The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
The game has bridge crew, which fits with the IP.
The IP doesn't require them to be player controlled. Making them "pets" was a design decision based on what would reasonably produce better overall gameplay for the most people.
You might not agree with the decision, but it doesn't mean it breaks the IP.
Anyway, might I suggest some online Trek RP communities, like http://www.star-fleet.com/webb/ . It might be what you're looking for, since you can't like STO.
The game has bridge crew, which fits with the IP. The IP doesn't require them to be player controlled. It does. Virtually every episode was about the crew working together to solve problems. Contributing their own skills and jugment to the problems at hand. This game turns Spock, Riker, T'Pol, etc. into bots. Making them "pets" was a design decision based on what would reasonably produce better overall gameplay for the most people.
Based on what would be cheap and easy to produce.
Player crews could have been made optional for those who didn't want them, but they weren't.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Well, SWG didn't have multi-player ships until quite a bit after Jump to Lightspeed, so perhaps they will come in an expension or just released along with a patch. If I remember correctly, the latter is how they entered SWG.
The game has bridge crew, which fits with the IP. The IP doesn't require them to be player controlled. It does. Virtually every episode was about the crew working together to solve problems. Contributing their own skills and jugment to the problems at hand. This game turns Spock, Riker, T'Pol, etc. into bots. Making them "pets" was a design decision based on what would reasonably produce better overall gameplay for the most people.
Based on what would be cheap and easy to produce.
Player crews could have been made optional for those who didn't want them, but they weren't.
And it won't surprise me if at some point in the future they don't give players the ability to crew the same ship. It just isn't like that now. My understanding is that players can cooperatively perform ground missions, which is part of the solution.
Besides, Nimoy, Frakes, and Blalock were all contractually obligated to show up on the set to record their respective shows. Players are under no such obligation. What happens when Spock gets a new RL job and quits, Riker decides to cross over to Star Wars: The Old Republic, and T'Pol gets banned for hacking? You'll be going through bridge crew faster than Tiger Woods goes through condoms - which also doesn't mesh well with the IP. Or, you'll be Picard, sitting on the bridge all by himself. That also doesn't fit.
Personally, I like the decision they've made, with the hope that they continue to expand the game. In any event, I'm going to at least try the game myself, which is probably more than you'll do, though you'll certainly continue to "Doubt" it as much and as loudly as possible.
Originally posted by Rohn Personally, I like the decision they've made, with the hope that they continue to expand the game. In any event, I'm going to at least try the game myself, which is probably more than you'll do, though you'll certainly continue to "Doubt" it as much and as loudly as possible.
I'll try the game when and if I can do so without paying them for the opportunity. I don't buy a car in order to test drive it. Especially not one with so few features and so many obvious flaws.
As for crew replacements - I will repeat what I and others have said before. It is nothing that guilds in other MMORPGs don't deal with every day, and temporary substitions are in line with the IP. The bridge crew in the various series change with virtually every episode.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Given how unbelivably broad the scope is of the IP compared to how narrow the scope of the game is, I find it hard to believe that the game will feel 'trekkish' to many people.
(note: Not saying many people won't like the game. Just talking about it feeling trekkish)
The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseumin a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
Dana Massey Formerly of MMORPG.com Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
I'm still skeptical about the game because I have no confidence whatsoever in Cryptic's competence as an MMORPG developer.
I'm still going to try the game out because I've been a SciFi and Fantasy geek since I was about 8 years old and I loved the original and the next gen.
I still like Babylon 5 better and Farscape trumps all as the coolest and most engrossing SciFi show ever. (I miss that show. It was so awesome and funny as hell too.)
Originally posted by Rohn Personally, I like the decision they've made, with the hope that they continue to expand the game. In any event, I'm going to at least try the game myself, which is probably more than you'll do, though you'll certainly continue to "Doubt" it as much and as loudly as possible.
I'll try the game when and if I can do so without paying them for the opportunity. I don't buy a car in order to test drive it. Especially not one with so few features and so many obvious flaws.
As for crew replacements - I will repeat what I and others have said before. It is nothing that guilds in other MMORPGs don't deal with every day, and temporary substitions are in line with the IP. The bridge crew in the various series change with virtually every episode.
You probably also wouldn't test drive a car that you've already determined that you don't like the looks of, or the features that it comes with. One need not be Nostradamus to see which way your "test" of STO will be going. RIP objectivity.
