The reason we see that rarely overall in the TV show is, that Star Trek isnt so much about constant space fighting, but a lot about exploring, diplomacy, first contacts, inter-crew experiences ("Data's Day") and space combat actually is a very tiny part of Star Trek. That is the root of why STO feels so absurd to me, as it is designed now.
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
From what I gathered with the vertical movement is that of going up or down WITHOUT changing the Pitch. Essentially Pitch is always at 0 degrees while the ship changes elevation, there may be some animation for the ship adjusting pitch to give the illusion of changing elevation. Therefore there is no Angle of Attack, Pitch, or other 'complex' terms that people need to worry about, which could hamper their fun. (Why can't I fire at that ship that is in front of me? So what if my ship is pointed up, the UI-radar-thingy shows the enemy is in front of me.)
To know for certain if Pitch is to be used or not at all will be determined by a screenshot of the UI. Will the UI have a sensor display which shows 3D (Front, Left, Right, Rear, Top, Bottom), thus having Pitch, or 2D (Front, Left, Right, Rear) and thus have no Pitch? My bet is on a 2D overhead sensor display UI widget because a 3D sensor display is considered complex for the mass market.
As for bigger and smaller ships in space, I would say bigger ships will move faster than smaller ships and I believe this was the case in the Star Trek Series. Bigger ships can carry more and bigger engines than smaller ships. Since there is very little gravity (unless in a gravity well), bigger ships will out run smaller ones. This is similar to naval warships in which the number of screws determines how fast the ship can move. Granted, excluding jet propelled engines and very light speed boats, carriers with four screws can out run their escorts (with either two or one screws) behind.
Mobility... I would say is based on the story-teller or script-writer. A bigger ship could turn as quick as a small ship due to using g-force dampers or some grav systems that counter the g-forces for the crew; though the hull of the ship may be stressed... but as with the iPhone, "there's an App for that."
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
Personally I’d like to see it more so an updated clone of Starfleet Command, which is a very good tactical experience… which as a matter of fact is still installed on my putter and quite enjoyable. Oh please no, not another SWG: JTLS game :P
You Star Wars fan boys need to take a break from all your looping and strafing
The reason we see that rarely overall in the TV show is, that Star Trek isnt so much about constant space fighting, but a lot about exploring, diplomacy, first contacts, inter-crew experiences ("Data's Day") and space combat actually is a very tiny part of Star Trek. That is the root of why STO feels so absurd to me, as it is designed now.
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
Almost all Star Trek movies had alot of space combat, the corny series did not, but for an MMORPG to sell well it has to have focus on combat. Very few people will play an MMORPG which is about getting Data in touch with his emotions and crap like that.
The reason we see that rarely overall in the TV show is, that Star Trek isnt so much about constant space fighting, but a lot about exploring, diplomacy, first contacts, inter-crew experiences ("Data's Day") and space combat actually is a very tiny part of Star Trek. That is the root of why STO feels so absurd to me, as it is designed now.
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
Almost all Star Trek movies had alot of space combat, the corny series did not, but for an MMORPG to sell well it has to have focus on combat. Very few people will play an MMORPG which is about getting Data in touch with his emotions and crap like that.
Amen. Glad to see we won't be having a game about the crew's holo deck adventures (always hated those episodes.....c'mon people, just turn the damn thing off and disable it.)
I can live w/o 3D space, as many others have said, most Startrek combat did not involve barrel rolls and looping, and in any sort of realistic space combat, since we assume the gun mounts can actually move and are not fixed, the manuvers won't help much. (and don't forget, there's rear phasers and photon tubes as well)
Large space craft should not be able to move quickly in space, they should be as restricted as a naval battleship in terms of manuverablity and I won't be disappointed with such a mechanic.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The reason we see that rarely overall in the TV show is, that Star Trek isnt so much about constant space fighting, but a lot about exploring, diplomacy, first contacts, inter-crew experiences ("Data's Day") and space combat actually is a very tiny part of Star Trek. That is the root of why STO feels so absurd to me, as it is designed now.
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
Almost all Star Trek movies had alot of space combat, the corny series did not, but for an MMORPG to sell well it has to have focus on combat. Very few people will play an MMORPG which is about getting Data in touch with his emotions and crap like that.
Amen. Glad to see we won't be having a game about the crew's holo deck adventures (always hated those episodes.....c'mon people, just turn the damn thing off and disable it.)
I can live w/o 3D space, as many others have said, most Startrek combat did not involve barrel rolls and looping, and in any sort of realistic space combat, since we assume the gun mounts can actually move and are not fixed, the manuvers won't help much. (and don't forget, there's rear phasers and photon tubes as well)
Large space craft should not be able to move quickly in space, they should be as restricted as a naval battleship in terms of manuverablity and I won't be disappointed with such a mechanic.
star trek was as much about conflict as exploration, diplomacy etc. and since this is a game i'm guessing more so here, however i will be disappointed if there's no sense of exploration or diplomacy to go along with the combat
as for manoeuvrability i'm still waiting to see how it's handled. No full 3d maybe a little disappointing but i liked the starfleet command series and somehow ships in the shows always seemed to meet each other the 'same side up'. But am still worried this could end up as wow in space with no evasive manoeuvres and just sitting 3 inch from each other blasting away with phasers and torepedos until one eventually loses
Is that an actual screenshot or just marketing art? I don't see anything resembling a UI on it, so it's tough to tell. A static picture doesn't tell us anything about the controls available or how they work. If they have a finctional Pitch control...I'd be happy to be wrong about that. I'd also be happy if what they said about not having a reverse gear proved to be wrong as well. From the terminology they used in that piece that's quoted I'm not very hopeful though.
Not trying to spike the games future....just making my preferences clearly known.....and trying to get a clear and somewhat authoritive answer of how things will actually work.
Bren, Is that an actual screenshot or just marketing art? I don't see anything resembling a UI on it, so it's tough to tell. A static picture doesn't tell us anything about the controls available or how they work. If they have a finctional Pitch control...I'd be happy to be wrong about that. I'd also be happy if what they said about not having a reverse gear proved to be wrong as well. From the terminology they used in that piece that's quoted I'm not very hopeful though. Not trying to spike the games future....just making my preferences clearly known.....and trying to get a clear and somewhat authoritive answer of how things will actually work.
