You don't gain yourself anything by dressing it up as a "preference," either, and as I explained, your analogy was at best inaccurate, at worst dishonest.
My analogy was perfect for the point I wanted to convey. And your accusation of dishonesty on my part will be reported directly.
No one is saying you don't have a right to your opinions.
That is exactly what is being said.
What's being rejected here are the continued, dogged attempts to frame a painfully obvious desire to limit people to the preferences of a few as a way to preserve what's best for the game. Your issue is with free will, and you're not going to win people over by advocating for things that influence/manipulate/pressure them into visiting places you deem valuable. Give everyone both options, and if nobody chooses yours, tough noogies. The game will not be ruined, and life will go on.
The game is already ruined, but life will still go on.
My analogy was perfect for the point I wanted to convey.
Then your point had nothing whatsoever to with the actual situation. No proposed change on the table in any way compares to the difference between a golf course and mini golf, nor forcing players to transition from one to the other.
That is exactly what is being said.
Only if you thing your right to your opinions includes constraining other people with those opinions. Nobody is denying you the ability to do anything. What they're doing is rejecting your attempts to deny them abilities you don't approve of.
The game is already ruined, but life will still go on.
Then your point had nothing whatsoever to with the actual situation. No proposed change on the table in any way compares to the difference between a golf course and mini golf,
I didn't say that it did. My analogy, which was directed at the proposition that one person's preference is more valid than another, used preferring to play by "winter rules" as opposed to "traditional rules". More to the point it was to dismiss the assertion that playing with a group using a different set of rules in no way effected one's gaming experience.
nor forcing players to transition from one to the other.
So, the whole concept of "social pressure" is just a myth? If this was a single player game, that would be a valid point. It is not a single player game and the players are part of the experience.
Only if you thing your right to your opinions includes constraining other people with those opinions. Nobody is denying you the ability to do anything. What they're doing is rejecting your attempts to deny them abilities you don't approve of.
Rules and game mechanics are constraints. It is those constraints that define the game. I have a preference for a particular set of rules and game mechanics. My preference is no less valid than others.
I agree there's a bit of immersion lost with this change.
That said, as a long time player, who has gradually been getting more ships that I often don't have time to change into and setup when some of my friends spontaneously ask me to go run something that another of my ships would be better suited for, or isn't too weak for, I like this change.
The bottom line for me is that despite the drawbacks of this change, it will ultimately get me playing more, and having more fun, so in the end, I support this change.
More to the point it was to dismiss the assertion that playing with a group using a different set of rules in no way effected one's gaming experience.
So the sector swap affects your gaming experience because...you'll be lonely at ESD or something? You'll have to forgive me for not enduring any inconvenience to keep you company. There is no inherent, objective value in visiting social zones. It depends entirely on how you feel about it, and if someone doesn't care about the social aspect, then those areas have no value to them, and your problem is with free will.
So, the whole concept of "social pressure" is just a myth? If this was a single player game, that would be a valid point. It is not a single player game and the players are part of the experience.
It's a valid point regardless, because players are already free to completely disregard social zones without harming their gaming experience. If your enjoyment is that dependent on other people, I suggest you learn to be more self-reliant in your contentment.
Rules and game mechanics are constraints. It is those constraints that define the game. I have a preference for a particular set of rules and game mechanics. My preference is no less valid than others.
These two opinions are not equivalent:
1) I want an option you don't like, but are free to abstain from using.
2) I want to deprive you of an option I don't like.
Yes, both are opinions, but only one allows you to limit someone else's freedom based on on your opinions. And no, "ruining your immersion by rendering social zones vacant" is not someone else limiting your freedom, it's them acting on their freedom in a way you don't like.
No matter how stubbornly you try, you will not get away with muddying that distinction.
My analogy was perfect for the point I wanted to convey. And your accusation of dishonesty on my part will be reported directly.
To be honest, your analogy made no sense to me in the context of the OP issue - ship swapping in sector space. Purely from that perspective, Hanover's analogy is more accurate to me.