Games that mandate group play most or all of the time, or are based on an overreliance on other players, to do anything of consequence are going to have problems. WAR is a perfect example here - without a critical mass of friendlies to play with, or enemies to fight, the main focus of the game was impossible to enjoy.
A similar thing would likely occur in STO, especially during off-peak times, as you spam the LFC (looking for crew) channel just to operate your ship and play the game at its most rudimentary level. Most other games are more solo-friendly than such an STO design would be. Guilds in other games generally don't need to run minimum manning schedules 24 hours a day.
Again, I believe the design decision was made to give players the best overall experience at all times. I'm hoping they will continue to expand it, and make it so characters can man the same ship, but I understand and agree with the decision they've made so far.
Of course, I haven't played it yet, so don't know how much I'll enjoy it. I'm going to give it a fair shot, however.
The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseumin a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
mmo_doubter, this is a good opportunity. I think you should do it.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseumin a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
Can anyone take advantage of that? I've written several posts about how player crews could be done to the benefit of all, even those against player crews, but they usually get lost in the storm of posts about player crews.
The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseumin a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
mmo_doubter, this is a good opportunity. I think you should do it.
Yeah go for it, I'm interested to see how you fill an entire objective editorial with trolling, should be fun.
----- The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseumin a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
Can anyone take advantage of that? I've written several posts about how player crews could be done to the benefit of all, even those against player crews, but they usually get lost in the storm of posts about player crews.
I offered it to him first (there's little value in several articles on the same topic) so we'll see what he says. If he doesn't, consider yourself second in line.
Again, no promise we post it. I have no writing sample to go off save those two sentences above, but provided it's readable and can at least be edited, and makes a coherent point (even if I don't agree with it) we'd use it.
Dana Massey Formerly of MMORPG.com Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
I have to say I'm impressed by this offer. There have been a lot of well written and clearly thought out posts in the STO subsection of the forums recently, both by people in favor of Cryptics current offering and by those who would have done it differently. I hope mmo_doubter does take you up on this offer, or if he decides not to that somebody else does, and is able to provide a clear, concise and workable idea for player crews. Not that I think it would make any difference to STO, since STO has already been designed to play the way it is, and attempting to simply add this to the existing system would most likely not be all that fun, but maybe in future a developer might choose to design a game where player crews are a central component if they know that the interest is there.
Either way, regardless of whether someone does submit an article that is good enough to be published or not, hats off to Dana for making the offer!
Originally posted by Rohn Personally, I like the decision they've made, with the hope that they continue to expand the game. In any event, I'm going to at least try the game myself, which is probably more than you'll do, though you'll certainly continue to "Doubt" it as much and as loudly as possible.
I'll try the game when and if I can do so without paying them for the opportunity. I don't buy a car in order to test drive it. Especially not one with so few features and so many obvious flaws.
As for crew replacements - I will repeat what I and others have said before. It is nothing that guilds in other MMORPGs don't deal with every day, and temporary substitions are in line with the IP. The bridge crew in the various series change with virtually every episode.
You probably also wouldn't test drive a car that you've already determined that you don't like the looks of, or the features that it comes with. One need not be Nostradamus to see which way your "test" of STO will be going. RIP objectivity.
Games that mandate group play most or all of the time, or are based on an overreliance on other players, to do anything of consequence are going to have problems. WAR is a perfect example here - without a critical mass of friendlies to play with, or enemies to fight, the main focus of the game was impossible to enjoy.
A similar thing would likely occur in STO, especially during off-peak times, as you spam the LFC (looking for crew) channel just to operate your ship and play the game at its most rudimentary level. Most other games are more solo-friendly than such an STO design would be. Guilds in other games generally don't need to run minimum manning schedules 24 hours a day.
Again, I believe the design decision was made to give players the best overall experience at all times. I'm hoping they will continue to expand it, and make it so characters can man the same ship, but I understand and agree with the decision they've made so far.
Of course, I haven't played it yet, so don't know how much I'll enjoy it. I'm going to give it a fair shot, however.
How many times, really, does this canard have to be rebutted? No one advocates mandatory grouping to fill ship roles. The ship roles would be filled by NPCs as needed -- the very system that's in place now I expect. But one would have the option of playng as Bridge Crew in lieu of NPCs -- just like grouping in any MMO where people have differing roles AND differing game mechanics to learn for their selected "position".
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Well, SWG didn't have multi-player ships until quite a bit after Jump to Lightspeed, so perhaps they will come in an expension or just released along with a patch. If I remember correctly, the latter is how they entered SWG.
