Sadly, dstahl has already responded to this request saying that there contract with CBS keeps them from posting pics of ships that weren't passed. I would have liked to have seen it as well, just to see what could have been.
1. They consider the ship design to contradict canon design philosophies so much that they fear letting people even see it could cause problems.
or
2. They failed the ship just to be buttholes when it really was a good design, and now they are trying to cover it up by not letting us see that it was a good design.
Since the ship failed inspection not once, but twice, I tend to lean towards the later option. I might be able to see the ship straying from canon design philosophy even more so than the Imperial, Horizon, and Envoy (which have very contradictory designs, yet were passed) did the first time, but I don't see how a ship could possibly look anymore contradictory than those other examples twice. This tells me that there QA at CBS is way too strict, or that they had some ulterior motive for delaying the Nomad.
1. They consider the ship design to contradict canon design philosophies so much that they fear letting people even see it could cause problems.
or
2. They failed the ship just to be buttholes when it really was a good design, and now they are trying to cover it up by not letting us see that it was a good design.
Since the ship failed inspection not once, but twice, I tend to lean towards the later option. I might be able to see the ship straying from canon design philosophy even more so than the Imperial, Horizon, and Envoy (which have very contradictory designs, yet were passed) did the first time, but I don't see how a ship could possibly look anymore contradictory than those other examples twice. This tells me that there QA at CBS is way too strict, or that they had some ulterior motive for delaying the Nomad.
im sorry but option 1 is so funny if they did decide it was too contradicting for cannon, espeicaly in this game thats made my day so far ^^
im sorry but option 1 is so funny if they did decide it was too contradicting for cannon, espeicaly in this game thats made my day so far ^^
Yeah, like I said, the ship would have to look really bad to be failed not once, but twice, when we already have ugly ships like the Horizon, Envoy, and Imperial. How could it possibly look so much worse than those that they feel the need to not even let a picture of it get leaked, for fear of the ugliness blinding people? It scares me to thank about how ugly it would need to be for CBS to turn to these kinds of tactics to make sure we never see it. *shudders*.
To be honest, I don't see how you could make a Star Cruiser design radical enough to be failed twice. The design philosophy is pretty straightforward, and is one of the ship types that looks the most like canon ships. I don't see how the devs could have made a design radical enough to fail, while still allowing the parts to be modular. It confounds me and makes me want to see the ship even more.
Comments
considering some of the ones we have ATM would probly never ever appear on any ST series. :rolleyes:
the only way they could show some of us, is if they had a little booth and everyone has to go in 1 by 1 and sign a dissclaimer before hand
I see 2 possible reasons:
1. They consider the ship design to contradict canon design philosophies so much that they fear letting people even see it could cause problems.
or
2. They failed the ship just to be buttholes when it really was a good design, and now they are trying to cover it up by not letting us see that it was a good design.
Since the ship failed inspection not once, but twice, I tend to lean towards the later option. I might be able to see the ship straying from canon design philosophy even more so than the Imperial, Horizon, and Envoy (which have very contradictory designs, yet were passed) did the first time, but I don't see how a ship could possibly look anymore contradictory than those other examples twice. This tells me that there QA at CBS is way too strict, or that they had some ulterior motive for delaying the Nomad.
im sorry but option 1 is so funny if they did decide it was too contradicting for cannon, espeicaly in this game
Yeah, like I said, the ship would have to look really bad to be failed not once, but twice, when we already have ugly ships like the Horizon, Envoy, and Imperial. How could it possibly look so much worse than those that they feel the need to not even let a picture of it get leaked, for fear of the ugliness blinding people? It scares me to thank about how ugly it would need to be for CBS to turn to these kinds of tactics to make sure we never see it. *shudders*.
To be honest, I don't see how you could make a Star Cruiser design radical enough to be failed twice. The design philosophy is pretty straightforward, and is one of the ship types that looks the most like canon ships. I don't see how the devs could have made a design radical enough to fail, while still allowing the parts to be modular. It confounds me and makes me want to see the ship even more.
I'm guessing the Nomad design will turn up in the next movie