I don't think CBS ever took a Star Trek MMO seriously. Even with Trek fading at the time, they had the resources to take it to a serious developer that would have had the resources to have a proper development cycle. That Atari seems happy with ~100k subscribers only reaffirms that. Nobody was willing to aim as high as they could have and should have.
When you say "take it to a developer", you make it sound like they bankroll or manage the game the way LucasArts does.
They license the game. They get a cut so they stand to make more off of success but I don't think it's a case of them wanting an MMO so much as it's a case of other people paying them to leverage the brand to make one, like Hasbro licensing Marvel Comics characters to make action figures.
This game isn't produced by CBS. CBS is making money by allowing the IP they own to be used by a developer in exchange for payment.
I like to log on every few months, set up a training queue, troll militia chat with "So, can we walk around the stations yet?" then hit Alt+Q.
Also, MMORPG.com is the worst example of a gaming site ever. It's full of MMO players who hate MMOs.
You know I find it interesting EVE Online player think CCP will EVER add humanoid avatars and the ability to walk on stations as its been advertised as 'coming soon' since 2006 (no lie).:eek:
I don't think CBS ever took a Star Trek MMO seriously. Even with Trek fading at the time, they had the resources to take it to a serious developer that would have had the resources to have a proper development cycle. That Atari seems happy with ~100k subscribers only reaffirms that. Nobody was willing to aim as high as they could have and should have.
"No, I'm not making this up. They actually filmed this and put it into a Star Trek movie."
"Yes the enlightened Captain Picard who enjoys playing flutes, drinking tea, and reading Shakespeare also likes redneck off-roading. Could anything be more out of character?"
You can get STO to run on a Mac. I did that when my main PC's power supply broke.
But in the end, support for Mac is mostly irrelevant for games. Sure, you get a larger audience, but making a game conform to two platforms requires a lot of extra development time. It's doable, but not really crucial for success.
of course you can... I make the unofficial Mac version :-P
of course its not crucial for "success" as thats purely subjective. Making it Windows is a safe bet to make some money, why take any more risk than that? its proven... even if its a very slight risk to do something new, its still a risk. But with current tech, you can easily have a single codebase for both Windows and Mac... just as Eve does.
ignore? hardly. While I would like to play on OSX, I am happy enough using Boot Camp to run Windows 7. Mac support = more time not spent on improving the game.
Boot Camp is a utility that lets you install Windows for a dual boot... once you boot Windows, its a normal Windows PC. Cryptic is ignoring Macs by telling them to go buy a different OS and waste a buncha hard rive space to dual boot.
This is also the reason the devs have cited for not supporting Mac officially.
Most Mac users also have Windows. It's not like Mac users are a discrete market - there's a huge overlap and most Mac users at least know of BootCamp.
saying its going to waste time developing the game is a total cop out, or complete ignorance... for Cryptic I'd say its a combination of the 2.
saying "use Windows" is just as bad as just saying "buy a Windows computer." I do not play any game that requires me to run Windows... i do not run Windows, and I'm not alone. just because some more recent Mac converts who cannot give up their gaming habits love to turn their Mac into a WinPC doesn't mean they are even close to the majority. Run a whole different OS? just for 1 game? lose access to running any of my other software while playing it? no thanks.. I'll just not play it....
luckily STO is playable just fine without Windows, but thats not due to Cryptic.
You know I find it interesting EVE Online player think CCP will EVER add humanoid avatars and the ability to walk on stations as its been advertised as 'coming soon' since 2006 (no lie).:eek:
I certainly can't begrudge them taking their time. They're having to build an entirely new ground-based engine and implementing it into an existing MMO that has no concept of ground-based gameplay.
Doing some research, the engine they've put together looks like it should be pretty good and may easily rival if not surpass STO's. Animations look smoother and more natural. But the big question is.... if I click on a chair, will my avatar sit in it? If so then it has definitely surpassed STO. And I might even try it out again. EVE as an RP medium may skyrocket in popularity, and might even pull some RPers from STO who are frustrated with the instancing.
The avatar customization, to be introduced by the end of this year, sounds like it may rival STO's as well. Instead of sliders it sounds like you use your mouse to click-and-drag "sculpt" your avatar's appearance--at least with the face. If it turns out as good in practice as it sounds, Cryptic might find itself dethroned as far as character customization goes.
Boot Camp is a utility that lets you install Windows for a dual boot... once you boot Windows, its a normal Windows PC. Cryptic is ignoring Macs by telling them to go buy a different OS and waste a buncha hard rive space to dual boot.
It's obviously not wasted space if you're using what's on it.
Also... space is cheap. Between my PC and network storage I have 3.25TB of space. I have a 500GB drive sitting in my PC completely unused. I gave another 500GB drive to my mother since I had absolutely no use for it. There's not much substance in pointing out wasted space these days.
In this day and age a homeless person might not have food, but he'll probably have storage space.
saying its going to waste time developing the game is a total cop out, or complete ignorance... for Cryptic I'd say its a combination of the 2.