That pic is from the game play trailer that they showed at the games unveiling in Las Vegas. They were very insistent at the time that the trailer was 100% in game footage. So yes it is an actual in-game screen shot with the UI removed for the purpose of the game play trailer.
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
Thanks Lorn,
Sounds like you are confirming what I though/feared. There is no functional PITCH or ROLL control... just YAW and an Elevator function to move you up/down on the Z axis. Any pitch and roll displayed by ships in the game is cosmetic (and not player controlable) and not functional.
I find that (combined with no reverse or lateral motion) EXTREMELY disapointing and very limiting in terms of tactics for a Space Combat game.
I could accept it perfectly well for a submarine game, or an Age of Sail game, or a Battle of Jutland game....but Space (IMO) is supposed to work a bit differently and to expose a different set of tactics.
The fact that those things aren't in the game, and that the designers have said players wouldn't be missing them in combat... tells me that they aren't spending alot of thought designing a Space Combat game.... They are designing something that looks like WOW in space....but with the Paladins and Druids dressed up in space-ship skins.
Sorry guys....I know this is going to upset some of you fanboys.... but like the great Yogi Bera said.... I call em like I see em.... and this design is just plain dumb (IMO).
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
Thanks Lorn,
Sounds like you are confirming what I though/feared. There is no functional PITCH or ROLL control... just YAW and an Elevator function to move you up/down on the Z axis. Any pitch and roll displayed by ships in the game is cosmetic (and not player controlable) and not functional.
I find that (combined with no reverse or lateral motion) EXTREMELY disapointing and very limiting in terms of tactics for a Space Combat game.
I could accept it perfectly well for a submarine game, or an Age of Sail game, or a Battle of Jutland game....but Space (IMO) is supposed to work a bit differently and to expose a different set of tactics.
The fact that those things aren't in the game, and that the designers have said players wouldn't be missing them in combat... tells me that they aren't spending alot of thought designing a Space Combat game.... They are designing something that looks like WOW in space....but with the Paladins and Druids dressed up in space-ship skins. Maybe, maybe not will have to wait and see on that one
Sorry guys....I know this is going to upset some of you fanboys.... but like the great Yogi Bera said.... I call em like I see em.... and this design is just plain dumb (IMO). It worked pretty well in the starfleet command series and that had no z axis
I think the vid is choreographed ingame footage, there is some on the sto website that shows it as is with the controls
don't forget this is based on the star trek tv series which for some reason never did seem to have full 3d movement
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
Thanks Lorn,
Sounds like you are confirming what I though/feared. There is no functional PITCH or ROLL control... just YAW and an Elevator function to move you up/down on the Z axis. Any pitch and roll displayed by ships in the game is cosmetic (and not player controlable) and not functional.
I find that (combined with no reverse or lateral motion) EXTREMELY disapointing and very limiting in terms of tactics for a Space Combat game.
I could accept it perfectly well for a submarine game, or an Age of Sail game, or a Battle of Jutland game....but Space (IMO) is supposed to work a bit differently and to expose a different set of tactics.
The fact that those things aren't in the game, and that the designers have said players wouldn't be missing them in combat... tells me that they aren't spending alot of thought designing a Space Combat game.... They are designing something that looks like WOW in space....but with the Paladins and Druids dressed up in space-ship skins.
Sorry guys....I know this is going to upset some of you fanboys.... but like the great Yogi Bera said.... I call em like I see em.... and this design is just plain dumb (IMO).
Doesn't upset me even a little bit as you are entitled to your opinion Mel. I just don't really see this as that big of a deal. The Starfleet Command series of games were considered some of the best games by most Trekkies and they didn't have any vertical movement at all. This is supposed to be a MMO... not a space flight sim. As for your WoW in space comment I think you are being a little harsh as this game will not resemble WoW in any fashion. Cryptic is known for not following the standard MMO mold when it comes to games and STO will be no different. If you want to shut the door on STO this early in the development with so little info available the only one you're hurting is yourself. See you around.
The vast majority of spaceship combat in the various star trek series was rather two dimensional, very rarely was any 3D (dog-fighting) tactics used or shown. Mostly it was positioning using shields and making passes going toward, past or running from another ship and slugging it out with phasers and torpedoes. So for me I find my self rather accepting of the 2.5D style of combat.
I never saw the enterprise roll, flip, or strafe. When you're dealing with vessels that large, it's just not something that comes in to play. This talk of 'ignoring the fanbase' is just ridiculous. If anything, they are staying true to the fanbase. I've always found it slightly humorous that whenever two ships meet up in Star Trek they are always approaching on the same plane, not coming at each other from crazy angles. That's what we'll have hear. 2.5D is more than enough for the game.
Watch the final season of Deep Space 9. In one of the major battles, the Fed fleet forms a wall with the smaller "fighter" ships coming in at angles to makes holes in the dominion fleet. Then near the end of the battle, the Klingons enter from above the dominion fleet and slice thru them.
Then in Star Trek 2: Wrath of Kahn, they enter the nebula and to trick Kahn, who is thinking in a 2d way, they move the ship to be below Kahn and to get in behind. I could cite many more instances of a 3d engagement, but this is enough.
So, there is precedent for a 3d movement, but its early and they can still change thier minds, if enough people ask for it in the right way.
But your examples still represent a small minority of the engagements that have taken place in the star trek universe. They're not going to waste their time catering to this small minority, nor the small minority of whiners.
I cited evidence that there is 3d movement in Star Trek. If they(the ships moving in a 3d way) are a small minority, show me some proof. I want to see you analysis of this to prove your point.
Also, in a Next Generation episode, the enterprise is stuck in a trap and cant use impulse engines to move. They did a move that I can describe as a spin. They kept the nose of the ship pointed at a asteroid then "spun" the backend around to get a slingshot effect to kept up the momentum.
Mosrt of this will be moot if thier is no collision detection in STO. But if thier is, this will be a game of turrets just spinning in 1 spot shooting at another turret. With a 3d enviroment, that will open up the combat to accomadate the smaller ships better manuverability.
Actually with the exception of your last example, what you've given are examples of the 2.5D that they talked about in the dev post. Change height (angling up or down), 'sink' below Khan etc.... Your last example with the Ent. swinging it's back around (strafing) is the type of 3D they're not going to support.
There are a number of TV show examples of the smaller ships flying like fighter aircraft with rolls, looks etc... so yes there is precedence, but they don't want to support that.