That's actually not true at all. Multi-player ships were available at JtL launch. I beta tested that xpac -- back when beta testing meant something, haha. But you have a point in so far as the JtL xpac was released months after the initial launch, so STO could possibly add Player Crew functionality.
But here's my fear, since I keep hearing from STO developers that if there's enough player demand, they'll add Player Crews: After launch they'll see if they've placated enough people with their current system in order to satisfy the bean counters -- to this end, I think they'll be successful. Thus STO won't feel obliged to introduce Player Crews because, through self-fullfilling rationalization, there won't be any 'demand'. You see how that's a self-fulfilling rationalization? It's like US automakers saying there isn't any demand for hybrid/electric cars, and yet how do they know or measure that demand when they aren't producing any of that product? lol. (Okay, let's not get into car talk here, it was just an example).
The ironic thing regarding SWG:JtL xpac was that there wasn't nearly the hue and cry for multi-player ships as there is here for STO. Yet those old SWG devs thought it would be cool and fun to add -- and they were right. Not only that, they figured out a way, as really good, creative developers can, a way to make multiple roles fun. Crafters repairing the ship as it breaks down, medics running around healing injured crew. They didn't even have NPC crews, something that a STO system would have.
/sigh
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
I think the bodies are too thin. I don't see any variety, and not much variety in heads, either. I think it's important to gain an attachment to your character. A friend who plays in the beta, says he doesn't feel that attachment.
I'm a big fan of Champions Online, and watched all seasons of NG/DS9/VOY, but unless I am really far off in my assesment of the typical MMO gamer, STO is headed for a record breaking level of fail that will also, sadly for me, nail the coffin of CO. Even if the game defies my expectation and becomes a sales success, I am 100% sure that experienced MMO players will not be able to enjoy this game. All the flaws of Champions, and none of the graces...
I was very disappointed by the lack of detail on the non-combat mission. It made it sound like it was beaming down, clicking a couple times, and then it was done. Then again, maybe it was just that. I can't honestly say I expect any non-combat depth from this game. If the non-combat play is paper-thin, then I don't see how it would really feel like Star Trek.
Multi-player crews only work in SWG because you really only need one person to fly the ship and fire some of the guns. Other players could man gunnery turrets and spam heal the ship but they weren't necessary to play the game and they ship didn't feel as empty since the maximum crew was supposed to be 2-5 anyways.
Star Trek's about huge ships with hundreds of crew members, even if you took the bridge crew you're still talking 7-9 people. Away team? You're talking 3-5 with 2 of them basically being NPC pets.
The MMO scene being what it is, I don't fault Cryptic for going the "player-is-captain" route. My only nitpick is that you have to be an "Admiral" in order to Captain a Sovereign-class ship. They could have gone with "Fleet Captain" if they needed a rank above Captain.
My biggest questions about STO are more fundamental. Is the game balanced? Is the game fun to play for the long-term? How much of the stuff they put into the game will actually work two months after launch? Take away the Trek set dressing and does the game stand on it's own?
The single-biggest IP-breaking aspect of the game is the lack of player crews. This article glosses over that with one or two sentences. So much for being a big Trek fan.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseumin a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
mmo_doubter, this is a good opportunity. I think you should do it.
Yeah go for it, I'm interested to see how you fill an entire objective editorial with trolling, should be fun.
SACK-UP!! Here's your chance.
I'm rooting for you to canvas this topic and give stage to all ways it could be done. Even WOW now has a system coming that would play right into this with "beaming" members to a ship. Go for it MMO_Doubter, you can do it!
Sorry did I miss the NDA being dropped on the beta? (I appreciate press have different rules) That sure would make for better conversation.
Else I think the best some of us can do is say we agree with some things that were said...
The player crew thing is kind of strange, but there's obviously different games you can make with the IP (there have been a LOT of Star Trek games). The "player captain + bot crew" is a different game to the "player crew" one, while conceptually I would have truly loved to play the later but I don't know how well it works in practice. It's hard enough to keep peoples attention when they're in the spotlight, let alone running a background role.
Sure would have been a unique game though.
[LFG] Captain Pikeard : "Looking to run Scarlet Nebular, need 1 Security, and First Officer. No Science".
I was very disappointed by the lack of detail on the non-combat mission. It made it sound like it was beaming down, clicking a couple times, and then it was done. Then again, maybe it was just that. I can't honestly say I expect any non-combat depth from this game. If the non-combat play is paper-thin, then I don't see how it would really feel like Star Trek.