An argument that has even less substance than wasted space is one denouncing game developers for not paying attention to Apples. It's been common knowledge for at least two decades that Windows-based systems get first dibs on the majority of games.
If you didn't know that when you bought Apple, you didn't do your research.
I think we wish STO had had that problem. It's problem is that it wasn't in development long enough.
Umm, STO DID have that problem. CBS/Paramount gave Perpetual 4 YEARS to make the game, and Perpetual delivered NOTHING and went bankrupt. Cryptic got saddle with that 'baggage' in that CBS WANTED a company that could do it fast (and was willing to have that stated outright in the contract as CBS didn't want a repeat of the Perpetual debacle.
As far as CBS licensingf dept. is concerned, this game took 6 years to get to market. The fact it took two different development deals with different companies (and that the second one was contractually obligated to do it in a really short cycle makes no diffrence to the bean counters at CBS.)
Umm, STO DID have that problem. CBS/Paramount gave Perpetual 4 YEARS to make the game, and Perpetual delivered NOTHING and went bankrupt. Cryptic got saddle with that 'baggage' in that CBS WANTED a company that could do it fast (and was willing to have that stated outright in the contract as CBS didn't want a repeat of the Perpetual debacle.
As far as CBS licensingf dept. is concerned, this game took 6 years to get to market. The fact it took two different development deals with different companies (and that the second one was contractually obligated to do it in a really short cycle makes no diffrence to the bean counters at CBS.)
In the business world maybe, in the gamer's eyes maybe. In reality? Nothing Perpetual did matters, at all.
Beyond the fact that its Star Trek and an MMO, the two games have zero in common. No design elements, no code, no concepts, nothing was used from the previous attempt at making the game. STO that we play now only had two years of development time, nothing else matters.
Umm, STO DID have that problem. CBS/Paramount gave Perpetual 4 YEARS to make the game, and Perpetual delivered NOTHING and went bankrupt. Cryptic got saddle with that 'baggage' in that CBS WANTED a company that could do it fast (and was willing to have that stated outright in the contract as CBS didn't want a repeat of the Perpetual debacle.
As far as CBS licensingf dept. is concerned, this game took 6 years to get to market. The fact it took two different development deals with different companies (and that the second one was contractually obligated to do it in a really short cycle makes no diffrence to the bean counters at CBS.)
I don't care about the bean counters at CBS who think in contract language.
The STO Perpetual was making is different than the STO Cryptic has made. Different code, different content, different people behind it. The STO we're playing now was developed in 2 years. You can argue semantics as much as you like, but that's how it is.
So no, the STO we have now didn't have that problem. I wish it had 6 years of development instead of 2. We would have gotten a much more complete game. People have been saying that since beta.
An argument that has even less substance than wasted space is one denouncing game developers for not paying attention to Apples. It's been common knowledge for at least two decades that Windows-based systems get first dibs on the majority of games.
If you didn't know that when you bought Apple, you didn't do your research.
thats exactly my point... but you probably do not get that.
"common knowledge" ... yeah.... 'thats the way its always been' .... yeah... if you always stick with what works and stop trying to look at doing something better... well we probably wouldn't even have computers today.
I hear that last line way too much.... if you think thats any type of a valid point to make, you didn't do any research yourself.
I have plenty of machines, even non-Apple machines that can run Windows... its nothing to do with the ability to run Windows, its the fact that in this day and age its very easy to make cross-platform games. Its not easy to make a port of a game if you made it badly to start with because of bad planning. It actually would have been very easy, if they had planned right, to be at the same exact point in the state of the game they are now and run on both Windows and OSX. Why don't they? because of the same reasons you say... because thats how its been done for so long. Its called playing it safe. Do what you know because its what you know, don't take the time to learn anything new. Game companies over almost any other software companies like to stick with what they know... making a decent profit with little risk is safe to keep your job... and the people giving the input care more about keeping their jobs than anything else. Take a little risk and possibly make even more profit? well why take any risk at all when I'm taking home the same pay at night, and I don't have to learn anything new.
"No, I'm not making this up. They actually filmed this and put it into a Star Trek movie."
"Yes the enlightened Captain Picard who enjoys playing flutes, drinking tea, and reading Shakespeare also likes redneck off-roading. Could anything be more out of character?"
Makes me giggle every time
I watch them AT LEAST once a week. I think something's wrong with me.
I certainly can't begrudge them taking their time. They're having to build an entirely new ground-based engine and implementing it into an existing MMO that has no concept of ground-based gameplay.
Most companies could WRITE a new engine from the ground up in 4 years; and EVE has no real PvE content to worry about hooking into.
Doing some research, the engine they've put together looks like it should be pretty good and may easily rival if not surpass STO's. Animations look smoother and more natural. But the big question is.... if I click on a chair, will my avatar sit in it? If so then it has definitely surpassed STO. And I might even try it out again. EVE as an RP medium may skyrocket in popularity, and might even pull some RPers from STO who are frustrated with the instancing.
