test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

New Galaxy Model =/= New Base for Galaxy-X. Um, WHY?

giannicampanellagiannicampanella Member Posts: 424 Arc User
I guess I'm the only logical person in the STO community, but it stands to immutable reason that if one model is dependent upon a superseded model, the dependent model ought be updated to the new model else you'll have 2 radically different Galaxy models in the same game for no reason, the former being of noticeably inferior quality but costs the same as the new model. Not only does this ruin visual consistency, not only is it unethical, not only is it illogical, not only will it prevent people from buying the derivative based on an inferior model and thus loose the game $, but it's just plain sloppy and amateur. Fix it.
Post edited by giannicampanella on
Greenbird

Comments

  • rock3tmanrock3tman Member Posts: 143 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I noticed this too and i dont even use cruisers, just wanted to see what the changes where. I find my self disgusted at the lack of effort and attention to detail in this game. I hope they fix it soon.
    1FHdQdl.jpg
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I guess I'm the only logical person in the STO community, but it stands to immutable reason that if one model is dependent upon a superseded model, the dependent model ought be updated to the new model else you'll have 2 radically different Galaxy models in the same game for no reason, the former being of noticeably inferior quality but costs the same as the new model. Not only does this ruin visual consistency, not only is it unethical, not only is it illogical, not only will it prevent people from buying the derivative based on an inferior model and thus loose the game $, but it's just plain sloppy and amateur. Fix it.

    The Galaxy-X is from a potential alternative future. The Andromeda...isn't necessarily part of that timeline. Simple logic. ;)
  • rock3tmanrock3tman Member Posts: 143 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    The Galaxy-X is from a potential alternative future. The Andromeda...isn't necessarily part of that timeline. Simple logic. ;)

    I think he is referring to the quality of the Gal X, its not up to standards with the new re-model of the iconic galaxy. Go look at it again. Ordinary Galaxy's model has been updated while the Gal X has not.

    In this alternate timeline of yours, does their universe render differently? :rolleyes:
    1FHdQdl.jpg
  • senatorvreenaksenatorvreenak Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Funny, I think the new one is inferior because of the low quality phaser arrays and that it seems more based on the inferior 4 foot Enterprise D model rather than the sleeker 6 foot. :P
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,961 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    The models may be based on each other, but the are different models, as the Galaxy X model has obviously notable difference. So it's logical to assume that updating the X model would require a separate work, which does not limit the ability to release the "regular" Galaxy class.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    He's not the only one scratching his head over this one, the Galaxy X is just a standard Galaxy model with some addon parts, the amount of "work" involved bringing the model up to snuff shouldn't have been that much.
    As I said in another thread I can only hope the oversight is due to there being updates to the Dreadnought and maybe the Nebula in the works, which is wishful thinking on my part since there is no excuse for leaving the Dreadnought in the state it's been in for so long.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • zerokillcf2011zerokillcf2011 Member Posts: 545 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    What, you don't LIKE the spinal lance that isn't on straight? C'mon....looks like she got in a bad bar fight and got knocked crooked! The rendering model that hasn't changed since it was released in....season 2 was it? Or do you mean why has the Galaxy ALWAYS had more skin options, while our Gal-X had 2 very cheaply rendered ones? And the third nacelle changed as part of the neck, regardless of the option you selected for the ummmm...nacelles? Or why the DREADNOUGHT (even post revamp) still has a worse BO layout than the FREE Risian Cruiser? Nooooo....nothing wrong with that......

    And good point, the Gal-X WAS from an alternate timeline. A timeline where the Federation was WARRING. Hence the cloak. And the alpha strike that one shot killed Negh'Vars like a warm knife through butter. As far as the "feds get everything better than klinks" TRIBBLE, why does the Klingon annalog (the Disruptor Javalon) share a 3 min cooldown, but is FAR more accurate, and FAR more powerful in real-world game play? C'mon, the lance can only be shot once every three minutes. That's enough penalty. Ship turns like a pregnant whale (yes I know we have all learned ways around that), but my point is when we DO finally line her up, and she IS finally cooled down....stupid thing needs to be practically a guranteed hit, right? Already limited to a 45 degree arc, how hard is it to hit something? Really? Read the description, it "fires a .06 kilometer cylinder"...that's almost 200 foot diameter beam. Buuuuuuttttt....yah, I can miss a borg cube. At 1 klick. With a tractor beam on it. Sitting in warp plasma.