One problem here is that what the Dev's are calling 2.5D movement IS REALLY 3D movement. Anytime you introduce a height element into a back / forward / turn setup it's 3D. So yes Lugal there is 3D in the TV shows and yes there will be 3D in the game, just not a 100% anything goes type.
You are correct.
I hope they do something for the smaller ships, like the shuttles or Defiant size ships that alows some of the more 3d movement. It would be easy to implement something based on the mass of a ship. A large ship like a Warbird wont be doing barrel rolls without losing some parts of its hull. Plus a ship that big, a barrel roll is useless as nobody(or computer) is gonna miss. But a small ship with increased manuverability ship have some 3d movement. Alowing it to fly close to a large ship and making targeting harder.
All of this speculation is pretty meaningless untill we see how they implement this stuff and if they have collision detection or not.
Seems to me, their intent is to completely avoid joystick style combat. Doesn't matter the size of the ship or prescedent or the physics. They've chosen a combat style that focuses more on ship abilities rather than your reflexes, quite simple. You make up for your lack of mobility by being able to shift defensive systems on the fly.
They don't want a twitch game and I'm glad they don't.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
I cited evidence that there is 3d movement in Star Trek. If they(the ships moving in a 3d way) are a small minority, show me some proof. I want to see you analysis of this to prove your point. Also, in a Next Generation episode, the enterprise is stuck in a trap and cant use impulse engines to move. They did a move that I can describe as a spin. They kept the nose of the ship pointed at a asteroid then "spun" the backend around to get a slingshot effect to kept up the momentum. Mosrt of this will be moot if thier is no collision detection in STO. But if thier is, this will be a game of turrets just spinning in 1 spot shooting at another turret. With a 3d enviroment, that will open up the combat to accomadate the smaller ships better manuverability.
Actually with the exception of your last example, what you've given are examples of the 2.5D that they talked about in the dev post. Change height (angling up or down), 'sink' below Khan etc.... Your last example with the Ent. swinging it's back around (strafing) is the type of 3D they're not going to support.
There are a number of TV show examples of the smaller ships flying like fighter aircraft with rolls, looks etc... so yes there is precedence, but they don't want to support that.
One problem here is that what the Dev's are calling 2.5D movement IS REALLY 3D movement. Anytime you introduce a height element into a back / forward / turn setup it's 3D. So yes Lugal there is 3D in the TV shows and yes there will be 3D in the game, just not a 100% anything goes type.
You are correct.
I hope they do something for the smaller ships, like the shuttles or Defiant size ships that alows some of the more 3d movement. It would be easy to implement something based on the mass of a ship. A large ship like a Warbird wont be doing barrel rolls without losing some parts of its hull. Plus a ship that big, a barrel roll is useless as nobody(or computer) is gonna miss. But a small ship with increased manuverability ship have some 3d movement. Alowing it to fly close to a large ship and making targeting harder.
All of this speculation is pretty meaningless untill we see how they implement this stuff and if they have collision detection or not.
Seems to me, their intent is to completely avoid joystick style combat. Doesn't matter the size of the ship or prescedent or the physics. They've chosen a combat style that focuses more on ship abilities rather than your reflexes, quite simple. You make up for your lack of mobility by being able to shift defensive systems on the fly.
They don't want a twitch game and I'm glad they don't.
I feel the same. They are staying true to the IP. The ships in Star Trek resembled naval vessels so the strategy was more "where should I divert power" rather than loop de loops and barrel rolls. Granted, the smaller ships were more maneuvarable so I'm sure that those who get their rocks off on "flying by the seat of their pants" will be happy with a Defiant class ship. I say before anyone criticizes this aspect of the game to go watch a few episodes of Star Trek.
Well, no 3D movement in STO. Is Basically just 2.5 D (Think Submarine Warfare)
One of the best ship battle sequences was from Wrath of Kahn which was EXACTLY like submarine warfare! Bring it on!
One of the best... but by far my fav is Balance of Terror (ST Orig). Yes, very much like sub warfare, including thick tension. Not all combat was just like sub warfare though, but all quite sea navel warfare like.
Good that they are not going to overdo it all, gives them the resources for making better away missions which is the meat and potatoes of ST.
Typically speaking, during the TV series pre-Defiant DS9 and even some of Voyager, most of the space combat was on the same plane not because that was how it was supposed to be, but because they were using real models (time intensive to do a fully 3D combat scene) and/or the technology didn't exist to computer render the battle fast enough, or that would look cool enough. Certain episodes, however, the time WAS taken and this is evident in, as examples; in "All Good Things" where the refitted Enterprise-D executes a roll and comes up from underneath the Klingon cruiser, in many of the Borg episodes the Enterprise did some pretty fancy manuevering to get the hell out of dodge, and so on.
In fact, during the first seperation of the Enterprise (Farpoint I believe) the drive section executed a lateral loop to haul ass back and buy time. In the 'Locutus' episodes, the Saucer and Drive section did fighter-style strafing on the cube itself. The Saucer would leap in at an angle to protect the belly and scoot across the Drive Section's path, and so on.
Star Trek repeatedly attempted to show off space combat as it was meant to be, but the technology and budget just wasn't there. Look at the original Star Wars series, a lot of that combat is on a 2 dimensional grid as well. Bring up the new ones though, and you have technology that can do it. Likewise with Star Trek! In First Contact, it wasn't just the Defiant that was doing rolls, spins, and the like. The Akira did some fancy stuff, in fact that entire battle was in a 100% 3D space. None were facing the ship, they were all assuming position of weaponry. In Insurrection, and this is a laughable example, Riker took the stick and did the same manuvering that a Defiant could. Also, the Enterprise did a 180 roll to skirt that ship to save Picard. In the newest reboot, it's in a fully three-dimensional space as well.