If you're talking about the general state of the game, even then I find your analogy to be a bit of a stretch. You playing traditional rules while your friends play winter rules... Changes in the game that directly affect you and put you at a disadvantage if you don't use them, I can understand, but the sector space ship swaps aren't really in that category, unless you're going to get upset at being beaten to a team spot by a player who switches ships in sector space while you're making your way back to a starbase.
For those not familiar with winter rules in golf and how it applies to the analogy given, this link gives a description.
That is exactly what is being said.
I would disagree. Nobody says you can't have an opinion. What is being said is that nobody has the right to impose that opinion on others and force them to abide by it or adopt it. There's a big difference there.
The game is already ruined, but life will still go on.
Here we come to the heart of the issue. I'm not going to attempt to ascribe any particular emotion to these words - but if I did, my first impression would be along the lines of bitterness or disillusionment. Your previous comment about coming to Star Trek Online for the space exploration aspect does paint a picture, though, and this comment adds to it. As does, I think, your second analogy - it indicates to me that you feel Star Trek is a run down old putt-putt mini golf course when it could (and should) be the Augusta National Golf Club...
If so, then the inclusion or omission of sector space ship swaps isn't going to change a lot. There are much bigger issues involved, which fundamentally boil down to the design of the entire game.
The game is what it is. I'm not saying that's the way it should be. Heck, I'm not impressed with all of it, and there are many things I would like to see changed. Sector space improvements are one of them. Like you (if I read your comments correctly), I mainly came for the Star Trek aspect. I kind of sit in the middle - I could play other MMOs quite easily, and have in the past, but I like this one particularly because it involves one of my favourite IPs.
Now if somebody was to develop a cracking Macross/Robotech MMO... I might be tempted to abandon ship (or maybe just go on extended shore leave). Until then, I enjoy piloting my (in my opinion) rather gorgeous starships around the galaxy, having fun and 'saving the galaxy' every day before bedtime.
No, it's not a particularly grand Star Trek simulator. Heck, in terms of pure gameplay it's not even all that good of a game design, but for now I enjoy it, and I'll continue to play it. If I want to slog through sector space, I will (and often do if I feel it's too expensive to transwarp there and I don't want to burn my transwarp cooldown). I have a Vesta with MACO gear, so with the Chroniton Integrated Slipstream and Asynchronous warp drive, it's not a real time drag anyway.
Having people suddenly change space outfits (i.e. ships) in front of me is inconsequential to me. Being able to switch ships in sector space is inconsequential to me - it's like queuing or transwarping - just a convenience thing. If I feel like using it, I will, otherwise if I have other business to attend to at the same time, I'll head for a starbase. It's neither here nor there for me. That's my opinion and how I play. Others play differently. That's of no consequence to me. I enjoy my playstyle, and their gameplay doesn't affect me, so I'm not worried.
If the game is so disappointing and that much of a letdown for you, I'm not sure there's anything that can be said to make it better.
As always, just my (increasingly incoherent) thoughts.
Somewhere on the wrong side of insanity.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately be explained by stupidity" ~ Robert Heinlein.
Well if everyone can switch outside the door it will be very quiet indoors and DS9 was already not very busy, Now you can use the echo to Captain Gekko :P
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"Coffee: the finest organic suspension ever devised. It's got me through the worst of the last three years. I beat the Borg with it."
Yeah me too I like the system I must say if they put in a nice Vid of your ship flying into spacedock see engines changed and fly out that would be an nice touch to it I think...
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"Coffee: the finest organic suspension ever devised. It's got me through the worst of the last three years. I beat the Borg with it."
A number of threads lately (I feel) are starting to show how disenchanted the community seems to be with this game. As someone who's played a few different MMO's This one has the most divided and unhappy community IMO. Sure every MMO has fans that complain about something, but they're a small minority. Here that number seems greater.
rofl, you need to roam around the MMO world a little more. I can assure you, there are far more unhappy communities.
A number of threads lately (I feel) are starting to show how disenchanted the community seems to be with this game. As someone who's played a few different MMO's This one has the most divided and unhappy community IMO. Sure every MMO has fans that complain about something, but they're a small minority. Here that number seems greater.