The avatar customization, to be introduced by the end of this year, sounds like it may rival STO's as well. Instead of sliders it sounds like you use your mouse to click-and-drag "sculpt" your avatar's appearance--at least with the face. If it turns out as good in practice as it sounds, Cryptic might find itself dethroned as far as character customization goes.
You need to do a bit more research as those 'test animations' and the rest hve been paraded SINCE 2006. Again, this feature has been announced as 'coming soon' by CCP since December 2006; and everytine a new EVE major update in announced, CCP says, 'Avatars and Station Walking is still in development, etc.' - In others words, they're making some Vaulve annoucement look fast. Hell, people thought 'Dust' (also still in development by CCP) WAS going to add a ground combat element and colinization to EVE Online proper; but then it was clarified it was a First Person Shooter set in in the EVE Universe (and for consoles like XBox and PS3, etc. - and it's been about a year since they MADE the announcement that 'Dust' was coming soon too.)
thats exactly my point... but you probably do not get that.
"common knowledge" ... yeah.... 'thats the way its always been' .... yeah... if you always stick with what works and stop trying to look at doing something better... well we probably wouldn't even have computers today.
I hear that last line way too much.... if you think thats any type of a valid point to make, you didn't do any research yourself.
I have plenty of machines, even non-Apple machines that can run Windows... its nothing to do with the ability to run Windows, its the fact that in this day and age its very easy to make cross-platform games. Its not easy to make a port of a game if you made it badly to start with because of bad planning. It actually would have been very easy, if they had planned right, to be at the same exact point in the state of the game they are now and run on both Windows and OSX. Why don't they? because of the same reasons you say... because thats how its been done for so long. Its called playing it safe. Do what you know because its what you know, don't take the time to learn anything new. Game companies over almost any other software companies like to stick with what they know... making a decent profit with little risk is safe to keep your job... and the people giving the input care more about keeping their jobs than anything else. Take a little risk and possibly make even more profit? well why take any risk at all when I'm taking home the same pay at night, and I don't have to learn anything new.
Erm... it's not as easy as you seem to think.
It takes quite a lot of resources to simultaneously design a game to be run on multiple operating systems, and Cryptic was and still is stretched thin. If it were as easy as you imply then developers would do it much more often. It's in their own interest to target as many gamers as possible.
Heck... you're even contradicting yourself. You're saying how it's so easy for them to do it, but then imply there's risk in them doing so. If it's so easy, what's the risk? It's not even anything as obscure as "risk". It's numbers. The majority of gamers are on Windows. Companies have budgets and also want to sell to the most players... that means Windows.
To get back on the original topic, I have to say that I started MMOs with Star Wars Galaxies... left when things started going south with the combat downgrade and all that. Tried out World of Warcraft... got to a certain level and kept getting ganked in a neutral zone I had to be in. Left. I avoided MMOs ever since because to me, the aspect of every video game that is the most important, the fact that the game has to be "fun", is fundamentally lost on MMOs. They're so concerned with depth that they lose the basic focus of what they're after -- in STO, at the very least, Cryptic pinned down that everyone needed the experience of being a Captain, but SWG or WoW really isn't even that focused. When STO was announced, I bought Champions Online to get a taste of what I might be getting into had I chose to give MMOs another shot. I was pleasantly surprised by what I found -- Cryptic's gameplay was more action based as opposed to queuing attacks, and it included things like sidekicking that let friends play together despite their level. No other MMO does this! Cryptic was considering how to take the "bummer" out of MMOs and inject things that make a fun experience back into it. And even more new things in STO like open teaming further show how Cryptic's MMOs try to take out the monotony of "LFG!" shouting and just having fun playing the game.
But a friend of mine implored me to try out EVE, claiming it was still a much better game. I struggled through its "tutorial" for 40 minutes, staring at a UI that closed me in from all sides like a caged animal... and what do we have in the way of combat? Circle around enemies by clicking on stuff? And setting a laser to auto fire? By the time I had gotten out of the tutorial, I already knew that EVE was one of those MMOs that was going to focus on ganking, grinding, and waiting as opposed to finding the fun within the story and the gameplay.
This guy can say what he wants, but Star Trek Online is the only MMO I'd pay money for, and Cryptic's MMOs have been the only two I haven't ever regretted purchasing.
Most companies could WRITE a new engine from the ground up in 4 years; and EVE has no real PvE content to worry about hooking into.
Which is also their problem. With no ground-based game content, an engine to provide ground-based interactions would obviously have a low priority and would take some time to get put in place. Also, there being no ground-based content doesn't make development of the engine any easier. They still need models, costumes, animations, etc. They still need to design interiors and, for all we know, every base has a unique design (doubtful, but possible). It's practically a game in and of itself. And for all we know, because it's not instrumental to the regular gameplay, they may have had only 1 or 2 people working on it all this time.
