Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Supreme Cmdr

Star Trek Online

Recommended Posts

quote:


Originally posted by DREADA:

In any case if you stay watching, you're supposed to get to see a lot of those events when the supposedly final season kicks off in October...but with what quality is open to debate.

Looks like B&B have finally heard the fans' calling for Trek to soon "lay fallow"!


IMO, Enterprise has NO REDEEMING QUALITIES WHATSOEVER. IT IS COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH. And just another nail in the geriatric ST coffin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jumping in the way back machine here.

I became enamored with the mysteries of our cosmos on dark clear nights at my grandfather's farm. There, away from all the light pollution of a big city, one could see the magnificent wonder of our galaxy. Peering up at all the stars in the night sky makes you feel like a speck in the universe and you can't help but wonder "What's out there?" I soon discovered science fiction in the school library and I was hooked. Writers with imagination as large as the cosmos. I could always be found glued to the television when the Mercury, Gemeni,and Apollo spaceshots were televised.

Then came Gene Roddenberry's dream.

Star Trek.

Captain Kirk's opening monologue provoked a sense of visual tangibility of my dreams without end.

To seek out new life and new civilizations. I was giddy to say the least. That is until some Hollywierd suit popped the whole thing.

Throughout the show's run, there was very little in the way of seeking out new life and their civilizations. They turned it more toward drama and the human interactions with races of extraterrestrials with no backstory development of how these races were encountered.

I seriously think the producers were too busy scarfing Quatatriticalli and stuffing Tribbles in thier shorts, to actually create a viable sci-fi TV show.

Time passes to new spinoffs and movies. Mostly mediocre at best.

And now we have some erstwhile individuals attempting to create an online version of the Star Trek universe. They know not what they have bit off and I am suspicious of thier intentions.

Every idea used to create MMOGs has been used, abused, and copied to the point of making a True Trekker hurl in his helmet. Not to mention the proliferation of the standalone ST games and thier putrid storylines.

If these guys can't create a universe as big as say,the Battlecruiser series and Eve, then they are wasting thier time and alot of someone's money.

I'll put my money on BCO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hellbinder[CE]

quote:

IMO, Enterprise has
NO REDEEMING QUALITIES WHATSOEVER. IT IS COMPLETE AND UTTER RUBBISH.
And just another nail in the geriatric ST coffin.

I totally agree. This is entirely the fault of those idiot producers Brandon and Baraga or however you spell their names.

Enterprise was never going to be decent bnecuase these jerks completely threw away 30 years of history and did their own thing. They are Simply "producers" looking for cash with no actual heart for the show or understanding of the material or what made it popular.

Every time one of the star trek series starts to falter their answer is to throw as much rampant immorality as possible into it instead of actual Scifi content and Good story arcs.

This Show Should have had *nothing* to do with Enterprise. It should have been about the Datelaus(sp). The actual first Warp capable star ship. They did not want to do that becuase it did not "look cool for today". This series Should have started there and taken 3 years to progress through the origional Romulan wars. That would have been a decent entertaining show. Based on welll established mythos.

What they should have done if anything though is to redo the Origional TOS. Or really what the new Voyages are doing. Finish the origional 5 year mission.

What is sad is that these big wig producers have no common sense at all and no real talent at all other than the Licence that was handed to them and their ability to toss in as much sex related crap as possible every time the ratings slip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Every time one of the star trek series starts to falter their answer is to throw as much rampant immorality as possible into it instead of actual Scifi content and Good story arcs.

It seemed like: When Gene Roddenbury died, maybe a year or 2 before, All the SarTrek productions had been turned into evening SOAPS, with every conceived socially immoral act, pursued by every leading role, character.

I would not consider myself a "Trekke", but I am a hard core Sci Fi fan, from way back.

without "science fact" wrapped around ANY futuristic story line? I see FANTASY FICTION, being passed off, for SCIENCE FICTION.

Its quite irritating

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with street about Fantasy being presented as Science.

However, I'm only posting this even though it's off topic cause I haven't seen any warnings given out yet, I love Enterprise. I'm not a big ST fan, I'm only 20. But what I do like from the 3rd season is T'Pol having to deal with strong emotions, however, I don't like that it seems to lead to her stripping or getting together with Trip. It doesn't seem like they have anything, but a physical attraction to each other. And yea I like Jolene, but if I wanna see soft porn I got the net. When I want drama and good solid stories that's what tv and movies are for.

True, I don't like that the first ship is called Enterprise, but the character development of Archer is a good watch. But it seems to me that Hoshi, Reed, and Phlox (sp?) get pushed aside when it comes to good writing. I mean the actor who plays Phlox has small scenes which is whenever they need the doctor to explain stuff, "

Doctor's Orders" was the only ep that had him on set for more than an hour or so.

But as long as it's on the air there's still time for improvements. I wonder have any of you seen Angel while it was still on the air? I'm gonna create a new thread for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh well I just lost a big rant I posted on star trek online. I was saying...

Has anyone been following the latest developments. I think now some time has passed and a good deal more information has been released that we can open this discussion again.