    Nothing broke there. Nope. Good job making shiny things to sell more stuff Cryptic. Fix the Gal-x CORRECTLY this time. Heck, CHARGE us again to get it. Release it as a T6 version. I don't care. Just want it not broken. We all do. Read the COUNTLESS forum posts that are HUNDREDS of pages long. FIX IT.
  • psiameesepsiameese Member Posts: 1,566 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Okay. Let's break this one down, shall we?

    Let's pretend the STO Galaxy-X model - like the television Galaxy-X model - really was just the original Galaxy-class model with the cannon and third nacelle structure mounted to it. I could see how one might assume the new STO Galaxy-class model should just auto-magically propagate to all player's with a Galaxy-X starship.

    BUT.

    Can any player confirm without a shadow of a doubt that the STO Galaxy-X model wasn't built from the ground up by a starship artist? If the model is original unto itself, then it never was just a Galaxy with extra parts pasted on it.

    Even if the models really were of identical art assets, I understood that the cannon was the one major flaw of the STO Galaxy-X model. Even if the new Galaxy art propagated to your Galaxy-X, that cannon would still be crooked.

    If my conclusion is correct, the Art Team still has to be given time in their busy schedule to rebuild the Galaxy-X model for a later re-release.
    (/\) Exploring Star Trek Online Since July 2008 (/\)
    #TASinSTO
    #LDinSTO
    #TrekkiesTogether
  • jer5488jer5488 Member Posts: 506 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    psiameese wrote: »
    Okay. Let's break this one down, shall we?

    Let's pretend the STO Galaxy-X model - like the television Galaxy-X model - really was just the original Galaxy-class model with the cannon and third nacelle structure mounted to it. I could see how one might assume the new STO Galaxy-class model should just auto-magically propagate to all player's with a Galaxy-X starship.

    BUT.

    Can any player confirm without a shadow of a doubt that the STO Galaxy-X model wasn't built from the ground up by a starship artist? If the model is original unto itself, then it never was just a Galaxy with extra parts pasted on it.

    Even if the models really were of identical art assets, I understood that the cannon was the one major flaw of the STO Galaxy-X model. Even if the new Galaxy art propagated to your Galaxy-X, that cannon would still be crooked.

    If my conclusion is correct, the Art Team still has to be given time in their busy schedule to rebuild the Galaxy-X model for a later re-release.

    Actually we can say they were based on the same model. Because when the original ship artist updated the model before he left - he updated it and that's when the lance and additions became misaligned.

    I will play devil's advocate and say that they can't just slap the 'X' additions on the new Galaxy because they would probably look worse then what we have now. Give them some time, it seems like everything older is getting a face lift.
  • giannicampanellagiannicampanella Member Posts: 424 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    The Galaxy-X is from a potential alternative future. The Andromeda...isn't necessarily part of that timeline. Simple logic. ;)

    Simpler logic: I'm talking about the Galaxy, not the Andromeda. :P
    psiameese wrote: »
    Okay. Let's break this one down, shall we?

    Let's pretend the STO Galaxy-X model - like the television Galaxy-X model - really was just the original Galaxy-class model with the cannon and third nacelle structure mounted to it. I could see how one might assume the new STO Galaxy-class model should just auto-magically propagate to all player's with a Galaxy-X starship.

    BUT.

    Can any player confirm without a shadow of a doubt that the STO Galaxy-X model wasn't built from the ground up by a starship artist? If the model is original unto itself, then it never was just a Galaxy with extra parts pasted on it.

    Even if the models really were of identical art assets, I understood that the cannon was the one major flaw of the STO Galaxy-X model. Even if the new Galaxy art propagated to your Galaxy-X, that cannon would still be crooked.

    If my conclusion is correct, the Art Team still has to be given time in their busy schedule to rebuild the Galaxy-X model for a later re-release.