While I agree that this kind of flying is not cohesive to a casual gamer's experience, and may in fact be too much for said gamer, I think the mechanics SHOULD be in place for those of us that do want to use position to our advantage. I personally would want to be able to out-position a ship than just sit there and trade shots. Example :
Let's say I'm in a Galaxy. If I recall my specs right, I have a phaser bank both on top and bottom of the saucer. I have a torpedo tube on the "neck" just north of the deflector on the underside, and an aft tube directly rear. Let's say you are in an Akira. Your weapon banks favor directly front. Instead of trading hits with me, why not take position? If you sit right in front of me, I can hammer you with both banks and a torpedo tube. If you took position, say, directly above me -- strafing (which is not side-stepping like in a FPS, but rather run-and-gun) you just eliminated two-thirds of my available arsenal and are putting every advantage to how your ship was designed to perform. Only one bank of phasers to contend with if you stayed directly above me. I'm toast at this point, it doesn't matter what I do with my shields. If I have unrestricted movement, however, I can assume position on you by rolling and pitching as hard as I can at the conclusion (or beginning, depending) of one of your strafes, because to keep that position you would have to loop up. If I managed that, I now have full view of your tail (hopefully), and a clear shot with a tube.
It takes far more strategy to gain position supremacy on an opponent than just juggling shields. Let those of us who can pilot even half-assedly do that, and let the rest fly on a plane. In the end, those that fly on a plane would learn basic moves like half-rolls and strafing. Unrestricted flight is the only way to handle a game set in space, no matter what universe it is. Do I think, though, that every Galaxy-class starship should be executing buttonhook loops? No. Do I think that bigger = slower and less manuverable? Of course, that's reality. A larger ship takes more power to move simply because it's physics.
I guess my point is, even if you do not want to engage in that sort of flight gameplay, do you think that there should be restrictions? I'm not a huge fan of micromanagement, what if they restricted that instead? Restrictions, no matter where they are and how they do not affect you personally, are bad in any game -- ESPECIALLY an MMO.
Typically speaking, during the TV series pre-Defiant DS9 and even some of Voyager, most of the space combat was on the same plane not because that was how it was supposed to be, but because they were using real models (time intensive to do a fully 3D combat scene) and/or the technology didn't exist to computer render the battle fast enough, or that would look cool enough. Certain episodes, however, the time WAS taken and this is evident in, as examples; in "All Good Things" where the refitted Enterprise-D executes a roll and comes up from underneath the Klingon cruiser, in many of the Borg episodes the Enterprise did some pretty fancy manuevering to get the hell out of dodge, and so on.
It's true that, for a long time, the Star Trek series didn't have the technology to showcase action-packed battles, and so scenes played out like naval combat. Hell, in the Original Series, most of the time the Enterprise just parked right in front of the enemy of the week, and they motionlessly shot at each other if battle ensued.
In later years, the battles became more action-y, but nevertheless stately space combat remained mostly the norm. Barrel rolls and fancy maneuvers were rare. That's just how the series is though, and I'd argue that limitations are sometimes a good thing. I think that's why the original Star Wars movies are so much better than the new ones; Lucas had to work with limited resources and old technology in the 70s and 80s, and a lot of creativity and uniqueness came out of that.
Let me give you a Star Trek example: When Gene Roddenberry designed the Original Series, he envisioned that away teams would visit planets in shuttlecraft. This was deemed too expensive to produce, however, so he brainstormed, and came up with the idea of away teams beaming up and down via the transporter.
That's right: If not for limitations that fostered unforeseen creativity, Star Trek would not have transporters, a signature element of the series.
So, stately space battles may be the result of limited technology and funding when producing the series, but that's okay. It's okay that that's a part of Star Trek, and allowing full-blown aerobatic maneuvers in the game certainly wouldn't feel like Star Trek to me.
And I agree with other posters who say that barrel rolls and other fancy maneuvers are rare in the series. They are rare, and they should stay that way in the game. The antics of the Defiant shouldn't dictate how a game representing the whole series should function. People saying they'll refuse to play STO without fully 3D space maneuevering are just being silly.
Also, so far no one has thought about the visual consequences of allowing full 3D movement. Knowing MMO players, the stately Star Trek ships would be barrel rolling, flipping end over end, and just flying around crazily ALL THE TIME, which doesn't look like Star Trek at all. The in-game videos Cryptic has released depict ship movement that actually, you know, looks like Star Trek.
Currently Playing: EVE Online Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
I'll summarize my opinion like this - Bridge Commander > Starfleet Command. STO = Starfleet command. Finish that equation and you've got it.
People keep saying "SFC did it!", well, SFC was slow and annoying as hell. All combat is down to jousting and spinning in circles to get your enemy exposed to your charged weapons on the other side. This is not a problem in bridge commander, because you can just roll, eliminating the need for spinning circles for an hour. Oh, and in BC you also have top and bottom phaser arcs, which helps a lot. SFC you have two weapon loadout strategies - Overload the fron arcs with strong weapons and leave everything else empty, and then just joust or stay on your enemies tail, or if your non-fed then just utilizing cloak. (Decloak, fire all weapons, cloak). Or spread your weapons out, and spend an hour spinning in circles cycling your arcs, which is a pain because the enemy ship will be doing the same thing.
This results in two ships side by side, spinning and jousting attempting to gain the upper hand, occasionally someone breaching a shield and getting some troops in at the warp core. Personally, neither Bridge commander nor Starfleet command follows the "flow" of Star Trek series combat. But by and large Star Trek has sucked as far as the combat effects are concerned, the vast majority of battles being relegated to two ships staring at eachother with no movement, firing until somebodies shields give out or the crew gets some technobabble victory in. As far as the movies, the Enterprise almost always has an insane weapon arc, being able to hit the enemy no matter where they are, never really worrying about ship position. And even it rolls slightly to get the top phaser arcs in position to unload into the enemy.
At the end of the day. not adding roll only serves to limit your options, and thus limit gameplay. And i can see no reason for that, unless we are assuming the playerbase is so inept they wouldnt know what to do with the ability to roll your ship (we're not talking barrel rolls here, we're talking slight rolls to expose your top or bottom shields/phaser arcs or weapons on the other side of the ship without having to change your direction (ergo flying in circles)). And i tend to think most people are a little bit smarter than that. Then again, people elected Barack Obama.
The fact that Cryptic is cutting corners on ALL aspects of this game is why I will not EVER play this game.
My best experience with a Star Trek game was Bridge Commander, and the fact that this game will not be anything remotely close, means I will not ever play it.
The fact that Cryptic is cutting corners on ALL aspects of this game is why I will not EVER play this game. My best experience with a Star Trek game was Bridge Commander, and the fact that this game will not be anything remotely close, means I will not ever play it.