You need to do a bit more research as those 'test animations' and the rest hve been paraded SINCE 2006. Again, this feature has been announced as 'coming soon' by CCP since December 2006; and everytine a new EVE major update in announced, CCP says, 'Avatars and Station Walking is still in development, etc.' - In others words, they're making some Vaulve annoucement look fast. Hell, people thought 'Dust' (also still in development by CCP) WAS going to add a ground combat element and colinization to EVE Online proper; but then it was clarified it was a First Person Shooter set in in the EVE Universe (and for consoles like XBox and PS3, etc. - and it's been about a year since they MADE the announcement that 'Dust' was coming soon too.)
I'm well aware they have articles about it dating back to 2006. They've obviously been working on it for a while now. You continue to mention that as though it's a bad thing. It'll take as long as it'll take. The future of EVE isn't dependent upon it, nor does the general gameplay require it. Unless they plan to add ground-based content off it--which I think they should--it's entirely a social tool.
They're also not saying "soon". The Incursion expansion, due out by year's end, will include the new 3D avatar engine and customization. I think its raw form is already live on their public test server. That is a prelude to the Incarna expansion that will begin to deploy interiors for bases, due out Summer 2011. That's quite a bit more specific than "soon".
As someone that has played both since they launched and someone that still plays both I will take a moment to comment here. Let me first say take anything said at MMORPG with a grain of salt. That site has one of the biggest hate crowds of all the many gaming forums out there. In fact in my efforts to get haters to stop bugging the people that enjoyed Star Trek I got perma banned. Not for fould language. not for anything that was considered bad behavior, but for pointing out that the STO haters were perdictable and could not let a thread that spoke well of STO exist.
That being said lets compare these two games..
EVE is a matured and well established title that is designed for pure sandbox play. That means direct player interaction and large groups working together. STO is meant to try and recreate ST as it was felt in various TV series. By it's very nature this is very different from EVE since it is more a single ship, or small squadron experience and is story driven.
Both games do an excellent job of hitting their target but both carry baggage with that target. EVE by it's nature is griefer friendly. Many people in EVE play for no other reason than to ruin the fun of others. The open game system which is a great, also attracts this style of play and thus whiling being a wonderful system it has a major flaw by it's nature. STO has less griefers for sure, none in fact but the nature of the game has led to heavy instancing play and this leads to a feeling of being alone way to often.
Space combat in the two systems is a area that is bound to be compared. The EVE system while seemingly very open compared to STO is also very stale. Basically your hit fire on your weapons and then auto orbit and wait for your opponent to die. The STO system in contrasts seems limited out of the gate but actually has a solid tactical element to it that requires paying more attention to energy management and shield facing duriung hard fights.
Ground combat is impossible to compare because EVE does not have this. However while the STO ground combat system is not the best in gaming it does offer a nice diversion from pure ship combat.
Crafting is one area where STO is still very limited but in fairness within the ST unioverse this was not a big deal since replicators took care of most of this. In EVE with a player driven economy crafting thrives, is deep and robust.
Open space is something a lot of people comment on. In EVE space is wide open and you feel the immense size. However with that comes LONG travel times, with litterally at times an hour spent reaching a destination. The STO system makes space feel small and in some ways hurts the open universe feel but at the same time it means quicker moving about.
I could go on and on with breaking down points but I am hoping people get what I am trying to say. A direct comparision of these two games makes no sense because they are two very different approaches. All they share in common is a scifi genre and that is it.
I can say this however, in EVE I have three highly skilled characters. I am a GOOD combat pilot and can handle PVP usually as high as 3 vs 1 odds against me. I have run highly successful corporations in mining and manufacturing making billions of ISK. Yet at the end of the day I prefer STO.
STO has a more casual play style that lets me enjoy time with my family and not feel like I am cheating on my gaming. EVE is a great game and I do not mean to put it down but it is game that becomes a job very fast. STO has a play style and approach I just personally find more fun.
Booo! biased review!
yeah! retro games for the Amiga and Apple!
Boo! EVE gameplay and user0interface
Yeah! EVE economy and open world feel!
Boo! STO instancing and crafting
Yeah! STO pretties and space combat
I know there a joke opportunity in here somewhere..............................
If you want to be sucessful in eve its liek a second job, and thats why I stoped playing.
WIth STO I can play a few hours have fun and don't have a fear that when im not logging in to make certain runs, set up training queue and missout isk/xp...
It takes quite a lot of resources to simultaneously design a game to be run on multiple operating systems, and Cryptic was and still is stretched thin. If it were as easy as you imply then developers would do it much more often. It's in their own interest to target as many gamers as possible.
Heck... you're even contradicting yourself. You're saying how it's so easy for them to do it, but then imply there's risk in them doing so. If it's so easy, what's the risk? It's not even anything as obscure as "risk". It's numbers. The majority of gamers are on Windows. Companies have budgets and also want to sell to the most players... that means Windows.