    This is one of the worst cases of Stockholm syndrome I've ever seen. Tragic! :(
    Greenbird
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Stockholm syndrome isn't the word I would choose since nobody is forced to be here.
    I have examined the the Dreadnought model in detail and it is just that, a standard Galaxy with the extra parts stuck into it. Anybody who wishes to see that need only turn on the cloak then look at it closely from various angles and you will be able to see the lines and silhouettes of the various parts. Clearly they've given the model a unique identifier in the game so the saucer separation etc., will work without it reverting to a standard Galaxy appearance. My point was they would not have to rebuild the ship from the ground up but simply put the dreadnought parts on the new model, hopefully correctly this time and hopefully properly proportioned since our current dreadnoughts only vaguely resemble the studio model.
    But with the Dreadnought every time they come out with these updates and revamps it almost seems like they are working around actually fixing the damn thing.
    I spent good money on this thing and they are still selling it and expecting others to spend money on it, and now that the Galaxy has been given a new look, I certainly hope the Dreadnought is finally getting an art update.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • gavshawgavshaw Member Posts: 65 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    This probably doesn't provide a definite answer, but I think the Gal-X model does have some basis from the standard Galaxy model. I have noticed that at the right angle up close my Gal-X has the standard Galaxy's single stardrive impluse engine inside. The Gal-X has two stardrive impulse engines (mounted higher up I believe) as part of the structure that includes the third nacelle. If you can get your camera to 'inside' your ship's model, I can see what appears to be the impulse engine that would be found on the normal Galaxy.

    I discovered this after transitioning from the J Dyson sphere to the delta quadrant sector block and found my ship parked right outside the sphere's sector model, which seemed to force my camera up the butt of my ship.
    SigPic_01_zpspudusvou.png

    Yes, I fly a Dreadnought cruiser. Deal with it.
  • amosov78amosov78 Member Posts: 1,495 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Geko mentioned on twitter that the updated Galaxy model was done by CrypticCat in his own spare time, since unlike the Intrepid is wasn't connected to any new content, he likely then never got paid to do it.
    U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-71895 - Nebula-class
    Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
    Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    amosov78 wrote: »
    Geko mentioned on twitter that the updated Galaxy model was done by CrypticCat in his own spare time, since unlike the Intrepid is wasn't connected to any new content, he likely then never got paid to do it.
    If that's the case, You can visualize me slapping my forehead shaking my head and walking away in disgust. I will give full credit to the new Galaxy model, it's not "perfect" but it is nicely done and considerably more detailed than what we've had before, if the artist who did that was not fairly compensated that is simply beyond shameful.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • thetaninethetanine Member Posts: 1,366 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Uuuuhhhh...I hate to be the bearer of bad news but...the Gal X sucks, and everyone who reads up on it comes to the same conclusion. It's a broken gimped ship in a pay to win atmosphere. It was only made to silence the FEDs early in the life of STO who were butt hurt by the KDF.

    But please, do not take my word for it. Do the research yourself. Or start a thread in the FED ships forum, where you ask, something along the lines of "I'm thinking of buying a Gal X. Please help me decide for or against it".
    STAR TREK
    lD8xc9e.png
  • thetaninethetanine Member Posts: 1,366 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    gavshaw wrote: »
    [snip]I discovered this after transitioning from the J Dyson sphere to the delta quadrant sector block and found my ship parked right outside the sphere's sector model, which seemed to force my camera up the AFT!! :eek: of my ship.

    There. Fixed that for ya. I hope that camera had a glove on!! :D
    STAR TREK
    lD8xc9e.png
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    maxvitor wrote: »
    If that's the case, You can visualize me slapping my forehead shaking my head and walking away in disgust. I will give full credit to the new Galaxy model, it's not "perfect" but it is nicely done and considerably more detailed than what we've had before, if the artist who did that was not fairly compensated that is simply beyond shameful.
    He's a (probably) salaried employee. Salaried employees don't get paid by the ship model.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • amosov78amosov78 Member Posts: 1,495 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    He's a (probably) salaried employee. Salaried employees don't get paid by the ship model.

    True, what I should have implied was that by doing it on his own time it wasn't a part of his usual workload in office hours, and wasn't something that was budgeted for. I'd heard a rumour that one of the people let go recently was a part of the ship team, though that's difficult to confirm.
    U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-71895 - Nebula-class
    Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
    Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
  • zerokillcf2011zerokillcf2011 Member Posts: 545 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    thetanine wrote: »
    Uuuuhhhh...I hate to be the bearer of bad news but...the Gal X sucks, and everyone who reads up on it comes to the same conclusion. It's a broken gimped ship in a pay to win atmosphere. It was only made to silence the FEDs early in the life of STO who were butt hurt by the KDF.