Did BC or SC have huge tracks of open space to explore? Did they have 100's of planets, Space stations and other exotic locals that you could get out of your fancy bridge and explore? Did they have crafting? Did they have a player market? Recreational activities? The ability to play with thousands of friends and strangers all at the same time? A player advancement system? A ship advancement system? Huge PvP battles involving more than 10 ships? Discoverable planets, anomalies and other space oddities? Advanced Character customization? Advanced ship customization? Anything other than small scripted battles that involve nothing but combat?
You people can't seem to grasp the aspect that this isn't some single player game. This is a MMO and is a completely different type of game. This game already has 5-10 times the content of most other MMOs and your crying and whining about pitch and roll? This game will be epic in the MMO genre when it releases with the promised features. This is a MMO and not some single player or limited multiplayer space flight sim. You guys are so blinded by one or two missing features that your totally ignoring the fact that this game will have 1000 times the content of BC and SC combined with the ability to play with thousands of other players. Talk about not being able to see the forest through the trees.
Comments
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
From what I gathered with the vertical movement is that of going up or down WITHOUT changing the Pitch. Essentially Pitch is always at 0 degrees while the ship changes elevation, there may be some animation for the ship adjusting pitch to give the illusion of changing elevation. Therefore there is no Angle of Attack, Pitch, or other 'complex' terms that people need to worry about, which could hamper their fun. (Why can't I fire at that ship that is in front of me? So what if my ship is pointed up, the UI-radar-thingy shows the enemy is in front of me.)
To know for certain if Pitch is to be used or not at all will be determined by a screenshot of the UI. Will the UI have a sensor display which shows 3D (Front, Left, Right, Rear, Top, Bottom), thus having Pitch, or 2D (Front, Left, Right, Rear) and thus have no Pitch? My bet is on a 2D overhead sensor display UI widget because a 3D sensor display is considered complex for the mass market.
As for bigger and smaller ships in space, I would say bigger ships will move faster than smaller ships and I believe this was the case in the Star Trek Series. Bigger ships can carry more and bigger engines than smaller ships. Since there is very little gravity (unless in a gravity well), bigger ships will out run smaller ones. This is similar to naval warships in which the number of screws determines how fast the ship can move. Granted, excluding jet propelled engines and very light speed boats, carriers with four screws can out run their escorts (with either two or one screws) behind.
Mobility... I would say is based on the story-teller or script-writer. A bigger ship could turn as quick as a small ship due to using g-force dampers or some grav systems that counter the g-forces for the crew; though the hull of the ship may be stressed... but as with the iPhone, "there's an App for that."
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
Personally I’d like to see it more so an updated clone of Starfleet Command, which is a very good tactical experience… which as a matter of fact is still installed on my putter and quite enjoyable. Oh please no, not another SWG: JTLS game :P
You Star Wars fan boys need to take a break from all your looping and strafing
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
Almost all Star Trek movies had alot of space combat, the corny series did not, but for an MMORPG to sell well it has to have focus on combat. Very few people will play an MMORPG which is about getting Data in touch with his emotions and crap like that.
My gaming blog
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
Almost all Star Trek movies had alot of space combat, the corny series did not, but for an MMORPG to sell well it has to have focus on combat. Very few people will play an MMORPG which is about getting Data in touch with his emotions and crap like that.
Amen. Glad to see we won't be having a game about the crew's holo deck adventures (always hated those episodes.....c'mon people, just turn the damn thing off and disable it.)
I can live w/o 3D space, as many others have said, most Startrek combat did not involve barrel rolls and looping, and in any sort of realistic space combat, since we assume the gun mounts can actually move and are not fixed, the manuvers won't help much. (and don't forget, there's rear phasers and photon tubes as well)
Large space craft should not be able to move quickly in space, they should be as restricted as a naval battleship in terms of manuverablity and I won't be disappointed with such a mechanic.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
No barrel rolling or looping? Does that mean this game will not appeal to the "bunny hoppers"? Star Fox anyone?
One of the best ship battle sequences was from Wrath of Kahn which was EXACTLY like submarine warfare! Bring it on!
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Navajo Proverb
You have a point there and to add to it, those 'everyday affairs' are on board the ship, not on a planet. I guess STO is going based on the recent Star Trek movie of Rebooting for combat.
Almost all Star Trek movies had alot of space combat, the corny series did not, but for an MMORPG to sell well it has to have focus on combat. Very few people will play an MMORPG which is about getting Data in touch with his emotions and crap like that.
Amen. Glad to see we won't be having a game about the crew's holo deck adventures (always hated those episodes.....c'mon people, just turn the damn thing off and disable it.)
I can live w/o 3D space, as many others have said, most Startrek combat did not involve barrel rolls and looping, and in any sort of realistic space combat, since we assume the gun mounts can actually move and are not fixed, the manuvers won't help much. (and don't forget, there's rear phasers and photon tubes as well)
Large space craft should not be able to move quickly in space, they should be as restricted as a naval battleship in terms of manuverablity and I won't be disappointed with such a mechanic.
star trek was as much about conflict as exploration, diplomacy etc. and since this is a game i'm guessing more so here, however i will be disappointed if there's no sense of exploration or diplomacy to go along with the combat
as for manoeuvrability i'm still waiting to see how it's handled. No full 3d maybe a little disappointing but i liked the starfleet command series and somehow ships in the shows always seemed to meet each other the 'same side up'. But am still worried this could end up as wow in space with no evasive manoeuvres and just sitting 3 inch from each other blasting away with phasers and torepedos until one eventually loses
Hey... Look at this!
Ships at different elevations all with varying pitch angles! I guess that you guys can put this nonsense debate to rest now... right?
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
Bren,
Is that an actual screenshot or just marketing art? I don't see anything resembling a UI on it, so it's tough to tell. A static picture doesn't tell us anything about the controls available or how they work. If they have a finctional Pitch control...I'd be happy to be wrong about that. I'd also be happy if what they said about not having a reverse gear proved to be wrong as well. From the terminology they used in that piece that's quoted I'm not very hopeful though.
Not trying to spike the games future....just making my preferences clearly known.....and trying to get a clear and somewhat authoritive answer of how things will actually work.