It's just a number's game. It's not a conspiracy.
thats exactly what I'm saying... it didn't use to be that easy, but it is easier now.. its just the people with the knowledge/intelligence to even think about it that can get it going... its hiring the right employees. Nothing I said is contradicting myself... you just may not know what I'm talking about so it seems that way. Risk I was talking about is the most avoided type of risk... perceived risk. Easy doesn't mean risk free... and risk doesn't mean difficult.
You do realize there are other ways to do things... even without using Wine/Cider type of thing to run the pure Windows code on OSX, you also have solutions like Valve uses with its games... they have a single codebase they compile and it spits out a Windows and OSX version. Does it take a bit of extra work... sure. You can even do things better, if you make your tools right, than what valve does.
Most game programmers know DirectX and nothing else... most of their staff know only that... which is why Windows was chosen, its all they knew how to do. Its funny how Blizzard could always make Win/Mac simultaneous releases with different codebases, and still get super big. Do you think they knew WoW would take off as big as it did when they were developing it? You do know they had a Mac client from day one, it wasn't added later... CoH, Eve, and others who have branched out to Macs easily using Cider haven't regretted it in any visible way.
Just to let you know, weve been checking our account servers and working closely with our friends at MMORPG about this for the last couple days and just a short time ago MMORPG updated the article with the following statement:
Some concerns have been brought to our attention that the author only played 57 minutes of Star Trek Onlines demo. He did not play the full retail game, though he invested significantly more time in EVE Online. We apologize to Star Trek Online for this and would like to remind our readership that this piece is not an official review, but rather an editorial generated by the author, a regular contributor to our publication. We have added this statement so that readers can better interpret the article fairly. We will have an update for you soon.
Wed like to thank MMORPG for their honesty and integrity in this matter and look forward to their continuing contributions to our community and the industry. Of course, we will always acknowledge and encourage all fair editorial opinion without discrimination -- heck, just look at our reviews index on the official website. And, more...er, of course-ly, if further details emerge, well let you guys know straightaway.
Yeah, that about sums that up. I can appreciate a difference of opinion in a written review - but at least TRY the game and all it's features before you attmept to compare it and rate it.
Tha's like reviewing the movie Alien and saying it's a wonderful love story garaunteed to make the heart sing and watching Benjamin Button instead.
Are you kidding? STO and EvE are not even remotely similar.
Incoming rant about EvE online, shields up!
EvE is spreadsheets in space. There is no direct control over your ship, no real "combat", you can't even fly five feet to the left unless there is a waypoint you can click on. PvP amounts to whoever has spent the most money on the biggest ships with the most guns. The automated combat is just flying in circles autoattacking.
I'm a total nerd. I love space and space-related games. I love MMOs. Hell, I even like spreadsheets. I've wanted to like EvE online because it looks cool, and it sounds cool. But every time I trick myself into downloading that 14-trial of theirs, I uninstall within an hour. I can't stand it. Bored to tears.
Some EvE players like to argue that people who don't like EvE just can't deal with hard games. That we can't handle being punished for mistakes. To those people I'd just like to say that I have and still play Ultima Online on UOR ruleset shards. Full PvP, full loot, thievery, scams, the whole nine yards. I've been through all of it and UO still remains my favorite MMO because of the tense atmosphere it creates. I *understand* why you like EvE being hard and punishing because of how "real" it is sociologically.
What I don't understand is how anyone can slog through the endless grind-fest drudgery that is "playing the game". I'll admit having a bigger ship than the next guy is alluring, but ****. Sometimes the ends just don't justify the means.
Star Trek Online is waaaaaay on the other end of the spectrum of MMOs, designed for casual trekkish players to log in a few hours a week and blow stuff up in their Enterprise. Fully-consensual non-consequential PvP is tacked on, but everyone knows it is entirely meaningless and "just for fun". And no, this does not hold the same intrigue as dry-looting grief-play, but it isn't supposed to. I wouldn't want it to.
Obviously, one thing STO has over EvE is being able to *fly your ship*. I don't know about you, but I like to fly spaceships in games about spaceships. PvP is much more about skill than gear, and its actually fun to play.
STO is just the right amount of "Star Trek MMO" for someone who plays other MMOs, has a day job, or both.
I'd like to add a personal note that I appreciate all of the commentary in this thread. There is a lot that EVE and Star Trek Online can learn from each other and I look forward to seeing both games continue to succeed and improve on their original designs. After reading the article and all the commentary about EVE having 7 years of updates under their belt, it got me excited to imagine all the updates STO will have seven years from now! V'Ger here we come! :P
Comments
When you say "take it to a developer", you make it sound like they bankroll or manage the game the way LucasArts does.
They license the game. They get a cut so they stand to make more off of success but I don't think it's a case of them wanting an MMO so much as it's a case of other people paying them to leverage the brand to make one, like Hasbro licensing Marvel Comics characters to make action figures.
This game isn't produced by CBS. CBS is making money by allowing the IP they own to be used by a developer in exchange for payment.
You know I find it interesting EVE Online player think CCP will EVER add humanoid avatars and the ability to walk on stations as its been advertised as 'coming soon' since 2006 (no lie).:eek:
and we all know why that is!