My experience is somewhat limited, but I can say that in comparison to the WoW forums, the STO forums are a veritable lovefest of peace and happiness. And the arguments are over less stupid points here, as well.
Problem is, there's an echo chamber effect, where a few people can post over and over about something that annoys them, and unless interrupted by others they can become convinced that they're in the vast majority because they don't see any dissent in their thread. And unlike some places, the Community Managers here are reluctant to shut down a thread unless it's in severe and repeated violations of ToS, whereas the aforementioned forums tend to close threads down the first time a mod smells smoke.
My experience is somewhat limited, but I can say that in comparison to the WoW forums, the STO forums are a veritable lovefest of peace and happiness. And the arguments are over less stupid points here, as well.
Problem is, there's an echo chamber effect, where a few people can post over and over about something that annoys them, and unless interrupted by others they can become convinced that they're in the vast majority because they don't see any dissent in their thread. And unlike some places, the Community Managers here are reluctant to shut down a thread unless it's in severe and repeated violations of ToS, whereas the aforementioned forums tend to close threads down the first time a mod smells smoke.
When this game went F2P, I had expected it to go downhill community wise. But it holds up well, all things considered. It comes down to the target audience though, we are a bit more "narrowed down" as demographics will have it, and that is why it still is worth it, if you ask me. I tried SWTOR, and that too was a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Honestly, doesn't look bad at all. For the immersion folks... the current ship will warp out, and the new ship will warp in.
"Warping out" in sector space remains silly because sector space is already depicting ships at warp.
Now... I am not against space mattering or travel mattering or travel being interactive.
Sector space is awkward piloting around a box. It has no synergy with current gameplay. It confuses people. Warping in and out of sector space makes very little sense because sector space already represents everyone at warp. Map transitions are annoying. It de-legitimizes any kind of ship interior gameplay and this is to a point where people don't know they have ship interiors.
I've said for some time, I'd like to see space like this:
Warp out of system space? Cut to you in the chair on your bridge.
There would be a button that you can press at any time for a cinematic of your ship at warp.
Select a destination? Get a timer. Want to shorten the timer? Play an astrometrics minigame or play a rail shooter level with speed boosts for successfully utilizing subspace eddies while collecting anomalies.
Make the ship interior a social gathering spot with options like making it an open hub for visitors or inviting friends for daily tasks or as a staging ground for missions.
When you are "in" a sector, you can launch missions directly from your ship interior that are in the map sector where your ship is presented as being.
Have an "open space" option for each sector that acts as a big, randomized space adventure zone you can put around in, when "in a sector".
This sector-specific space adventure zone may have discoverable missions that launch exploration missions.
All of that doable without sector space and while honoring space MORE, not less. It just means the game stops encouraging people to run into the edge of boxes. Maps still have boundaries but you use fewer map transitions and are not encouraged to ram your ship's nose into the wall of a box, because you are playing aboard a ship or doing a non-combat, navigation-based rail shooter travel level.
The game keeps track of where you are (viewable on a 2D map just like now) and you can launch any sector missions from your ship's bridge or transporter room in some cases.
One additional cue? I'd probably have viewscreens and outside the window lightboxes act as a visual cue to which sector block you're in.
I like the idea of having more of a reason to captain from the bridge as a way to make the game more immersive, plus real views of the current system and action on the view screen and windows.
I haven't gone through the entire thread, but has it been mentioned whether changed boff abilities will be part of the presets too, or will we still have to go to ESD to change abilities(or keep certain boffs dedicated to certain abilities and swap them out)?
"Warping out" in sector space remains silly because sector space is already depicting ships at warp.
This ^^^ :eek:
While I don't like the idea of quick ship switching, I can live with that. I can still fly to base to switch, new feature does not prevent me from doing so. But I just don't think it is a good strategic decision. Sometimes people have to be forced to do something, or go somewhere to realize that it's actually cool.
However I'd like to see a poll how players really desperately want fast ship switching in every social zone as opposed to, for example, fixing the <choose your popular> bug (I choose Defera City)
plus real views of the current system and action on the view screen and windows.