Yeah, I had the same thought actually. I would have liked more detail from Jon on that mission since we hardly ever hear anything about non-combat missions.
Was there any complexity to it? Was there a chance of failure? If so, what were the consequences of failure? In the various TV series, there was almost always a complication to seemingly easy, benign missions. Did this non-combat mission have any complications from the expected?
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Great offer Dana! Way to put the lid on MMO_Doubter. Funny how some folks, when seriously challenged to make their real point can't because all they want to do is whine. Love it. STO is going to rock and I mean ROCK the BLOCKS.. I cannot wait to test and play it...
Comments
The game has bridge crew, which fits with the IP.
The IP doesn't require them to be player controlled. Making them "pets" was a design decision based on what would reasonably produce better overall gameplay for the most people.
You might not agree with the decision, but it doesn't mean it breaks the IP.
Anyway, might I suggest some online Trek RP communities, like http://www.star-fleet.com/webb/ . It might be what you're looking for, since you can't like STO.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
I find many of the discussions interesting ( I have always enjoyed a good argument), and there are often good game design ideas brought up.
fair enough....i just dont see the point in bringing up something that was mentioned when Cryptic took over the game.
Based on what would be cheap and easy to produce.
Player crews could have been made optional for those who didn't want them, but they weren't.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Well, SWG didn't have multi-player ships until quite a bit after Jump to Lightspeed, so perhaps they will come in an expension or just released along with a patch. If I remember correctly, the latter is how they entered SWG.
Based on what would be cheap and easy to produce.
Player crews could have been made optional for those who didn't want them, but they weren't.
And it won't surprise me if at some point in the future they don't give players the ability to crew the same ship. It just isn't like that now. My understanding is that players can cooperatively perform ground missions, which is part of the solution.
Besides, Nimoy, Frakes, and Blalock were all contractually obligated to show up on the set to record their respective shows. Players are under no such obligation. What happens when Spock gets a new RL job and quits, Riker decides to cross over to Star Wars: The Old Republic, and T'Pol gets banned for hacking? You'll be going through bridge crew faster than Tiger Woods goes through condoms - which also doesn't mesh well with the IP. Or, you'll be Picard, sitting on the bridge all by himself. That also doesn't fit.
Personally, I like the decision they've made, with the hope that they continue to expand the game. In any event, I'm going to at least try the game myself, which is probably more than you'll do, though you'll certainly continue to "Doubt" it as much and as loudly as possible.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
I'll try the game when and if I can do so without paying them for the opportunity. I don't buy a car in order to test drive it. Especially not one with so few features and so many obvious flaws.
As for crew replacements - I will repeat what I and others have said before. It is nothing that guilds in other MMORPGs don't deal with every day, and temporary substitions are in line with the IP. The bridge crew in the various series change with virtually every episode.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Given how unbelivably broad the scope is of the IP compared to how narrow the scope of the game is, I find it hard to believe that the game will feel 'trekkish' to many people.
(note: Not saying many people won't like the game. Just talking about it feeling trekkish)
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseum in a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
I'm still skeptical about the game because I have no confidence whatsoever in Cryptic's competence as an MMORPG developer.
I'm still going to try the game out because I've been a SciFi and Fantasy geek since I was about 8 years old and I loved the original and the next gen.
I still like Babylon 5 better and Farscape trumps all as the coolest and most engrossing SciFi show ever. (I miss that show. It was so awesome and funny as hell too.)
I'll try the game when and if I can do so without paying them for the opportunity. I don't buy a car in order to test drive it. Especially not one with so few features and so many obvious flaws.
As for crew replacements - I will repeat what I and others have said before. It is nothing that guilds in other MMORPGs don't deal with every day, and temporary substitions are in line with the IP. The bridge crew in the various series change with virtually every episode.
You probably also wouldn't test drive a car that you've already determined that you don't like the looks of, or the features that it comes with. One need not be Nostradamus to see which way your "test" of STO will be going. RIP objectivity.
Games that mandate group play most or all of the time, or are based on an overreliance on other players, to do anything of consequence are going to have problems. WAR is a perfect example here - without a critical mass of friendlies to play with, or enemies to fight, the main focus of the game was impossible to enjoy.
A similar thing would likely occur in STO, especially during off-peak times, as you spam the LFC (looking for crew) channel just to operate your ship and play the game at its most rudimentary level. Most other games are more solo-friendly than such an STO design would be. Guilds in other games generally don't need to run minimum manning schedules 24 hours a day.