It's a screen cap from the gameplay video they 1st showed a long time back
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/352/view/videos/play/1258/-Star-Trek-Online-Gameplay-Trailer.html
That pic is in that video at 1:03
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
That pic is from the game play trailer that they showed at the games unveiling in Las Vegas. They were very insistent at the time that the trailer was 100% in game footage. So yes it is an actual in-game screen shot with the UI removed for the purpose of the game play trailer.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
It's a screen cap from the gameplay video they 1st showed a long time back
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/352/view/videos/play/1258/-Star-Trek-Online-Gameplay-Trailer.html
That pic is in that video at 1:03
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
Thanks Lorn,
Sounds like you are confirming what I though/feared. There is no functional PITCH or ROLL control... just YAW and an Elevator function to move you up/down on the Z axis. Any pitch and roll displayed by ships in the game is cosmetic (and not player controlable) and not functional.
I find that (combined with no reverse or lateral motion) EXTREMELY disapointing and very limiting in terms of tactics for a Space Combat game.
I could accept it perfectly well for a submarine game, or an Age of Sail game, or a Battle of Jutland game....but Space (IMO) is supposed to work a bit differently and to expose a different set of tactics.
The fact that those things aren't in the game, and that the designers have said players wouldn't be missing them in combat... tells me that they aren't spending alot of thought designing a Space Combat game.... They are designing something that looks like WOW in space....but with the Paladins and Druids dressed up in space-ship skins.
Sorry guys....I know this is going to upset some of you fanboys.... but like the great Yogi Bera said.... I call em like I see em.... and this design is just plain dumb (IMO).
It's a screen cap from the gameplay video they 1st showed a long time back
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/352/view/videos/play/1258/-Star-Trek-Online-Gameplay-Trailer.html
That pic is in that video at 1:03
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
Thanks Lorn,
Sounds like you are confirming what I though/feared. There is no functional PITCH or ROLL control... just YAW and an Elevator function to move you up/down on the Z axis. Any pitch and roll displayed by ships in the game is cosmetic (and not player controlable) and not functional.
I find that (combined with no reverse or lateral motion) EXTREMELY disapointing and very limiting in terms of tactics for a Space Combat game.
I could accept it perfectly well for a submarine game, or an Age of Sail game, or a Battle of Jutland game....but Space (IMO) is supposed to work a bit differently and to expose a different set of tactics.
The fact that those things aren't in the game, and that the designers have said players wouldn't be missing them in combat... tells me that they aren't spending alot of thought designing a Space Combat game.... They are designing something that looks like WOW in space....but with the Paladins and Druids dressed up in space-ship skins. Maybe, maybe not will have to wait and see on that one
Sorry guys....I know this is going to upset some of you fanboys.... but like the great Yogi Bera said.... I call em like I see em.... and this design is just plain dumb (IMO). It worked pretty well in the starfleet command series and that had no z axis
I think the vid is choreographed ingame footage, there is some on the sto website that shows it as is with the controls
don't forget this is based on the star trek tv series which for some reason never did seem to have full 3d movement
It's a screen cap from the gameplay video they 1st showed a long time back
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/352/view/videos/play/1258/-Star-Trek-Online-Gameplay-Trailer.html
That pic is in that video at 1:03
The ships pitch and roll on the own when they turn or move up and down the z axis.
You never will come up to a ship and it be upside down to you because the horizontal plane has a set "up and down"
Basically the ship just can't flip over, bottom of you ship will always face the set "down".
Thanks Lorn,
Sounds like you are confirming what I though/feared. There is no functional PITCH or ROLL control... just YAW and an Elevator function to move you up/down on the Z axis. Any pitch and roll displayed by ships in the game is cosmetic (and not player controlable) and not functional.
I find that (combined with no reverse or lateral motion) EXTREMELY disapointing and very limiting in terms of tactics for a Space Combat game.
I could accept it perfectly well for a submarine game, or an Age of Sail game, or a Battle of Jutland game....but Space (IMO) is supposed to work a bit differently and to expose a different set of tactics.
The fact that those things aren't in the game, and that the designers have said players wouldn't be missing them in combat... tells me that they aren't spending alot of thought designing a Space Combat game.... They are designing something that looks like WOW in space....but with the Paladins and Druids dressed up in space-ship skins.
Sorry guys....I know this is going to upset some of you fanboys.... but like the great Yogi Bera said.... I call em like I see em.... and this design is just plain dumb (IMO).
Doesn't upset me even a little bit as you are entitled to your opinion Mel. I just don't really see this as that big of a deal. The Starfleet Command series of games were considered some of the best games by most Trekkies and they didn't have any vertical movement at all. This is supposed to be a MMO... not a space flight sim. As for your WoW in space comment I think you are being a little harsh as this game will not resemble WoW in any fashion. Cryptic is known for not following the standard MMO mold when it comes to games and STO will be no different. If you want to shut the door on STO this early in the development with so little info available the only one you're hurting is yourself. See you around.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
The vast majority of spaceship combat in the various star trek series was rather two dimensional, very rarely was any 3D (dog-fighting) tactics used or shown. Mostly it was positioning using shields and making passes going toward, past or running from another ship and slugging it out with phasers and torpedoes. So for me I find my self rather accepting of the 2.5D style of combat.
Star warsg alaxies had rolls and loop de loops, I liked it for about a month. this might be a reason to pick it up imo
Watch the final season of Deep Space 9. In one of the major battles, the Fed fleet forms a wall with the smaller "fighter" ships coming in at angles to makes holes in the dominion fleet. Then near the end of the battle, the Klingons enter from above the dominion fleet and slice thru them.
Then in Star Trek 2: Wrath of Kahn, they enter the nebula and to trick Kahn, who is thinking in a 2d way, they move the ship to be below Kahn and to get in behind. I could cite many more instances of a 3d engagement, but this is enough.
So, there is precedent for a 3d movement, but its early and they can still change thier minds, if enough people ask for it in the right way.
But your examples still represent a small minority of the engagements that have taken place in the star trek universe. They're not going to waste their time catering to this small minority, nor the small minority of whiners.
I cited evidence that there is 3d movement in Star Trek. If they(the ships moving in a 3d way) are a small minority, show me some proof. I want to see you analysis of this to prove your point.
Also, in a Next Generation episode, the enterprise is stuck in a trap and cant use impulse engines to move. They did a move that I can describe as a spin. They kept the nose of the ship pointed at a asteroid then "spun" the backend around to get a slingshot effect to kept up the momentum.