1) pvp will only take place in the holodeck

2) federation will be the only race playable on release

3) others races to follow with an expansion

4) new players will start on the same bridge but be in different dimensions so as not to be able to interact with one another.

I have to cut down my rant because it feels silly posting it all again.

But this is starting to sound like star trek: the sims or SIMS: Star trekkin or something.

I always thought they would create a free form game universe with almost 0 limitations other than the obvious... like being able to pee on a starship hull or something.

Then they would loose us in that world and let us shape the world how we wanted within reason and the limitations of the game engine.

Like say for example if a large group of military romulan players decided they wanted to take over the federation, then it would be up to the federation miltary "starfleet" to get together and stop that.

I appreciate that it will be an FPS/3rd person real time world, but I'd like that if I felt like assassinating the president of the federation I could so so once I could get past security.... that's just a silly example of what I am refering too.

But they sound like they are making a game where they want us to grow up and live some sort of life. Like for people that want to make babies and live on frontier colonies online or something... yeah star trek ain't all about battles yeah yeah, but star trek IS a TV SHOW, this is supposed to be a game, that you PLAY, and that is FUN, and has long lasting APPEAL.

Star trek is about exploring the unknown, how can you explore the unknown if you can't do nothing player to player outside of the holodeck... what I am getting at is, it's not that I would to blast another player to star dust in his ship as soon as I see him on sensors, but I am saying that if that was allowed, if that was possible, it makes "playing" more fun... because it can go either way...

like all of a sudden I see a romulan ship decloak next to me, I don't know what he wants, as a starfleet captain and bound by starfleet rules I'll have to play by the rules, and not just open fire... which otherwise would give me demerit points and take away my ship commission.

they've got this thing, they don't want everyone flying around in ships and being captains... but last I checked most star trek shows portrayed STARFLEET 99 percent, and CAPTAINS on STARSHIPS, not grey haired old men making romulan ale and selling it to ferengi, so WHAT if people want starships ..... that is why people like star trek, adventure... you're in aship exploring the unknown...

there could be trials just like how there is in starfleet in the trek universe. a new captain under goes missions under training, real missions, before they are given a commission, and you must not only successfully complete the mission but also with a high starfleet score... even if after you get out there and become unorthodox they want to see you know what was "the right way" before you learn the "other way"

anyway this is a stupid rant, probably even more stupid sounding because I typed it twice in a row.. but if you have been following or if not look here http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~starmada/forum/stgu_portal.php

let me know what you think of the latest stuff... as the design starts to shape.

actually you can read up on most of the new things since the announcement here

http://www.rpgplanet.com/startrekonline/

just browse it a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what if this bid at developing a star trek online game is a smart move by perpetual just to get attention and marketing for there other game gods and heroes which is MUCH closer to being done. I mean who ever heard of perpetual or gods and heroes before they made a bid to paramount to develop a ST;O game...

sounds fishy... and doesn't take much effort from them to keep the fake press going and the message boards going.

I mean who announces a game 3 years before launch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well look at Halo 2 that was being developed for awhile not 3 years, but close. Then Perfect Dark came out I dunno 1999, 2000? Not the sequel skipped an entire generation of consoles and premires in the next generation.

Not to mention MMO's are not easy to make. Just ask SC. He's had the core concepts of his vison for close to a decade I think and now technology is catching up and he is able to expand with UCO and BCO or GC? I forget, sorry. And the fans knew those concepts were in developement for awhile. I think 2001? That's when I got BCM and then I heard of a planned first-person view in ship the SC dropped for better things.

Not to mention with Enterprise goen that game is now the only offical ST thing we know for sure is in the works. Just that alone gives it press. I never heard of Perpetual, but I didn't know about 3000ad, Derek Smart, until I got BCM either. Heck, there's a developer in Australia I didn't know about that's developing a game based on one of my favorite shows and it seems their doing pretty good.

I'd wait until the company is boughht or we actually see some shots of videos before I pass judgement. Even though I'm not a Trekky and no offense to Derek's great accomplishments, but what they planned (and not everything planned goes in the final product) is everything I dreamed of. Bascially working on a ship and not being the commander. I guess we're get some more news in a year or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though it is highly unlikely that this will ever see the light of day (well, not in the original form of ST anyways), their new site if up, along with an FAQ update.

I can't wait to see how many ways they screw this up. I can already see the signs; but thats just me maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SC, I love your postive and upbeat attitude

Anyway, what gets me is they siad they are in prepocduction yet the site has a "projected" launch time of Q1 2006.

I wonder who had guessed that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So SC what do you think of the results, I thought some of the wording of the questions were unprofessional considering the response they wanted and didn't get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its rubbish. This game - if it ever gets done - will fail. They lack the experience and they're playing with an all but dead franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will kill it all by itself.

quote:

What Daron was referring to was 2D movement. This is indeed our baseline for movement - it's the starting point from which players can diverge when they need to. This means that players will be able to steer the ship without having to take three dimensions into account, in general. Some people have reacted as if this was a travesty of canon, but that isn't true at all. Actually, we're modeling exactly what we see in the shows.

