test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Odd question: Regarding CBS and Ship Approval
leviathan99
Member Posts: 7,747 Arc User
So Star Trek: Alien Domain (the new browser game) has launched in beta and all the promotional artwork and material (I can't say anything specific about the contents of the game) centers on controlling a massively refit Constitution class in the 25th century in a campaign against the Undine in Fluidic Space. It clearly has no hull, nacelles, and struts but is described as a Constitution class.
Why would CBS say no here and yes there?
Why would CBS say no here and yes there?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
After the first round this plays like arcade game.
Time will only tell!
Maybe because it's a lower profile game?
Just shooting in the dark here, I really have no idea.
A) The one in the new game is different enough that they don't mind
C) They didn't say no at all
*checks in my pockets for my Occams Razor*
Free Tibet!
http://www.g4g.it/2014/11/28/star-trek-alien-domain/
It's the one under heavy fire.
This is it again, to the right of the Sovvie:
http://www.gamenguide.com/articles/15852/20141126/tired-of-star-trek-online-star-trek-alien-domain-beta-begins-next-week-free-to-play-web-browser-strategy-title-needs-you.htm
Time will only tell!
I havn't played yet, just reading the forums over there. It takes place before STO timeline wise (late 24th) and you start with a Constitution and upgrade out of it fairly quickly. Not in the beta so I can't be sure though.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
GG Cryptic.
dnirg eht nioj
I didn't see a direct link to a statement from CBS in that thread.
Free Tibet!
It looks to me like you continue to build them as support ships in a vaguely Final Fantasy-like fleet. I heard that it's statistically identical to the Akira in that game as well.
CBS doesn't post in the forums (imagine how much flak they would take, if they did). They only tell Cryptic, not the players. Thus, the next best thing is a report from the people CBS does speak to - which is what's presented here.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
And ours don't have rockets in their shuttle bays.
Besides, we don't know what Tier their Constitution is. We already have the Constitutions as Tier 1 and Tier 2 ships that look like the original and that might be the same for their Constitution.
They didnt say no here to a connie they said no to an end game one super powerful one.
I have still a replica of the original one from the original star trek even its t1 I can't remember how/why I got it but it was some kind of reward for something or other.. I had always wanted to be able to upgrade it but the game wont allow it because CBS says they need to be lower tier ships.
I'm going with a combination of reasons:
1) Lower profile game, browser game - less impact on the IP
2) STO had some soft-canon supporting materials, again making it more important to the IP
3) From what it looks like, it will be a lower ship on the power scale than newer vessels in most cases
4) CBS took a chill pill and isn't being as picky now
Now that doesn't stop the Federation in STO or in this new game from being used in a support/reserve/training/rear guard/emergence situation, but it seems like in both games CBS said no it's not going to be used as a top tier, front line, state of the art ship.
So really I'm not exactly sure what the OPs problem is, except to turn this into another slightly disguised , 10 millionth time whine of "I want a T5 Connie!"
- Playable Species 8472 ships.
- Ancient ENT era endgame ships.
- Starfleet, KDF, Romulan captains flying non-faction ships (I forgot the season where Picard was assigned to captain a non-Starfleet vessel).
But it's deemed unacceptable to have endgame ships of the class that was the centerpiece ship of the franchise for about 20 years until TNG and the Galaxy-class was made.
Actually, Cryptic had to fight to get the Connie in the game, period.
They had the model all done when They made Their first presentation to CBS.
It was then that They were told NO.
(This was during the time when JJ was fighting to get all the old Trek marketing stuff pulled and even though CBS would eventually say NO to him, They still didn't want to pizz him off entirely at that moment, while negotiations were still happening for Trek '09)
The only reason Cryptic finally succeeded in actually getting the Connie in the game, was because GameStop wanted it in their box as an exclusive and were willing to pay for it.
(rumor has it that somebody who no longer works for Cryptic, contacted the CEO of GameStop and told him about the problem.)
