100% Star Trek Online, hands down.
From the very premise of Star Trek (which was completely missunderstood), over how Starships work to the trashy FX, Cryptic made everything just wrong.
Star Trek has so much potential to tell good stories, STO only shows war and rewards killing everything in the players path. I think the very idea of creating a Star Trek MMO is basicly wrong. A open world/sandbox Single player RPG would have been way better. (With emphasis on free play and a advanced exploration engine)
Agree with you almost 100% (I don't think the FX are bad; I've seen alot worse). On the story/character interaction and development/exploration part, agree with you 1000%.
I started watching (okay, skimming here and there) through the first season of "Andromeda" at YouTube ... and thought, "What did this show do right that STO is failing to do? Character development and interaction. Characters that don't always get along with one another, but manage somehow to aim at mutual goals (if for different reasons). Morals that aren't 100% black-and-white. Consequences to actions that aren't always positive consequences. Stories that aren't dependent on fightfightfightfight to keep the interest of the viewer." But then I also remember comments of fellow STO players: (not a direct quote, but similar to this) "I wanna go blow something up. Anyone want to join an STF or PvE with me? Or maybe do some PvP?" And I thought: How far Star Trek has fallen. Warts and all, I still prefer Roddenberry's version and those that tried hard to keep to it (I'm excluding TNG's first season and Star Trek 5 here).
If you think STO has "betrayed Roddenberry's original vision", you need to watch more TOS. There's a reason the Jim Kirk verse of the famed song "Star Trekkin'" is:
We come in peace,
Shoot to kill, shoot to kill, shoot to kill,
We come in peace,
Shoot to kill, shoot to kill, men!
They talked a good game about how they were devoted to peaceful exploration, but it turned out that there were an astonishing number of problems encountered during "peaceful exploration" that were best solved through the application of violence. Some of the more outstanding episodes ("Spectre of the Gun", "The Trouble With Tribbles") required the heroes to think their way out of a situation, but even more ("Arena", "Balance of Terror", "Amok Time") that were solved by fighting.
Incidentally, I've read some of Roddenberry's pitches for his other shows. (It's amusing how many of them centered around a timelost hero named Dylan Hunt.) And the character development in Andromeda was despite Roddenberry's intentions, not because of them. When Kevin Sorbo took over control of the show and relegated all the other characters to mere shadows worshiping his portrayal of Hunt, that was the show Roddenberry came up with. And it went down in flames - deservedly.
Hrmmm... I would say Galaxy on Fire for those people who do mobile games. The first was okay, the second one was just epic along with dlcs, then Alliances was a good idea but the whole thing went to hell with such a huge player - base on two large maps. Now don't get me wrong I consider Alliances isolated, I have the second one in HD with the Valkyrie and Supernova dlcs and I had so much fun until I hit the end of the endgame content where you did just about everything there is to do.
I would agree on ME3 with other people. The game was a ton of fun and I even went on YouTube and watched Blonde Femshep on the worst ME3 start possible and burned the galaxy with a real bad ending. Then I went back to full paragon, saved lots of people, and clensed the galaxy of all Reapers.
Sorry, having trouble hearing you, getting a lot of bullsh*t on this channel
Captain Joseph Riker, U.S.S. Odyssey==General V'Mar, U.S.S. Blackwater-A==Admiral Laura Holmes, U.S.S. Forward Unto Dawn Grand Master Thotok, son of Koloth, I.K.S. Sompek==Dahar Master Shanara, I.K.S. Balth'Quv Admiral R'Tath V'Tirex, R.R.W. Dhael Glohha'enh==Commander Ta'eth Korval, R.R.W Hachae ch'Rhian==Admiral Vranuk, R.R.W Delevhas
The ending is what lands ME3 on this list. It could have been magnificent. For most of its length, it was magnificent - I built an alliance of races that had been at war with one another since before humans even knew their planet was round, I got al-Khalani to report on our side (helps if you hadn't punched her previously), I brought peace between the quarians and the geth, I even managed to drag the surviving batarians in with us - and then that ending happened, and nothing I'd done previously, not one damn thing, made a damned bit of difference, except that if I'd done well enough in preparing for war, I got a green gateway as well as a red one and a blue one.
I've played through it several times, and more than once I've dropped it before getting to that final confrontation.
I'm not saying it will or it won't, merely that I've been hesitant to back such a huge and still far from finished project. It could end up a masterpiece, or...it will end up crashing and burning.
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
Im surprised this one hasnt been brought up yet: Gran Turismo 5.