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070117072648/memoryalpha/en/images/3/3a/Rick_Berman.jpg
hisssss *holds up a cross and tosses holy water*
in the immortal works of Plinkett
**** YOU RICK BERMAN
Plinkett is my freakin hero
"No, I'm not making this up. They actually filmed this and put it into a Star Trek movie."
"Yes the enlightened Captain Picard who enjoys playing flutes, drinking tea, and reading Shakespeare also likes redneck off-roading. Could anything be more out of character?"
Makes me giggle every time
of course its not crucial for "success" as thats purely subjective. Making it Windows is a safe bet to make some money, why take any more risk than that? its proven... even if its a very slight risk to do something new, its still a risk. But with current tech, you can easily have a single codebase for both Windows and Mac... just as Eve does.
Boot Camp is a utility that lets you install Windows for a dual boot... once you boot Windows, its a normal Windows PC. Cryptic is ignoring Macs by telling them to go buy a different OS and waste a buncha hard rive space to dual boot.
saying its going to waste time developing the game is a total cop out, or complete ignorance... for Cryptic I'd say its a combination of the 2.
saying "use Windows" is just as bad as just saying "buy a Windows computer." I do not play any game that requires me to run Windows... i do not run Windows, and I'm not alone. just because some more recent Mac converts who cannot give up their gaming habits love to turn their Mac into a WinPC doesn't mean they are even close to the majority. Run a whole different OS? just for 1 game? lose access to running any of my other software while playing it? no thanks.. I'll just not play it....
luckily STO is playable just fine without Windows, but thats not due to Cryptic.
I certainly can't begrudge them taking their time. They're having to build an entirely new ground-based engine and implementing it into an existing MMO that has no concept of ground-based gameplay.
Doing some research, the engine they've put together looks like it should be pretty good and may easily rival if not surpass STO's. Animations look smoother and more natural. But the big question is.... if I click on a chair, will my avatar sit in it? If so then it has definitely surpassed STO. And I might even try it out again. EVE as an RP medium may skyrocket in popularity, and might even pull some RPers from STO who are frustrated with the instancing.
The avatar customization, to be introduced by the end of this year, sounds like it may rival STO's as well. Instead of sliders it sounds like you use your mouse to click-and-drag "sculpt" your avatar's appearance--at least with the face. If it turns out as good in practice as it sounds, Cryptic might find itself dethroned as far as character customization goes.
It's obviously not wasted space if you're using what's on it.
Also... space is cheap. Between my PC and network storage I have 3.25TB of space. I have a 500GB drive sitting in my PC completely unused. I gave another 500GB drive to my mother since I had absolutely no use for it. There's not much substance in pointing out wasted space these days.
In this day and age a homeless person might not have food, but he'll probably have storage space.
An argument that has even less substance than wasted space is one denouncing game developers for not paying attention to Apples. It's been common knowledge for at least two decades that Windows-based systems get first dibs on the majority of games.
If you didn't know that when you bought Apple, you didn't do your research.
Umm, STO DID have that problem. CBS/Paramount gave Perpetual 4 YEARS to make the game, and Perpetual delivered NOTHING and went bankrupt. Cryptic got saddle with that 'baggage' in that CBS WANTED a company that could do it fast (and was willing to have that stated outright in the contract as CBS didn't want a repeat of the Perpetual debacle.
As far as CBS licensingf dept. is concerned, this game took 6 years to get to market. The fact it took two different development deals with different companies (and that the second one was contractually obligated to do it in a really short cycle makes no diffrence to the bean counters at CBS.)
In the business world maybe, in the gamer's eyes maybe. In reality? Nothing Perpetual did matters, at all.
Beyond the fact that its Star Trek and an MMO, the two games have zero in common. No design elements, no code, no concepts, nothing was used from the previous attempt at making the game. STO that we play now only had two years of development time, nothing else matters.
I don't care about the bean counters at CBS who think in contract language.
The STO Perpetual was making is different than the STO Cryptic has made. Different code, different content, different people behind it. The STO we're playing now was developed in 2 years. You can argue semantics as much as you like, but that's how it is.
So no, the STO we have now didn't have that problem. I wish it had 6 years of development instead of 2. We would have gotten a much more complete game. People have been saying that since beta.
Edit: So yeah. What Hravik said.
thats exactly my point... but you probably do not get that.
"common knowledge" ... yeah.... 'thats the way its always been' .... yeah... if you always stick with what works and stop trying to look at doing something better... well we probably wouldn't even have computers today.
I hear that last line way too much.... if you think thats any type of a valid point to make, you didn't do any research yourself.
I have plenty of machines, even non-Apple machines that can run Windows... its nothing to do with the ability to run Windows, its the fact that in this day and age its very easy to make cross-platform games. Its not easy to make a port of a game if you made it badly to start with because of bad planning. It actually would have been very easy, if they had planned right, to be at the same exact point in the state of the game they are now and run on both Windows and OSX. Why don't they? because of the same reasons you say... because thats how its been done for so long. Its called playing it safe. Do what you know because its what you know, don't take the time to learn anything new. Game companies over almost any other software companies like to stick with what they know... making a decent profit with little risk is safe to keep your job... and the people giving the input care more about keeping their jobs than anything else. Take a little risk and possibly make even more profit? well why take any risk at all when I'm taking home the same pay at night, and I don't have to learn anything new.
