, leading to a game full of vanilla fighter/mage builds that are all more or less identical because that's what works.
In an MMO environment, it would probably lead to a bunch of wishy-washy generalist builds, and maybe two or three specialized builds in each role that are actually competitive, usually centered around broken powers.
Plus, this isn't a fantasy game: this is a Star Trek game. Star Trek is a series about officers on a ship with assigned duties and specialties. Doctor McCoy is a doctor, and while he might have basic combat training, his role is to be a doctor, and so sh has no business specializing in building phaser turrets or hurling photon grenades.
Now, I could see making class less important or have less of an impact on what skills you can choose, but getting rid of it entirely is removing something from the game that actually is Star Trek.
Your experience is just that, your experience. It is limited to the circumstances of that experience. The results of that experience are not necessarily the results to be expected from a different set of circumstances.
And this argument has already been refuted in other threads, where it has been noted that if, players were so inclined to follow one build, then we would have just one class being played in the game currently.
Actually I find the thought of telling an individual that they have no business in pursuing training in an area outside of their current field to be very unlike Star Trek, where personal development and individual freedom have been cited as the foundation of Federation culture.
Justifying the status quo. Defending tradition for the fear of change. It's irrational, but that's who we are.
No need for a PvP server, you can just make it so people can /PvP so they are flagged for PvP with the enemy, while other games that have this option tend to be on non instanced maps, they could make it like the old Deep space encounter's where you get pulled in to a zone to PvP. If you don't want to PvP then don't flag yourself for it. Yes I'm sure it would be much more complicated to add than I'm making out but hey, I'm not a programmer
Slightly related to this thread, I also see people constantly complaining that things ARE changing. To those people my one bit of advice is to quit playing MMO games LOL.
If you're looking for content, there's always the Foundry. Try not treating the missions as grinding opportunities and paying attention to the story missions instead.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
There is a "One build to rule them all" in game right now, being discussed in the PvP and Builds sections. I don't use it, because I expect it to eventually be nerfed.
Maybe that is just my experience, but shouting "NUH-UH!" to what I feel to be a legitimate game design concern isn't really much of a debating tool either. A classless game needs to be designed to reward specialization over generalization. Otherwise, you might as well just skip the character choices completely and give the player everything right at the start.
Right. You can train yourself on the holodeck to be a tactical officer, a pilot, a crack phaser shot, a cowboy, or Sherlock Holmes. That doesn't change the fact that Starfleet has divisions and departments, or that manning a station on a starship requires years of specialized training at the Academy.
Divisions belong in this game, either as classes, or as something else.
I see. The rest of us will become clones of this build, but you won't. You're special.
Did you really miss the point of my post or are you intentionally misrepresenting it?
Then you agree. A classless game does not necessarily lead to homogenous character builds.
I don't see that as necessary consequence either.
We're not talking about manning stations. That's what Bridge Officers do. We're talking about starship captains.
It's the "something else" that I advocate.
Look. This is obviously something you're very emotionally involved in. I am not. If you want to have a discussion, fine. If you want to have a fight, find someone else because I'm not going to play games over such a pointless discussion.
No. Bad ones do. There are a lot of bad ones. Classlessness, like any class system, is a means to an end: a game full of diverse and interesting character choices. Without careful design choices, it can fail at that goal. Classes and roles create a system in which characters have to fill different niches for the sake of teamwork.
Yes, it limits player choice in some respects, but then, I don't always think that more choice is a good thing, either. Look at a lot of PNP games, like some editions of Dungeons and Dragons. You have 9 million choices every time you level up, but 8.99 million of them are functionally useless and only exist to fill out page space in expensive splatbooks. Things like that take away from truly skillful gameplay and reward systems mastery instead.*
So, I'm sorry, but I have to disagree that classless systems are superior because they are classless. Good classless systems are fine.
BOffs are part of the class system, too. So are starships. So are kits. You already get a ton of power customization options through those. Virtually all of your powers are equipment based. Class in the traditional sense is very deluded across multiple layers of customization in this game, which you can chalk up to "transition", I guess.
Your captain is not supposed to be the one person on her ship doing everything. She's supposed to be the leader of a team, the crew of a starship, each of whom contribute to your performance. From that perspective, it doesn't really make sense to have her somehow know how to do everything everyone else on the bridge can do.
If you really need Attack Pattern Alpha in every build, there are ways to change the current system to accomplish that; say, with an XO or a kit revamp, as has been previously discussed.
*This is a problem with the current game, but it's more of a documentation problem than anything else.
lol Whatever makes you feel better about yourself, skippy.
*sigh* So much for having a productive conversation on game design, I guess.
The game your looking for is over here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/ Please deposit all your stuff in my mailbox on the way out.
A sigh? So much for your lack of emotional investment.
Looking forward to it. Chris Roberts produced the "Wing Commander" series. I have great expectations concerning his latest venture.
And you can stuff your own mailbox. I'm still a fan of the IP. I'm not going anywhere.