This was commented few times by devs, problem is that ground 3D engine (also used for bridge) and space 3D engine are two different, separate things. So you'd have to have two 3D engines running in parallel, one rendering the bridge and the other one rendering the space around ship as seen through windows and it is not technically possible. At least not without significant software hacking, that would bring even more bugs. I hate "wallpaper" viewscreen in old bridges, but I'm fine with fake 3D view from Odyssey bridge. Sure it would be nice to see the ESD from the window, including the live traffic, but having some background in 3D, I understand that this is very difficult.
This was commented few times by devs, problem is that ground 3D engine (also used for bridge) and space 3D engine are two different, separate things. So you'd have to have two 3D engines running in parallel, one rendering the bridge and the other one rendering the space around ship as seen through windows and it is not technically possible. At least not without significant software hacking, that would bring even more bugs. I hate "wallpaper" viewscreen in old bridges, but I'm fine with fake 3D view from Odyssey bridge. Sure it would be nice to see the ESD from the window, including the live traffic, but having some background in 3D, I understand that this is very difficult.
It's not a problem if it's just props outside a ship interior window.
As wifor SS:
1) It's already sharded so you can't see other players in it. We could both be in orbit of New Romulus but if we're in two instances of Tau Dewa, you won't see me. So why does it matter to have ships represented in Sector Space?
2) I favor scrapping sector space. Have "being in Tau Dewa" be represented by a variable on my ship interior map that tints the color of space outside the window in the skybox and uses a flat viewscreen texture swap. If you want ambient socialization, make visiting ship interiors of friends more desirable/common and create a Tau Dewa adventure zone accessible from the bridge of a ship that is flagged as being in Tau Dewa. Repeat for each sector and replace exploration/enemy contacts with this.
2) I favor scrapping sector space. Have "being in Tau Dewa" be represented by a variable on my ship interior map that tints the color of space outside the window in the skybox and uses a flat viewscreen texture swap. If you want ambient socialization, make visiting ship interiors of friends more desirable/common and create a Tau Dewa adventure zone accessible from the bridge of a ship that is flagged as being in Tau Dewa. Repeat for each sector and replace exploration/enemy contacts with this.
Regardless my firm belief that we're more likely to get a T5 Connie than this, don't you think that a Star Trek game without sector space would feel.......empty? I mean, regardless of the mess Cryptic turned sector space in STO to be, Star Trek was always settled in space.
Then, there is the fact that I'd vagure most of the STO players enjoy looking at their ships. That's why ship purchases have been the driving force of STO's economy, especially during these last 2 years. And if we go by the number of replies and type of opinions on the topic of social zones people have displayed in this thread, than I doubt this would be a popular decision. Sure it will be a hit for RPers and everyone will like having more interactive things to do in his/hers ship interior, but at the end of the day....I'm not sure.
Still, I maintain that having no open/sector space is the single worst thing it could happen to a Star Trek game.
Scrapping sector space is completely the wrong idea. Making sector space more interactive is a better idea. It would be so much better to make sector space worth being in.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
Warp out of system space? Cut to you in the chair on your bridge.
There would be a button that you can press at any time for a cinematic of your ship at warp.
Select a destination? Get a timer. Want to shorten the timer? Play an astrometrics minigame or play a rail shooter level with speed boosts for successfully utilizing subspace eddies while collecting anomalies.
This sounsd like something that's going to be fun and interesting for about 5 minutes. Then it's just going to get highly annoying.
It's not a problem if it's just props outside a ship interior window.
As wifor SS:
1) It's already sharded so you can't see other players in it. We could both be in orbit of New Romulus but if we're in two instances of Tau Dewa, you won't see me. So why does it matter to have ships represented in Sector Space?
2) I favor scrapping sector space. Have "being in Tau Dewa" be represented by a variable on my ship interior map that tints the color of space outside the window in the skybox and uses a flat viewscreen texture swap. If you want ambient socialization, make visiting ship interiors of friends more desirable/common and create a Tau Dewa adventure zone accessible from the bridge of a ship that is flagged as being in Tau Dewa. Repeat for each sector and replace exploration/enemy contacts with this.