Evidently, none of the programmers ever watched the second movie ... where the entire plot hinged on Kirk's ability to maneuver and think in three dimensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Its rubbish. This game - if it ever gets done - will fail. They lack the experience and they're playing with an all but dead franchise.

It will fail more so because they haven't enlisted the help of someone who knows more about Space Combat than any other programmer in the industry, perhaps, the only person who even know's how to program space combat CORRECTLY

And we all know who I'm talking about

Seriously though; 2D plane of movement? That sounds to much like Darkspace, which is a good game in it's own right but. I've lost any further interest in this game

*Put's it on his "No Buy" list, along with MANY MANY game's*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Marvin:

This will kill it
all by itself.


Yep, that for starters.

Even SWG, after barely one (?) year, they changed the combat to twitch (like Planetside) and are still having problems with it.

These games are not meant to be played in 2D dimension or even pseudo-3D. The only reason that Eve even has subcribers, is because it has rich graphics and is the only robust online space trading sim there is.

I have no idea what these people are thinking. Seriously.

Read this excerpt:

quote:


Finally, 2D movement helps make the game accessible

They're so dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see it as being anything other than an excuse for lazy programming.

Almost every single flight combat game requires 3D maneuvering. At least in space you need not worry about the added problem of gravity and the accompanying energy management. But you should need worry about guys who can think in three dimensions.

Take Starshatter, for instance. It's fully 3D but all the defenses are laid out along the "galactic plane" ... most all of the firepower is aimed alone the 2D horizon. Ergo, by maneuvering and attacking either from above or below, you increase your tactical advantage multifold.

I can see where they might be confused, though. In a lot of the space combat games, the ships move so fast that the only thing players can do is "joust" ... come at each other head-on, damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead. No tactics required ... the guy with the best aim is usually the winner.

They were right about one thing, though ... the survey team asked a lot of the wrong questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:


Originally posted by Marvin:

I can't see it as being anything other than an excuse for lazy programming.


I don't believe that their decisions have anything to do with lazy programming. Its all about poor game design, inexperience and management wanting a mass market title. Nothing wrong with that; if it works for them. Heck, gamers will vote with their dollars, as always.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see any "Trek-savvy" programmer consenting to what's being planned for this game. And as a navigator, I was a bit insulted by the idea you can "sign on" as a helmsman (pilot) or navigator but then be told ...

quote:

This is another reason to avoid focusing too heavily on heading and azimuth decisions:
we don't want to overly glorify the role of the person steering the ship. The entire bridge crew should have an equal part in determining the fate of the vessel. This reflects the spirit of Star Trek: while the pilot is important, and certainly saves the day occasionally, success in most episodes comes from the interaction of the entire bridge crew working together.

Except that it means the "pilot" has nothing much to do. What kind of interaction is that? Everyone else will be occupied with one or the other of ...

quote:

... by simplifying the everyday angle calculation, we free up the crew to do
the really interesting things that actually win battles: pulling off fancy maneuvers the enemy isn't expecting, adjusting phasers to overcome unusual enemy shields, hacking into enemy computers, and all the other exciting things we see bridge crews doing in shows.

Sounds like the weapons officer will be having a great time, as will the captian and his tactical officer. (I have no idea just how fancy you can get in your maneuvering if it's limited to two dimensions.) But the best time will be had at the forum where members can argue the "fairness" implied by ...

quote:

While a young ensign might only be able to handle movement in a 2D plane,
a seasoned veteran knows many tricks and maneuvers that take the ship out of that plane.
They might do this to attack the top or underside of an enemy, get between two enemy ships, or escape into a nebula.
3D movement isn't missing from STO, but it's also not an immediate and constant concern.

It would be an immediate concern to me. Would I be restricted from 3D movement until after being promoted above the rank of ensign? Which, of course, gives a significant edge to the game's beta testers and those who sign up immediately after the game hits the internet. I guess the guys running this show don't get around much or they'd know such a set-up (assuming it could be implemented at all) is a formula for disaster.

quote:

From the SC:
Its all about poor game design, inexperience and management wanting a mass market title.

I stand corrected. It's all that, too. But, considering how long it's going to take to program this thing, who would want to write such code ... knowing that even the concept is buggy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://startrek.perpetual.com/ships.html

There's alot more information now available in another updated faq. For instance, you can play as the klingons.

There's also "fringe" factions within the federation, probably to enable PVP, because they say PVP is now IN, outside of the holodeck.

Alot more information, read it then come back here and discuss whats new, too much for me too highlight.

I like that I'll definitely get a ship

I like the more simplified profession trees, engineering, science, tactical.

one thing that bugs me about this game is that in today's age where games are mostly developed in the public eye, showing off screenshots, and what not, for how deeply involved they were in the community in the beginning, there equally withdrawn now.

also the fact that this game has been in development for two years and we can't even get a screenshot of the month.

the fact that they are still filling signifcant positions on the development team up to now...

they initially said beta in 2006 and release in 2007. now its limited beta in 2007, 3 years after commencement and hopefully, if all is well a release in 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×