Mosrt of this will be moot if thier is no collision detection in STO. But if thier is, this will be a game of turrets just spinning in 1 spot shooting at another turret. With a 3d enviroment, that will open up the combat to accomadate the smaller ships better manuverability.
Actually with the exception of your last example, what you've given are examples of the 2.5D that they talked about in the dev post. Change height (angling up or down), 'sink' below Khan etc.... Your last example with the Ent. swinging it's back around (strafing) is the type of 3D they're not going to support.
There are a number of TV show examples of the smaller ships flying like fighter aircraft with rolls, looks etc... so yes there is precedence, but they don't want to support that.
One problem here is that what the Dev's are calling 2.5D movement IS REALLY 3D movement. Anytime you introduce a height element into a back / forward / turn setup it's 3D. So yes Lugal there is 3D in the TV shows and yes there will be 3D in the game, just not a 100% anything goes type.
You are correct.
I hope they do something for the smaller ships, like the shuttles or Defiant size ships that alows some of the more 3d movement. It would be easy to implement something based on the mass of a ship. A large ship like a Warbird wont be doing barrel rolls without losing some parts of its hull. Plus a ship that big, a barrel roll is useless as nobody(or computer) is gonna miss. But a small ship with increased manuverability ship have some 3d movement. Alowing it to fly close to a large ship and making targeting harder.
All of this speculation is pretty meaningless untill we see how they implement this stuff and if they have collision detection or not.
Seems to me, their intent is to completely avoid joystick style combat. Doesn't matter the size of the ship or prescedent or the physics. They've chosen a combat style that focuses more on ship abilities rather than your reflexes, quite simple. You make up for your lack of mobility by being able to shift defensive systems on the fly.
They don't want a twitch game and I'm glad they don't.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
Actually with the exception of your last example, what you've given are examples of the 2.5D that they talked about in the dev post. Change height (angling up or down), 'sink' below Khan etc.... Your last example with the Ent. swinging it's back around (strafing) is the type of 3D they're not going to support.
There are a number of TV show examples of the smaller ships flying like fighter aircraft with rolls, looks etc... so yes there is precedence, but they don't want to support that.
One problem here is that what the Dev's are calling 2.5D movement IS REALLY 3D movement. Anytime you introduce a height element into a back / forward / turn setup it's 3D. So yes Lugal there is 3D in the TV shows and yes there will be 3D in the game, just not a 100% anything goes type.
You are correct.
I hope they do something for the smaller ships, like the shuttles or Defiant size ships that alows some of the more 3d movement. It would be easy to implement something based on the mass of a ship. A large ship like a Warbird wont be doing barrel rolls without losing some parts of its hull. Plus a ship that big, a barrel roll is useless as nobody(or computer) is gonna miss. But a small ship with increased manuverability ship have some 3d movement. Alowing it to fly close to a large ship and making targeting harder.
All of this speculation is pretty meaningless untill we see how they implement this stuff and if they have collision detection or not.
Seems to me, their intent is to completely avoid joystick style combat. Doesn't matter the size of the ship or prescedent or the physics. They've chosen a combat style that focuses more on ship abilities rather than your reflexes, quite simple. You make up for your lack of mobility by being able to shift defensive systems on the fly.
They don't want a twitch game and I'm glad they don't.
I feel the same. They are staying true to the IP. The ships in Star Trek resembled naval vessels so the strategy was more "where should I divert power" rather than loop de loops and barrel rolls. Granted, the smaller ships were more maneuvarable so I'm sure that those who get their rocks off on "flying by the seat of their pants" will be happy with a Defiant class ship. I say before anyone criticizes this aspect of the game to go watch a few episodes of Star Trek.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
One of the best ship battle sequences was from Wrath of Kahn which was EXACTLY like submarine warfare! Bring it on!
One of the best... but by far my fav is Balance of Terror (ST Orig). Yes, very much like sub warfare, including thick tension. Not all combat was just like sub warfare though, but all quite sea navel warfare like.
Good that they are not going to overdo it all, gives them the resources for making better away missions which is the meat and potatoes of ST.
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.
Actually.
Typically speaking, during the TV series pre-Defiant DS9 and even some of Voyager, most of the space combat was on the same plane not because that was how it was supposed to be, but because they were using real models (time intensive to do a fully 3D combat scene) and/or the technology didn't exist to computer render the battle fast enough, or that would look cool enough. Certain episodes, however, the time WAS taken and this is evident in, as examples; in "All Good Things" where the refitted Enterprise-D executes a roll and comes up from underneath the Klingon cruiser, in many of the Borg episodes the Enterprise did some pretty fancy manuevering to get the hell out of dodge, and so on.
In fact, during the first seperation of the Enterprise (Farpoint I believe) the drive section executed a lateral loop to haul ass back and buy time. In the 'Locutus' episodes, the Saucer and Drive section did fighter-style strafing on the cube itself. The Saucer would leap in at an angle to protect the belly and scoot across the Drive Section's path, and so on.
Star Trek repeatedly attempted to show off space combat as it was meant to be, but the technology and budget just wasn't there. Look at the original Star Wars series, a lot of that combat is on a 2 dimensional grid as well. Bring up the new ones though, and you have technology that can do it. Likewise with Star Trek! In First Contact, it wasn't just the Defiant that was doing rolls, spins, and the like. The Akira did some fancy stuff, in fact that entire battle was in a 100% 3D space. None were facing the ship, they were all assuming position of weaponry. In Insurrection, and this is a laughable example, Riker took the stick and did the same manuvering that a Defiant could. Also, the Enterprise did a 180 roll to skirt that ship to save Picard. In the newest reboot, it's in a fully three-dimensional space as well.
While I agree that this kind of flying is not cohesive to a casual gamer's experience, and may in fact be too much for said gamer, I think the mechanics SHOULD be in place for those of us that do want to use position to our advantage. I personally would want to be able to out-position a ship than just sit there and trade shots. Example :
Let's say I'm in a Galaxy. If I recall my specs right, I have a phaser bank both on top and bottom of the saucer. I have a torpedo tube on the "neck" just north of the deflector on the underside, and an aft tube directly rear. Let's say you are in an Akira. Your weapon banks favor directly front. Instead of trading hits with me, why not take position? If you sit right in front of me, I can hammer you with both banks and a torpedo tube. If you took position, say, directly above me -- strafing (which is not side-stepping like in a FPS, but rather run-and-gun) you just eliminated two-thirds of my available arsenal and are putting every advantage to how your ship was designed to perform. Only one bank of phasers to contend with if you stayed directly above me. I'm toast at this point, it doesn't matter what I do with my shields. If I have unrestricted movement, however, I can assume position on you by rolling and pitching as hard as I can at the conclusion (or beginning, depending) of one of your strafes, because to keep that position you would have to loop up. If I managed that, I now have full view of your tail (hopefully), and a clear shot with a tube.