It single handedly turned a series that was once considered the king of racers into an anathema among fans of the genre. Not surprising when one under-delivers after five years of development and marketing.
Even with the DLC, it's still not the ending it could have been. Why can't I use my experience bringing peace between geth and quarian to convince the Catalyst that it's wrong, get it to tell the Reapers to stand down, and work on a new peace (for tons of Paragon points)? But no, I still get the same three colored gates - the only add-on, really, is a bit of postscript explaining that I'm not destroying all technology forever (the original endings were a bit Luddite), and that the races of the galaxy will be able to rebuild the mass relays even if I choose Destruction. (And of course the utterly hopeless ending where I refuse to cooperate, insist we can defeat the Reapers - and the final cutscene is someone in the next cycle finding one of Liara's beacons...)
What, are you the one person on the planet who liked that ending?
For what it's worth Jon, I saw the whole third game as the 'ending', and my interpretation of the 'Control' ending was mostly spot-on with what the extended cut brought to light. So while the Extended cut was most welcome and the last fifteen-twenty minutes were the weakest part of the 'ending', I was pretty much happy with the 'ending' as a whole.
As for a game.. DA: I. Specifically the last-gen port I played.
They just didn't care.
Speaks worlds to how good the game is that I still loved it despite being the most unpolished, broken mess of a game I ever sat through, technically.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Command and Conquer 4. The game play was horrible, and the story sucked big time. I played it 1 time and deleted it. Never to play again. My cousin who was also a big fan of those games. He got like 3 missions into the game and removed it from the computer. He said he couldn't stomach such garbage. What a way to end the epic GDI/Nod series.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
^ - what, they really made another one? Trying to follow 1-3 is just asking for trouble.
As for the OP, would have to pick Silent Hunter 5 (admittedly, the previous two were only really good simulations if you modded them, and then sometimes became a little unstable, but at least the devs let you do that.) 5 - well, the 'Battle of the Atlantic' from the U-Boaters point of view had so much potential, but they tried to make it like 'Das Boot, The Videogame' and fell so very far short.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,521Community Moderator
C&C 4 could have been good, but they wanted to go with the more mobile, multiplayer oriented playstyle. I may support GDI, but I noticed that Kane seemed less "Bring on a new age of Tiberium" and more... tired. There's still some unresolved stuff from C&C 3 like the Scrin, and the fact that Kane is still out there in the galaxy somewhere... maybe someday we'll see a proper sequel to C&C 4 that returns to the base building style from the previous games. Maybe GDI gets interstellar tech and ends up in a war with the Scrin. Nod... hm... maybe they're out looking for Kane.
I think with the new Mass Effect we might learn which of the three endings is now considered Canon. Personally I think the green option might be it. Would mean the Geth are still around, along with EDI and all the old Reaper tech. Controlling them... yea... that's a whole new can of worms and frankly what the Illusive Man wants... I'd rather deny him that.
Anyways... another one I'd like to submit, is Army Men: Sarge's War. Kinda took out some of the fun of the Army Men games, and killed off just about everyone for a revenge story. Little too dark for the Army Men universe IMO.
Star Ocean: Till the End of Time. Battle system was just terrible and felt horribly slow when controlling anyone other than Nel so I finally got sick of it a bit before the halfway point. But I read the rest of the story afterwards and holy TRIBBLE, TRIBBLE that nonsense.
It had everything ready to turn full epic: advanced force/lightsaber combat, a truly magnificent previous part, everything was there. Keep in mind I played them on the Wii (don't judge me)
Part one had an amazing interaction with the Wii remote when slashing your lightsaber. Part II had... generic stuff. Not to mention that when I finished the game, I felt like "really, this was it? Nothing more?"
Like I said, it could have had everything. But it really fell short.
Comments
Agree with you almost 100% (I don't think the FX are bad; I've seen alot worse). On the story/character interaction and development/exploration part, agree with you 1000%.
I started watching (okay, skimming here and there) through the first season of "Andromeda" at YouTube ... and thought, "What did this show do right that STO is failing to do? Character development and interaction. Characters that don't always get along with one another, but manage somehow to aim at mutual goals (if for different reasons). Morals that aren't 100% black-and-white. Consequences to actions that aren't always positive consequences. Stories that aren't dependent on fightfightfightfight to keep the interest of the viewer." But then I also remember comments of fellow STO players: (not a direct quote, but similar to this) "I wanna go blow something up. Anyone want to join an STF or PvE with me? Or maybe do some PvP?" And I thought: How far Star Trek has fallen. Warts and all, I still prefer Roddenberry's version and those that tried hard to keep to it (I'm excluding TNG's first season and Star Trek 5 here).