I watch them AT LEAST once a week. I think something's wrong with me.
Most companies could WRITE a new engine from the ground up in 4 years; and EVE has no real PvE content to worry about hooking into.
You need to do a bit more research as those 'test animations' and the rest hve been paraded SINCE 2006. Again, this feature has been announced as 'coming soon' by CCP since December 2006; and everytine a new EVE major update in announced, CCP says, 'Avatars and Station Walking is still in development, etc.' - In others words, they're making some Vaulve annoucement look fast. Hell, people thought 'Dust' (also still in development by CCP) WAS going to add a ground combat element and colinization to EVE Online proper; but then it was clarified it was a First Person Shooter set in in the EVE Universe (and for consoles like XBox and PS3, etc. - and it's been about a year since they MADE the announcement that 'Dust' was coming soon too.)
You just want pizza rolls.
Erm... it's not as easy as you seem to think.
It takes quite a lot of resources to simultaneously design a game to be run on multiple operating systems, and Cryptic was and still is stretched thin. If it were as easy as you imply then developers would do it much more often. It's in their own interest to target as many gamers as possible.
Heck... you're even contradicting yourself. You're saying how it's so easy for them to do it, but then imply there's risk in them doing so. If it's so easy, what's the risk? It's not even anything as obscure as "risk". It's numbers. The majority of gamers are on Windows. Companies have budgets and also want to sell to the most players... that means Windows.
It's just a number's game. It's not a conspiracy.
But a friend of mine implored me to try out EVE, claiming it was still a much better game. I struggled through its "tutorial" for 40 minutes, staring at a UI that closed me in from all sides like a caged animal... and what do we have in the way of combat? Circle around enemies by clicking on stuff? And setting a laser to auto fire? By the time I had gotten out of the tutorial, I already knew that EVE was one of those MMOs that was going to focus on ganking, grinding, and waiting as opposed to finding the fun within the story and the gameplay.
This guy can say what he wants, but Star Trek Online is the only MMO I'd pay money for, and Cryptic's MMOs have been the only two I haven't ever regretted purchasing.
Which is also their problem. With no ground-based game content, an engine to provide ground-based interactions would obviously have a low priority and would take some time to get put in place. Also, there being no ground-based content doesn't make development of the engine any easier. They still need models, costumes, animations, etc. They still need to design interiors and, for all we know, every base has a unique design (doubtful, but possible). It's practically a game in and of itself. And for all we know, because it's not instrumental to the regular gameplay, they may have had only 1 or 2 people working on it all this time.
I'm well aware they have articles about it dating back to 2006. They've obviously been working on it for a while now. You continue to mention that as though it's a bad thing. It'll take as long as it'll take. The future of EVE isn't dependent upon it, nor does the general gameplay require it. Unless they plan to add ground-based content off it--which I think they should--it's entirely a social tool.
They're also not saying "soon". The Incursion expansion, due out by year's end, will include the new 3D avatar engine and customization. I think its raw form is already live on their public test server. That is a prelude to the Incarna expansion that will begin to deploy interiors for bases, due out Summer 2011. That's quite a bit more specific than "soon".
That being said lets compare these two games..
EVE is a matured and well established title that is designed for pure sandbox play. That means direct player interaction and large groups working together. STO is meant to try and recreate ST as it was felt in various TV series. By it's very nature this is very different from EVE since it is more a single ship, or small squadron experience and is story driven.
Both games do an excellent job of hitting their target but both carry baggage with that target. EVE by it's nature is griefer friendly. Many people in EVE play for no other reason than to ruin the fun of others. The open game system which is a great, also attracts this style of play and thus whiling being a wonderful system it has a major flaw by it's nature. STO has less griefers for sure, none in fact but the nature of the game has led to heavy instancing play and this leads to a feeling of being alone way to often.
Space combat in the two systems is a area that is bound to be compared. The EVE system while seemingly very open compared to STO is also very stale. Basically your hit fire on your weapons and then auto orbit and wait for your opponent to die. The STO system in contrasts seems limited out of the gate but actually has a solid tactical element to it that requires paying more attention to energy management and shield facing duriung hard fights.
Ground combat is impossible to compare because EVE does not have this. However while the STO ground combat system is not the best in gaming it does offer a nice diversion from pure ship combat.
Crafting is one area where STO is still very limited but in fairness within the ST unioverse this was not a big deal since replicators took care of most of this. In EVE with a player driven economy crafting thrives, is deep and robust.
Open space is something a lot of people comment on. In EVE space is wide open and you feel the immense size. However with that comes LONG travel times, with litterally at times an hour spent reaching a destination. The STO system makes space feel small and in some ways hurts the open universe feel but at the same time it means quicker moving about.