That is when CBS relented to the Tier 1 version.
Dstahl told us this waaaayy back during the build up to F2P (when They were still denying that F2P was coming).
:cool:
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Exactly. Because Starfleet, the Klingon Empire, the Romulans, etc. didn't assign their captains to command ships that weren't made and supported by them.
Exchange programs have happened to send an officer to a friendly, allied military. Riker did one such trip to be on a Klingon ship.
But an exchange is a completely different thing than something like Starfleet telling Kirk, Picard, etc. to take command of a foreign vessel for good.
Sisko flies a bugship, and Kirk spent a whole movie and a half in a Bird of Prey.
The biggest problem is that feddies can't fly low tier klank ships, and vice versa.
This only holds water if Cryptic isn't lying to us.
We only have their word what CBS said.
It could just be the dev's own prejudice with a lie about CBS saying no to support it.
It's not like they've ever lied to us..... :rolleyes:
never mind what was wrote in red. it basically read at the time, "we wont do one now but perhaps in the future we can" .. a legacy of stahl that doesnt hold any weight any longer, need d'angelo to confirm or deny if anything stays or gets tossed.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Are you more of the opinion that Cryptic is a company that is trying to milk every penny from Star Trek fans it can get, or are you more of the opinion that Cryptic would refuse to earn money if they felt it violated their vision of Star Trek?
No matter what reason Cryptic gives or has for selling no Tier 6 Connie - the fact remains it is losing out on good money.
I am not sure if ST:AD has ship levels and the like, but it could easily be that the Connie is available in the game, but not an "endgame" ship.
If it's more like an RTS, it could also simply be a "cheap" unit compared to a Sovereign or Intrepid.
I think it might have to do with CBS's direct involvement with the project. Nevertheless, its their IP, they can do whatever they want with it.
http://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/10052253
Why are you not rejoicing?
We have been told that there is no End Game Constitution class because CBS Won't allow it. This has never made sense to me, and the only confirmation we have that this is true is Cryptic telling us it's true.
The only reason I can think of that CBS would object would be preservation of cannon story. Constitution Class ships are no longer in service and aren't meant to be front line ships flying with Galaxy Class, Sovereigns, etc.
But if CBS is so obsessed with preserving Cannon, why would they allow some of the crazy stuff in this game? Things like Starfleet being comprised almost entirely of Admirals flying around in Jem Hadar Ships with Orion/Breen/Borg crew members.. etc. Why would they be so adamant on this one issue and overlook everything else in this game? It makes no sense.
This leads me to believe that Cryptic isn't telling the entire story, or is at the least being intentionally deceptive.
But that makes no sense either. People scream for T5 Constitution Class.. why I don't know.. but they do. It makes no sense that Cryptic would pass up the chance to make money by marketing this ship.
In the end, the entire thing leaves me not knowing what to believe. Personally, I don't care because I wouldn't fly an Constitution Class if you gave me one for free (which they actually do at T2, but that's beside the point.) The point is, for whatever reason, it's just not going to happen. It looks like the Browser game is using nothing other then the name Constitution, because clearly that ship is not a Constitution class Federation Cruiser.
In any case, I wasn't so much setting out to create a T5/T6 TOS Connie thread so much as to question the apparent discrepancy where another licensee was allowed to make a "new" Connie refit that they position as being the Akira's exact counterpart (I was informed that it has identical stats to the Akira).
Obviously it's not the same as a ship that looks like it's from TOS being a T5 ship but it does seem to form a contradiction with what we know of approvals here, since we'd also had an endgame Exeter shot down and never had "third Constitution" (distinct from the TOS and TMP ships) presented as an option the way this other game seems to have done.
I've seen a number of similar suggestions in STO (ie. Cruiser Retrofit that excludes the Connie or intro of a new style Connie or a new style Connie escort or even a mandatory third nacelle Light Dreadnought). And was under the impression that the ship shape itself was out.