We come in peace,
Shoot to kill, shoot to kill, shoot to kill,
We come in peace,
Shoot to kill, shoot to kill, men!
They talked a good game about how they were devoted to peaceful exploration, but it turned out that there were an astonishing number of problems encountered during "peaceful exploration" that were best solved through the application of violence. Some of the more outstanding episodes ("Spectre of the Gun", "The Trouble With Tribbles") required the heroes to think their way out of a situation, but even more ("Arena", "Balance of Terror", "Amok Time") that were solved by fighting.
Incidentally, I've read some of Roddenberry's pitches for his other shows. (It's amusing how many of them centered around a timelost hero named Dylan Hunt.) And the character development in Andromeda was despite Roddenberry's intentions, not because of them. When Kevin Sorbo took over control of the show and relegated all the other characters to mere shadows worshiping his portrayal of Hunt, that was the show Roddenberry came up with. And it went down in flames - deservedly.
I would agree on ME3 with other people. The game was a ton of fun and I even went on YouTube and watched Blonde Femshep on the worst ME3 start possible and burned the galaxy with a real bad ending. Then I went back to full paragon, saved lots of people, and clensed the galaxy of all Reapers.
Sorry, having trouble hearing you, getting a lot of bullsh*t on this channel
Grand Master Thotok, son of Koloth, I.K.S. Sompek==Dahar Master Shanara, I.K.S. Balth'Quv
Admiral R'Tath V'Tirex, R.R.W. Dhael Glohha'enh==Commander Ta'eth Korval, R.R.W Hachae ch'Rhian==Admiral Vranuk, R.R.W Delevhas
I've played through it several times, and more than once I've dropped it before getting to that final confrontation.
COULD end up bad. COULD.
I'll repeat that: COULD.
I'm not saying it will or it won't, merely that I've been hesitant to back such a huge and still far from finished project. It could end up a masterpiece, or...it will end up crashing and burning.
Gran Turismo 5.
It single handedly turned a series that was once considered the king of racers into an anathema among fans of the genre. Not surprising when one under-delivers after five years of development and marketing.
Mass Effect 3
Destiny
The Order 1886
Fable 3
Halo 4
Gears of War Judgment
Far Cry 4
Assassin's Creed 3 and Unity
Resident Evil 5 and 6
Mass Effect 3, Destiny, and Halo 4. I actually had fun with them myself.
Main reason ME3 keeps coming up is because of the original ending before EA did a free DLC for it. Still kinda meh.
For what it's worth Jon, I saw the whole third game as the 'ending', and my interpretation of the 'Control' ending was mostly spot-on with what the extended cut brought to light. So while the Extended cut was most welcome and the last fifteen-twenty minutes were the weakest part of the 'ending', I was pretty much happy with the 'ending' as a whole.
As for a game.. DA: I. Specifically the last-gen port I played.
They just didn't care.
Speaks worlds to how good the game is that I still loved it despite being the most unpolished, broken mess of a game I ever sat through, technically.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Visit Bluegrass Beast's Build Basement for your Champions Online Freeform building needs! (Updated 07/26/15 - FIVE New Builds!)
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
As for the OP, would have to pick Silent Hunter 5 (admittedly, the previous two were only really good simulations if you modded them, and then sometimes became a little unstable, but at least the devs let you do that.) 5 - well, the 'Battle of the Atlantic' from the U-Boaters point of view had so much potential, but they tried to make it like 'Das Boot, The Videogame' and fell so very far short.
I think with the new Mass Effect we might learn which of the three endings is now considered Canon. Personally I think the green option might be it. Would mean the Geth are still around, along with EDI and all the old Reaper tech. Controlling them... yea... that's a whole new can of worms and frankly what the Illusive Man wants... I'd rather deny him that.
Anyways... another one I'd like to submit, is Army Men: Sarge's War. Kinda took out some of the fun of the Army Men games, and killed off just about everyone for a revenge story. Little too dark for the Army Men universe IMO.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
It had everything ready to turn full epic: advanced force/lightsaber combat, a truly magnificent previous part, everything was there.
Keep in mind I played them on the Wii (don't judge me)
Part one had an amazing interaction with the Wii remote when slashing your lightsaber. Part II had... generic stuff.
Not to mention that when I finished the game, I felt like "really, this was it? Nothing more?"
Like I said, it could have had everything. But it really fell short.
Join the Deltas today!