I could go on and on with breaking down points but I am hoping people get what I am trying to say. A direct comparision of these two games makes no sense because they are two very different approaches. All they share in common is a scifi genre and that is it.
I can say this however, in EVE I have three highly skilled characters. I am a GOOD combat pilot and can handle PVP usually as high as 3 vs 1 odds against me. I have run highly successful corporations in mining and manufacturing making billions of ISK. Yet at the end of the day I prefer STO.
STO has a more casual play style that lets me enjoy time with my family and not feel like I am cheating on my gaming. EVE is a great game and I do not mean to put it down but it is game that becomes a job very fast. STO has a play style and approach I just personally find more fun.
I know there a joke opportunity in here somewhere..............................
yeah, I got nothing.:)
WIth STO I can play a few hours have fun and don't have a fear that when im not logging in to make certain runs, set up training queue and missout isk/xp...
thats exactly what I'm saying... it didn't use to be that easy, but it is easier now.. its just the people with the knowledge/intelligence to even think about it that can get it going... its hiring the right employees. Nothing I said is contradicting myself... you just may not know what I'm talking about so it seems that way. Risk I was talking about is the most avoided type of risk... perceived risk. Easy doesn't mean risk free... and risk doesn't mean difficult.
You do realize there are other ways to do things... even without using Wine/Cider type of thing to run the pure Windows code on OSX, you also have solutions like Valve uses with its games... they have a single codebase they compile and it spits out a Windows and OSX version. Does it take a bit of extra work... sure. You can even do things better, if you make your tools right, than what valve does.
Most game programmers know DirectX and nothing else... most of their staff know only that... which is why Windows was chosen, its all they knew how to do. Its funny how Blizzard could always make Win/Mac simultaneous releases with different codebases, and still get super big. Do you think they knew WoW would take off as big as it did when they were developing it? You do know they had a Mac client from day one, it wasn't added later... CoH, Eve, and others who have branched out to Macs easily using Cider haven't regretted it in any visible way.
Just to let you know, weve been checking our account servers and working closely with our friends at MMORPG about this for the last couple days and just a short time ago MMORPG updated the article with the following statement:
Some concerns have been brought to our attention that the author only played 57 minutes of Star Trek Onlines demo. He did not play the full retail game, though he invested significantly more time in EVE Online. We apologize to Star Trek Online for this and would like to remind our readership that this piece is not an official review, but rather an editorial generated by the author, a regular contributor to our publication. We have added this statement so that readers can better interpret the article fairly. We will have an update for you soon.
Wed like to thank MMORPG for their honesty and integrity in this matter and look forward to their continuing contributions to our community and the industry. Of course, we will always acknowledge and encourage all fair editorial opinion without discrimination -- heck, just look at our reviews index on the official website. And, more...er, of course-ly, if further details emerge, well let you guys know straightaway.
Thanks,
Stormshade
Tha's like reviewing the movie Alien and saying it's a wonderful love story garaunteed to make the heart sing and watching Benjamin Button instead.
Incoming rant about EvE online, shields up!
EvE is spreadsheets in space. There is no direct control over your ship, no real "combat", you can't even fly five feet to the left unless there is a waypoint you can click on. PvP amounts to whoever has spent the most money on the biggest ships with the most guns. The automated combat is just flying in circles autoattacking.
I'm a total nerd. I love space and space-related games. I love MMOs. Hell, I even like spreadsheets. I've wanted to like EvE online because it looks cool, and it sounds cool. But every time I trick myself into downloading that 14-trial of theirs, I uninstall within an hour. I can't stand it. Bored to tears.
Some EvE players like to argue that people who don't like EvE just can't deal with hard games. That we can't handle being punished for mistakes. To those people I'd just like to say that I have and still play Ultima Online on UOR ruleset shards. Full PvP, full loot, thievery, scams, the whole nine yards. I've been through all of it and UO still remains my favorite MMO because of the tense atmosphere it creates. I *understand* why you like EvE being hard and punishing because of how "real" it is sociologically.
What I don't understand is how anyone can slog through the endless grind-fest drudgery that is "playing the game". I'll admit having a bigger ship than the next guy is alluring, but ****. Sometimes the ends just don't justify the means.
Star Trek Online is waaaaaay on the other end of the spectrum of MMOs, designed for casual trekkish players to log in a few hours a week and blow stuff up in their Enterprise. Fully-consensual non-consequential PvP is tacked on, but everyone knows it is entirely meaningless and "just for fun". And no, this does not hold the same intrigue as dry-looting grief-play, but it isn't supposed to. I wouldn't want it to.
Obviously, one thing STO has over EvE is being able to *fly your ship*. I don't know about you, but I like to fly spaceships in games about spaceships. PvP is much more about skill than gear, and its actually fun to play.
STO is just the right amount of "Star Trek MMO" for someone who plays other MMOs, has a day job, or both.
He's a possessed man, what can we say?