It takes far more strategy to gain position supremacy on an opponent than just juggling shields. Let those of us who can pilot even half-assedly do that, and let the rest fly on a plane. In the end, those that fly on a plane would learn basic moves like half-rolls and strafing. Unrestricted flight is the only way to handle a game set in space, no matter what universe it is. Do I think, though, that every Galaxy-class starship should be executing buttonhook loops? No. Do I think that bigger = slower and less manuverable? Of course, that's reality. A larger ship takes more power to move simply because it's physics.
I guess my point is, even if you do not want to engage in that sort of flight gameplay, do you think that there should be restrictions? I'm not a huge fan of micromanagement, what if they restricted that instead? Restrictions, no matter where they are and how they do not affect you personally, are bad in any game -- ESPECIALLY an MMO.
Just my thoughts.
It's true that, for a long time, the Star Trek series didn't have the technology to showcase action-packed battles, and so scenes played out like naval combat. Hell, in the Original Series, most of the time the Enterprise just parked right in front of the enemy of the week, and they motionlessly shot at each other if battle ensued.
In later years, the battles became more action-y, but nevertheless stately space combat remained mostly the norm. Barrel rolls and fancy maneuvers were rare. That's just how the series is though, and I'd argue that limitations are sometimes a good thing. I think that's why the original Star Wars movies are so much better than the new ones; Lucas had to work with limited resources and old technology in the 70s and 80s, and a lot of creativity and uniqueness came out of that.
Let me give you a Star Trek example: When Gene Roddenberry designed the Original Series, he envisioned that away teams would visit planets in shuttlecraft. This was deemed too expensive to produce, however, so he brainstormed, and came up with the idea of away teams beaming up and down via the transporter.
That's right: If not for limitations that fostered unforeseen creativity, Star Trek would not have transporters, a signature element of the series.
So, stately space battles may be the result of limited technology and funding when producing the series, but that's okay. It's okay that that's a part of Star Trek, and allowing full-blown aerobatic maneuvers in the game certainly wouldn't feel like Star Trek to me.
And I agree with other posters who say that barrel rolls and other fancy maneuvers are rare in the series. They are rare, and they should stay that way in the game. The antics of the Defiant shouldn't dictate how a game representing the whole series should function. People saying they'll refuse to play STO without fully 3D space maneuevering are just being silly.
Also, so far no one has thought about the visual consequences of allowing full 3D movement. Knowing MMO players, the stately Star Trek ships would be barrel rolling, flipping end over end, and just flying around crazily ALL THE TIME, which doesn't look like Star Trek at all. The in-game videos Cryptic has released depict ship movement that actually, you know, looks like Star Trek.
Currently Playing: EVE Online
Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
I'll summarize my opinion like this - Bridge Commander > Starfleet Command. STO = Starfleet command. Finish that equation and you've got it.
People keep saying "SFC did it!", well, SFC was slow and annoying as hell. All combat is down to jousting and spinning in circles to get your enemy exposed to your charged weapons on the other side. This is not a problem in bridge commander, because you can just roll, eliminating the need for spinning circles for an hour. Oh, and in BC you also have top and bottom phaser arcs, which helps a lot. SFC you have two weapon loadout strategies - Overload the fron arcs with strong weapons and leave everything else empty, and then just joust or stay on your enemies tail, or if your non-fed then just utilizing cloak. (Decloak, fire all weapons, cloak). Or spread your weapons out, and spend an hour spinning in circles cycling your arcs, which is a pain because the enemy ship will be doing the same thing.
This results in two ships side by side, spinning and jousting attempting to gain the upper hand, occasionally someone breaching a shield and getting some troops in at the warp core. Personally, neither Bridge commander nor Starfleet command follows the "flow" of Star Trek series combat. But by and large Star Trek has sucked as far as the combat effects are concerned, the vast majority of battles being relegated to two ships staring at eachother with no movement, firing until somebodies shields give out or the crew gets some technobabble victory in. As far as the movies, the Enterprise almost always has an insane weapon arc, being able to hit the enemy no matter where they are, never really worrying about ship position. And even it rolls slightly to get the top phaser arcs in position to unload into the enemy.
At the end of the day. not adding roll only serves to limit your options, and thus limit gameplay. And i can see no reason for that, unless we are assuming the playerbase is so inept they wouldnt know what to do with the ability to roll your ship (we're not talking barrel rolls here, we're talking slight rolls to expose your top or bottom shields/phaser arcs or weapons on the other side of the ship without having to change your direction (ergo flying in circles)). And i tend to think most people are a little bit smarter than that. Then again, people elected Barack Obama.
The fact that Cryptic is cutting corners on ALL aspects of this game is why I will not EVER play this game.
My best experience with a Star Trek game was Bridge Commander, and the fact that this game will not be anything remotely close, means I will not ever play it.
Did BC or SC have huge tracks of open space to explore? Did they have 100's of planets, Space stations and other exotic locals that you could get out of your fancy bridge and explore? Did they have crafting? Did they have a player market? Recreational activities? The ability to play with thousands of friends and strangers all at the same time? A player advancement system? A ship advancement system? Huge PvP battles involving more than 10 ships? Discoverable planets, anomalies and other space oddities? Advanced Character customization? Advanced ship customization? Anything other than small scripted battles that involve nothing but combat?
You people can't seem to grasp the aspect that this isn't some single player game. This is a MMO and is a completely different type of game. This game already has 5-10 times the content of most other MMOs and your crying and whining about pitch and roll? This game will be epic in the MMO genre when it releases with the promised features. This is a MMO and not some single player or limited multiplayer space flight sim. You guys are so blinded by one or two missing features that your totally ignoring the fact that this game will have 1000 times the content of BC and SC combined with the ability to play with thousands of other players. Talk about not being able to see the forest through the trees.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}