I don't think so. The sector map represents the sense of movement and activity that makes this a MMO. Your perspective moves inward, to that of the individual journey, and can be seen as a move towards further isolation.
It is basically like an onlooker would notice ships leaving the homely shores, setting sail for unknown lands. It is a way to visualize something greater than your personal voyage, and it binds the elements together, like a MMO ultimately must. The sector map is a way to put you out with other players, and to tell you that the world is indeeed, populated.
( Even if we are looking at shoeboxes tied together with a string. :P )
Interesting to see how many people want to keep sector space. I've always found it to be clunky and disjointed, so I actually agree with levi about outright removing it. I much prefer an EVE style warp system. Just give me a drop down menu that says "Warp to X system" followed by a warp animation and I'm set.
So did having to travel to ESD/Q'onos etc. to change ships.
And if you had read half of this, you would have seen that this is in my mind, a GOOD thing. :P
It stands to reason that when the change invokes the question of the relevance of sector space itself, someone must have forgotten about the principles that shaped these areas in the first place. They seem incompatible, by nature.
Interesting to see how many people want to keep sector space. I've always found it to be clunky and disjointed, so I actually agree with levi about outright removing it. I much prefer an EVE style warp system. Just give me a drop down menu that says "Warp to X system" followed by a warp animation and I'm set.
Apologies to Lantesh, as I'm not intending to single them out, but their post quoted above succinctly states the position of many posters in this thread.
"EVE Style" is a phrase that has popped up a number of times, as well as references to how other games have handled this sort of issue.
However, at no point has anyone tried to suggest that we should scrap sector space to make it more Star Trek like.
That's because, quite obviously, it's a move away from the IP.
This game has survived as long as it has, not because of its superior game mechanics, but because its Star Trek.
When the devs appear to make a conscious decision to make it less like Star Trek and more like, say, Eve, then I think we have a problem.
How many episodes of Star Trek, any series, happened when our heroes were travelling to somewhere else?
The journeys to places are part of Star Trek, as much as the arriving.
Now, clearly this is not a part of the game that has had enough attention paid to it, so sector space at present is a mere wisp of a shadow of what it should be.
The proposed change, as currently understood, is a clear signal that the devs have given up on sector space. A huge strategic error in my opinion.
However, by the same token, ship swapping as a concept is something a lot of players want.
If the mechanism was restricted to sectors with friendly starbases then the impact on the convenience of the mechanism is minimal. Nobody would have to go to ESD, just change one sector and back on in.
However, it would signal the concept of friendly/unfriendly space, which would give sector space some sort of meaning that could be built on at a later date.
Sadly I'm not at all convinced that there is any meaningful feedback happening here.
Seems to me the devs have made their decision and are merely going through the motions of receieving feedback.
Comments
http://sto.perfectworld.com/blog/?p=1082431
Honestly, doesn't look bad at all. For the immersion folks... the current ship will warp out, and the new ship will warp in.
Star Trek Online, Now with out the Trek....
My analogy was perfect for the point I wanted to convey. And your accusation of dishonesty on my part will be reported directly.
That is exactly what is being said.
The game is already ruined, but life will still go on.
Thanks for the link. That's interesting. Still expect the animations to be left out because they will crash all those puny laptops in the end.
That was a joke. Or so I hope.
---
Then your point had nothing whatsoever to with the actual situation. No proposed change on the table in any way compares to the difference between a golf course and mini golf, nor forcing players to transition from one to the other.
Only if you thing your right to your opinions includes constraining other people with those opinions. Nobody is denying you the ability to do anything. What they're doing is rejecting your attempts to deny them abilities you don't approve of.
More opinion stated as fact.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
I didn't say that it did. My analogy, which was directed at the proposition that one person's preference is more valid than another, used preferring to play by "winter rules" as opposed to "traditional rules". More to the point it was to dismiss the assertion that playing with a group using a different set of rules in no way effected one's gaming experience.
So, the whole concept of "social pressure" is just a myth? If this was a single player game, that would be a valid point. It is not a single player game and the players are part of the experience.