Again, I believe the design decision was made to give players the best overall experience at all times. I'm hoping they will continue to expand it, and make it so characters can man the same ship, but I understand and agree with the decision they've made so far.
Of course, I haven't played it yet, so don't know how much I'll enjoy it. I'm going to give it a fair shot, however.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseum in a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
mmo_doubter, this is a good opportunity. I think you should do it.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseum in a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
Can anyone take advantage of that? I've written several posts about how player crews could be done to the benefit of all, even those against player crews, but they usually get lost in the storm of posts about player crews.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseum in a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
mmo_doubter, this is a good opportunity. I think you should do it.
Yeah go for it, I'm interested to see how you fill an entire objective editorial with trolling, should be fun.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseum in a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
Can anyone take advantage of that? I've written several posts about how player crews could be done to the benefit of all, even those against player crews, but they usually get lost in the storm of posts about player crews.
I offered it to him first (there's little value in several articles on the same topic) so we'll see what he says. If he doesn't, consider yourself second in line.
Again, no promise we post it. I have no writing sample to go off save those two sentences above, but provided it's readable and can at least be edited, and makes a coherent point (even if I don't agree with it) we'd use it.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
I have to say I'm impressed by this offer. There have been a lot of well written and clearly thought out posts in the STO subsection of the forums recently, both by people in favor of Cryptics current offering and by those who would have done it differently. I hope mmo_doubter does take you up on this offer, or if he decides not to that somebody else does, and is able to provide a clear, concise and workable idea for player crews. Not that I think it would make any difference to STO, since STO has already been designed to play the way it is, and attempting to simply add this to the existing system would most likely not be all that fun, but maybe in future a developer might choose to design a game where player crews are a central component if they know that the interest is there.
Either way, regardless of whether someone does submit an article that is good enough to be published or not, hats off to Dana for making the offer!
I'll try the game when and if I can do so without paying them for the opportunity. I don't buy a car in order to test drive it. Especially not one with so few features and so many obvious flaws.
As for crew replacements - I will repeat what I and others have said before. It is nothing that guilds in other MMORPGs don't deal with every day, and temporary substitions are in line with the IP. The bridge crew in the various series change with virtually every episode.
You probably also wouldn't test drive a car that you've already determined that you don't like the looks of, or the features that it comes with. One need not be Nostradamus to see which way your "test" of STO will be going. RIP objectivity.
Games that mandate group play most or all of the time, or are based on an overreliance on other players, to do anything of consequence are going to have problems. WAR is a perfect example here - without a critical mass of friendlies to play with, or enemies to fight, the main focus of the game was impossible to enjoy.
A similar thing would likely occur in STO, especially during off-peak times, as you spam the LFC (looking for crew) channel just to operate your ship and play the game at its most rudimentary level. Most other games are more solo-friendly than such an STO design would be. Guilds in other games generally don't need to run minimum manning schedules 24 hours a day.
Again, I believe the design decision was made to give players the best overall experience at all times. I'm hoping they will continue to expand it, and make it so characters can man the same ship, but I understand and agree with the decision they've made so far.
Of course, I haven't played it yet, so don't know how much I'll enjoy it. I'm going to give it a fair shot, however.
How many times, really, does this canard have to be rebutted? No one advocates mandatory grouping to fill ship roles. The ship roles would be filled by NPCs as needed -- the very system that's in place now I expect. But one would have the option of playng as Bridge Crew in lieu of NPCs -- just like grouping in any MMO where people have differing roles AND differing game mechanics to learn for their selected "position".
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
That's actually not true at all. Multi-player ships were available at JtL launch. I beta tested that xpac -- back when beta testing meant something, haha. But you have a point in so far as the JtL xpac was released months after the initial launch, so STO could possibly add Player Crew functionality.
But here's my fear, since I keep hearing from STO developers that if there's enough player demand, they'll add Player Crews: After launch they'll see if they've placated enough people with their current system in order to satisfy the bean counters -- to this end, I think they'll be successful. Thus STO won't feel obliged to introduce Player Crews because, through self-fullfilling rationalization, there won't be any 'demand'. You see how that's a self-fulfilling rationalization? It's like US automakers saying there isn't any demand for hybrid/electric cars, and yet how do they know or measure that demand when they aren't producing any of that product? lol. (Okay, let's not get into car talk here, it was just an example).