    But please, do not take my word for it. Do the research yourself. Or start a thread in the FED ships forum, where you ask, something along the lines of "I'm thinking of buying a Gal X. Please help me decide for or against it".


    Actually....if you read a lot of those posts, people like myself who ENJOY flying the Gal X and know how to do so properly....we can pars dps right up with the the heavy hitters. By NO MEANS am I saying that the Gal X is one of the highest DPS ships. But when you learn how to fly it, it's really handy to be able to do 15k or 20k dps runs and still tank quite nicely. I'm not going to get into a bash, but like you said, read the threads, many many people have successful builds, mainly A2B setups, that are quite effective.

    Secondly, in those threads and this one, no one is looking to make the Gal X the best Fed ship, or even the best Fed cruiser. We are just asking for fixes. The cannon that has been visually missaligned for YEARS. The fact that the Klingon Disruptor Javelin (their version of lance) is more accurate, and deals more damage is an annoyance. So even just bumping the accuracy on the lance so that you can hit things...sometimes. Again, based on the one episode it was in, you saw it single shot kill Neg'Vars, at extreme range, who were in attack patterns on the Enterprise. So actually, it should be fairly accurate. 3 min cooldown is fine. Nobody takes issue to that. And a Lt Com tactical with Lt engineer swap is the bridge officer fix. (so BO layout would be Com Eng, Lt Com Tact, Lt Eng, Lt Sci, Ens Univ) That's 3 relatively small fixes. BO layout that is more tactical, it is BASED on exploration cruiser, but it IS a DREADNOUGHT. Fix visual lance issue; BO layout is just a swap of Lt Com eng to Tact; and accuracy on lance.

    Gal X captains can still dish it out with the best builds in PVP or PVE. And we aren't asking for the fix now. Just asking if these fixes are even coming at all? Some people like to play with ships we grew up seeing on TV, in the ACTUAL Star Trek TNG series. The Galaxy class was OUR Enterprise for all those years and was pretty tough herself....and in the series finale (yes alternate timeline, but it WAS in the actual series) to see Riker decloaking and blasting through the Klingon battle formation in The Enterprise D with the 3rd nacelle and that BIG phaser cannon....was EPIC. Yes the Odyssey and the command cruisers and all the others are better stats, blah blah blah....but to the people who play STO because it's STAR TREK, and NOT bc its a pretty cool MMORPG, we kinda want the true-to-show ships to be correct.

    On that note, MASSIVE PROPS to cryptic on the new Galaxy skin. It really, finally does justice to the Enterprise D. Very well done. Thank you!
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Considering the cooldown of the thing, with such slow turning, narrow firing arc and sh*t poor accuracy, I sometimes forget I even have the lance, my biggest complaint is visually the model is clearly broken, people have complained about it for years, but they've revamped the line, built a new model for the Galaxy and yet here we are, still waiting for this to be fixed.
    He's a (probably) salaried employee. Salaried employees don't get paid by the ship model.
    No but if he is not working on it during scheduled work hours, ie; as was said, on his own time, he isn't getting paid for it, which shouldn't be and it's friggin tragic if the only way we can get these old ships updated is if the artists have to do on their own time because there's no room in the schedule of producing hybrid generic lockbox abominations to do it.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • giannicampanellagiannicampanella Member Posts: 424 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    maxvitor wrote: »
    Stockholm syndrome isn't the word I would choose since nobody is forced to be here.

    Ah, but they practically are, since this is the only Star Trek MMO in existence.
    amosov78 wrote: »
    Geko mentioned on twitter that the updated Galaxy model was done by CrypticCat in his own spare time, since unlike the Intrepid is wasn't connected to any new content, he likely then never got paid to do it.

    The explanation. Priorities are so mismanaged, employees actually go rogue to get things done properly.
    Greenbird
  • giannicampanellagiannicampanella Member Posts: 424 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    The starship. Bring it... closer... so that I may... join with it. Nooooooowwwww!
    Greenbird
Sign In or Register to comment.