Rules and game mechanics are constraints. It is those constraints that define the game. I have a preference for a particular set of rules and game mechanics. My preference is no less valid than others.
It is a fact that those are my opinions.
That said, as a long time player, who has gradually been getting more ships that I often don't have time to change into and setup when some of my friends spontaneously ask me to go run something that another of my ships would be better suited for, or isn't too weak for, I like this change.
The bottom line for me is that despite the drawbacks of this change, it will ultimately get me playing more, and having more fun, so in the end, I support this change.
So the sector swap affects your gaming experience because...you'll be lonely at ESD or something? You'll have to forgive me for not enduring any inconvenience to keep you company. There is no inherent, objective value in visiting social zones. It depends entirely on how you feel about it, and if someone doesn't care about the social aspect, then those areas have no value to them, and your problem is with free will.
It's a valid point regardless, because players are already free to completely disregard social zones without harming their gaming experience. If your enjoyment is that dependent on other people, I suggest you learn to be more self-reliant in your contentment.
These two opinions are not equivalent:
1) I want an option you don't like, but are free to abstain from using.
2) I want to deprive you of an option I don't like.
Yes, both are opinions, but only one allows you to limit someone else's freedom based on on your opinions. And no, "ruining your immersion by rendering social zones vacant" is not someone else limiting your freedom, it's them acting on their freedom in a way you don't like.
No matter how stubbornly you try, you will not get away with muddying that distinction.
:rolleyes:
Show me one example, and I'll explain how you're distorting my meaning to make a false accusation.
To be honest, your analogy made no sense to me in the context of the OP issue - ship swapping in sector space. Purely from that perspective, Hanover's analogy is more accurate to me.
If you're talking about the general state of the game, even then I find your analogy to be a bit of a stretch. You playing traditional rules while your friends play winter rules... Changes in the game that directly affect you and put you at a disadvantage if you don't use them, I can understand, but the sector space ship swaps aren't really in that category, unless you're going to get upset at being beaten to a team spot by a player who switches ships in sector space while you're making your way back to a starbase.
For those not familiar with winter rules in golf and how it applies to the analogy given, this link gives a description.
I would disagree. Nobody says you can't have an opinion. What is being said is that nobody has the right to impose that opinion on others and force them to abide by it or adopt it. There's a big difference there.
Here we come to the heart of the issue. I'm not going to attempt to ascribe any particular emotion to these words - but if I did, my first impression would be along the lines of bitterness or disillusionment. Your previous comment about coming to Star Trek Online for the space exploration aspect does paint a picture, though, and this comment adds to it. As does, I think, your second analogy - it indicates to me that you feel Star Trek is a run down old putt-putt mini golf course when it could (and should) be the Augusta National Golf Club...
If so, then the inclusion or omission of sector space ship swaps isn't going to change a lot. There are much bigger issues involved, which fundamentally boil down to the design of the entire game.
The game is what it is. I'm not saying that's the way it should be. Heck, I'm not impressed with all of it, and there are many things I would like to see changed. Sector space improvements are one of them. Like you (if I read your comments correctly), I mainly came for the Star Trek aspect. I kind of sit in the middle - I could play other MMOs quite easily, and have in the past, but I like this one particularly because it involves one of my favourite IPs.
Now if somebody was to develop a cracking Macross/Robotech MMO... I might be tempted to abandon ship (or maybe just go on extended shore leave). Until then, I enjoy piloting my (in my opinion) rather gorgeous starships around the galaxy, having fun and 'saving the galaxy' every day before bedtime.
No, it's not a particularly grand Star Trek simulator. Heck, in terms of pure gameplay it's not even all that good of a game design, but for now I enjoy it, and I'll continue to play it. If I want to slog through sector space, I will (and often do if I feel it's too expensive to transwarp there and I don't want to burn my transwarp cooldown). I have a Vesta with MACO gear, so with the Chroniton Integrated Slipstream and Asynchronous warp drive, it's not a real time drag anyway.