The ironic thing regarding SWG:JtL xpac was that there wasn't nearly the hue and cry for multi-player ships as there is here for STO. Yet those old SWG devs thought it would be cool and fun to add -- and they were right. Not only that, they figured out a way, as really good, creative developers can, a way to make multiple roles fun. Crafters repairing the ship as it breaks down, medics running around healing injured crew. They didn't even have NPC crews, something that a STO system would have.
/sigh
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
I think the bodies are too thin. I don't see any variety, and not much variety in heads, either. I think it's important to gain an attachment to your character. A friend who plays in the beta, says he doesn't feel that attachment.
I'm a big fan of Champions Online, and watched all seasons of NG/DS9/VOY, but unless I am really far off in my assesment of the typical MMO gamer, STO is headed for a record breaking level of fail that will also, sadly for me, nail the coffin of CO. Even if the game defies my expectation and becomes a sales success, I am 100% sure that experienced MMO players will not be able to enjoy this game. All the flaws of Champions, and none of the graces...
Cryptic is trying a Customer Development approach to MMO creation.
I was very disappointed by the lack of detail on the non-combat mission. It made it sound like it was beaming down, clicking a couple times, and then it was done. Then again, maybe it was just that. I can't honestly say I expect any non-combat depth from this game. If the non-combat play is paper-thin, then I don't see how it would really feel like Star Trek.
Multi-player crews only work in SWG because you really only need one person to fly the ship and fire some of the guns. Other players could man gunnery turrets and spam heal the ship but they weren't necessary to play the game and they ship didn't feel as empty since the maximum crew was supposed to be 2-5 anyways.
Star Trek's about huge ships with hundreds of crew members, even if you took the bridge crew you're still talking 7-9 people. Away team? You're talking 3-5 with 2 of them basically being NPC pets.
The MMO scene being what it is, I don't fault Cryptic for going the "player-is-captain" route. My only nitpick is that you have to be an "Admiral" in order to Captain a Sovereign-class ship. They could have gone with "Fleet Captain" if they needed a rank above Captain.
My biggest questions about STO are more fundamental. Is the game balanced? Is the game fun to play for the long-term? How much of the stuff they put into the game will actually work two months after launch? Take away the Trek set dressing and does the game stand on it's own?
Not agreeing with you doesn't mean we're bad at our jobs, shills for Cryptic, or anything else. Some people out there actually have a different opinion than you.
We went over that one ad nauseum in a previous thread, do you really need to repeat the conversation?
So, I offer you a deal...
You seem to be able to string a few words together, so how about you put your ideas where you mouth is. Email me (dana@mmorpg.com) and I'll hook you up with a slot to do a freelance editorial (we'll pay you for if it makes the cut). You can have an entire article on "The Argument For Player Crews." Tell us why you feel it's important to the IP and how you would include it in the game if you could, or in the future.
You're clearly passionate about this topic and feel it needs to be highlighted. If the article needs rebuttal, I'll also circle back with Cryptic and try to get answers to a couple of your related questions to use in the article.
mmo_doubter, this is a good opportunity. I think you should do it.
Yeah go for it, I'm interested to see how you fill an entire objective editorial with trolling, should be fun.
SACK-UP!! Here's your chance.
I'm rooting for you to canvas this topic and give stage to all ways it could be done. Even WOW now has a system coming that would play right into this with "beaming" members to a ship. Go for it MMO_Doubter, you can do it!
Sorry did I miss the NDA being dropped on the beta? (I appreciate press have different rules) That sure would make for better conversation.
Else I think the best some of us can do is say we agree with some things that were said...
The player crew thing is kind of strange, but there's obviously different games you can make with the IP (there have been a LOT of Star Trek games). The "player captain + bot crew" is a different game to the "player crew" one, while conceptually I would have truly loved to play the later but I don't know how well it works in practice. It's hard enough to keep peoples attention when they're in the spotlight, let alone running a background role.
Sure would have been a unique game though.
[LFG] Captain Pikeard : "Looking to run Scarlet Nebular, need 1 Security, and First Officer. No Science".
Yeah, I had the same thought actually. I would have liked more detail from Jon on that mission since we hardly ever hear anything about non-combat missions.
Was there any complexity to it? Was there a chance of failure? If so, what were the consequences of failure? In the various TV series, there was almost always a complication to seemingly easy, benign missions. Did this non-combat mission have any complications from the expected?
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
Great offer Dana! Way to put the lid on MMO_Doubter. Funny how some folks, when seriously challenged to make their real point can't because all they want to do is whine. Love it. STO is going to rock and I mean ROCK the BLOCKS.. I cannot wait to test and play it...