Having people suddenly change space outfits (i.e. ships) in front of me is inconsequential to me. Being able to switch ships in sector space is inconsequential to me - it's like queuing or transwarping - just a convenience thing. If I feel like using it, I will, otherwise if I have other business to attend to at the same time, I'll head for a starbase. It's neither here nor there for me. That's my opinion and how I play. Others play differently. That's of no consequence to me. I enjoy my playstyle, and their gameplay doesn't affect me, so I'm not worried.
If the game is so disappointing and that much of a letdown for you, I'm not sure there's anything that can be said to make it better.
As always, just my (increasingly incoherent) thoughts.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately be explained by stupidity" ~ Robert Heinlein.
"Coffee: the finest organic suspension ever devised. It's got me through the worst of the last three years. I beat the Borg with it."
---
"Coffee: the finest organic suspension ever devised. It's got me through the worst of the last three years. I beat the Borg with it."
rofl, you need to roam around the MMO world a little more. I can assure you, there are far more unhappy communities.
Problem is, there's an echo chamber effect, where a few people can post over and over about something that annoys them, and unless interrupted by others they can become convinced that they're in the vast majority because they don't see any dissent in their thread. And unlike some places, the Community Managers here are reluctant to shut down a thread unless it's in severe and repeated violations of ToS, whereas the aforementioned forums tend to close threads down the first time a mod smells smoke.
When this game went F2P, I had expected it to go downhill community wise. But it holds up well, all things considered. It comes down to the target audience though, we are a bit more "narrowed down" as demographics will have it, and that is why it still is worth it, if you ask me. I tried SWTOR, and that too was a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
---
"Warping out" in sector space remains silly because sector space is already depicting ships at warp.
Now... I am not against space mattering or travel mattering or travel being interactive.
Sector space is awkward piloting around a box. It has no synergy with current gameplay. It confuses people. Warping in and out of sector space makes very little sense because sector space already represents everyone at warp. Map transitions are annoying. It de-legitimizes any kind of ship interior gameplay and this is to a point where people don't know they have ship interiors.
I've said for some time, I'd like to see space like this:
Warp out of system space? Cut to you in the chair on your bridge.
There would be a button that you can press at any time for a cinematic of your ship at warp.
Select a destination? Get a timer. Want to shorten the timer? Play an astrometrics minigame or play a rail shooter level with speed boosts for successfully utilizing subspace eddies while collecting anomalies.
Make the ship interior a social gathering spot with options like making it an open hub for visitors or inviting friends for daily tasks or as a staging ground for missions.
When you are "in" a sector, you can launch missions directly from your ship interior that are in the map sector where your ship is presented as being.
Have an "open space" option for each sector that acts as a big, randomized space adventure zone you can put around in, when "in a sector".
This sector-specific space adventure zone may have discoverable missions that launch exploration missions.
All of that doable without sector space and while honoring space MORE, not less. It just means the game stops encouraging people to run into the edge of boxes. Maps still have boundaries but you use fewer map transitions and are not encouraged to ram your ship's nose into the wall of a box, because you are playing aboard a ship or doing a non-combat, navigation-based rail shooter travel level.
The game keeps track of where you are (viewable on a 2D map just like now) and you can launch any sector missions from your ship's bridge or transporter room in some cases.
One additional cue? I'd probably have viewscreens and outside the window lightboxes act as a visual cue to which sector block you're in.
I haven't gone through the entire thread, but has it been mentioned whether changed boff abilities will be part of the presets too, or will we still have to go to ESD to change abilities(or keep certain boffs dedicated to certain abilities and swap them out)?
This ^^^ :eek:
While I don't like the idea of quick ship switching, I can live with that. I can still fly to base to switch, new feature does not prevent me from doing so. But I just don't think it is a good strategic decision. Sometimes people have to be forced to do something, or go somewhere to realize that it's actually cool.
However I'd like to see a poll how players really desperately want fast ship switching in every social zone as opposed to, for example, fixing the <choose your popular> bug (I choose Defera City)
This was commented few times by devs, problem is that ground 3D engine (also used for bridge) and space 3D engine are two different, separate things. So you'd have to have two 3D engines running in parallel, one rendering the bridge and the other one rendering the space around ship as seen through windows and it is not technically possible. At least not without significant software hacking, that would bring even more bugs. I hate "wallpaper" viewscreen in old bridges, but I'm fine with fake 3D view from Odyssey bridge. Sure it would be nice to see the ESD from the window, including the live traffic, but having some background in 3D, I understand that this is very difficult.
It's not a problem if it's just props outside a ship interior window.
As wifor SS:
1) It's already sharded so you can't see other players in it. We could both be in orbit of New Romulus but if we're in two instances of Tau Dewa, you won't see me. So why does it matter to have ships represented in Sector Space?
2) I favor scrapping sector space. Have "being in Tau Dewa" be represented by a variable on my ship interior map that tints the color of space outside the window in the skybox and uses a flat viewscreen texture swap. If you want ambient socialization, make visiting ship interiors of friends more desirable/common and create a Tau Dewa adventure zone accessible from the bridge of a ship that is flagged as being in Tau Dewa. Repeat for each sector and replace exploration/enemy contacts with this.
Regardless my firm belief that we're more likely to get a T5 Connie than this, don't you think that a Star Trek game without sector space would feel.......empty? I mean, regardless of the mess Cryptic turned sector space in STO to be, Star Trek was always settled in space.
Then, there is the fact that I'd vagure most of the STO players enjoy looking at their ships. That's why ship purchases have been the driving force of STO's economy, especially during these last 2 years. And if we go by the number of replies and type of opinions on the topic of social zones people have displayed in this thread, than I doubt this would be a popular decision. Sure it will be a hit for RPers and everyone will like having more interactive things to do in his/hers ship interior, but at the end of the day....I'm not sure.
Still, I maintain that having no open/sector space is the single worst thing it could happen to a Star Trek game.
This sounsd like something that's going to be fun and interesting for about 5 minutes. Then it's just going to get highly annoying.
I don't think so. The sector map represents the sense of movement and activity that makes this a MMO. Your perspective moves inward, to that of the individual journey, and can be seen as a move towards further isolation.
It is basically like an onlooker would notice ships leaving the homely shores, setting sail for unknown lands. It is a way to visualize something greater than your personal voyage, and it binds the elements together, like a MMO ultimately must. The sector map is a way to put you out with other players, and to tell you that the world is indeeed, populated.
( Even if we are looking at shoeboxes tied together with a string. :P )
---
I don't know if it would be the worst, but it would almost certainly be in the top 10 worst.
Mine Trap Supporter
And if you had read half of this, you would have seen that this is in my mind, a GOOD thing. :P
It stands to reason that when the change invokes the question of the relevance of sector space itself, someone must have forgotten about the principles that shaped these areas in the first place. They seem incompatible, by nature.
---
Apologies to Lantesh, as I'm not intending to single them out, but their post quoted above succinctly states the position of many posters in this thread.
"EVE Style" is a phrase that has popped up a number of times, as well as references to how other games have handled this sort of issue.
However, at no point has anyone tried to suggest that we should scrap sector space to make it more Star Trek like.
That's because, quite obviously, it's a move away from the IP.
This game has survived as long as it has, not because of its superior game mechanics, but because its Star Trek.
When the devs appear to make a conscious decision to make it less like Star Trek and more like, say, Eve, then I think we have a problem.
How many episodes of Star Trek, any series, happened when our heroes were travelling to somewhere else?
The journeys to places are part of Star Trek, as much as the arriving.
Now, clearly this is not a part of the game that has had enough attention paid to it, so sector space at present is a mere wisp of a shadow of what it should be.
The proposed change, as currently understood, is a clear signal that the devs have given up on sector space. A huge strategic error in my opinion.
However, by the same token, ship swapping as a concept is something a lot of players want.
If the mechanism was restricted to sectors with friendly starbases then the impact on the convenience of the mechanism is minimal. Nobody would have to go to ESD, just change one sector and back on in.
However, it would signal the concept of friendly/unfriendly space, which would give sector space some sort of meaning that could be built on at a later date.
Sadly I'm not at all convinced that there is any meaningful feedback happening here.
Seems to me the devs have made their decision and are merely going through the motions of receieving feedback.
It's a pity.