As was posted, there are a limited number of tasks involved in any given shipboard scenario. What will everyone be doing?
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of player crews, but what would they do?
Lackey, open a hailing frequency, I need to talk to that Romulan Captain. Okay, now that you have pushed 1-5 buttons, just hang out and look pretty until I need another hail. That may not happen until the next mission, but good work. Chair comfy?
Lackey, set a course for _______. Okay, course is set, just hang out and look pretty.
If you watch any ST series, you will see folks sitting around on the bridge, actually doing very little for long periods of time.
What happen if you can't find anyone? Having a human bridge crew = force grouping to play and forced grouping just does not work.
People have different schedules and you can't force a group of 5 to play together all the time. And people don't want to spend half an hour to put a crew together before you can play.
You also have issue about what people want to do. There are few who would want to play the communication officers. So what happen if we have a shortage of that?
Why is everyone consumed with this being a forced either or? I'm sure most of us have played WoW at one point or another. Single Player (You and your Ship) - Grinding/Rep Farming/Farming/Exploring/ect (smaller "shuttlecraft") Multiple player (Differing crew types) - Similar to Instances, jump in LFG, find what you need and depart from a common "star port" (actual starships) It not hard to add have a multiple human player crew. Eliminating it is just silly and the game will lose a lot from it.
That still doesn't address the other issues. What does everyone do during battle?
List the posts that would be on the bridge, and then find something for all of them to do during a battle.
The bridge of a 24th-century Galaxy-class starship featuring three command chairs at center
The bridge command stations provide seating and information displays for the commanding officer and one or two other officers, typically including the first officer (though in past times, usually a senior bridge officer doubled as first officer). The command chairs are located in the center of the bridge, designed to maximize interaction with all key bridge personnel, while permitting an unobstructed view of the main viewscreen.
Typically, the armrests of the captain's chair feature miniaturized status displays. Using keyboard or vocal commands, the captain can use these controls to override the basic operation of the starship.
Flight Control
The 24th century Flight Control position evolved from the 23rd century helm and navigation positions. Also referred to as Conn, the officer manning the Flight Control console is responsible for the actual piloting and navigation of the starship. Despite many of these functions being heavily automated, their criticality demands a humanoid officer to oversee these operations at all times.
During spaceflight at impulse, Conn is responsible for monitoring relativistic effects as well as inertial damping system status. When traveling at warp speed, Conn is required to monitor the subspace field geometry in parallel with the engineering department. During warp flight, the Conn console continually updates long-range sensor data and makes automatic course corrections to adjust for minor variations in the density of the interstellar medium. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual)
Operations management
The Ops and Conn consoles on the Galaxy-class bridge
Many shipboard operations involve scheduling resources or hardware that affect a number of departments. In many such cases, it is common for various operations to present conflicting requirements. It is the responsibility of the operations officer to coordinate such activities so that mission goals are not jeopardized.
The operations position (also known simply as "Ops") evolved from older 23rd century positions. The bulk of the duties held by the helm and navigation positions were combined into the Conn position. Other functions of the helm panel, such as internal systems control, became the purview of Ops, as have some communications and sensor system usages. (Star Trek: The Next Generation)
The Ops panel presents the operations officer with a continually updated list of current major shipboard activities. This list permits Ops to set priorities and allocate resources among current operations. This is especially critical in cases where two or more requests require the use of the same equipment, entail mutually exclusive mission profiles, or involve some unusual safety or tactical considerations.
During away team missions or emergency situations, the Ops station is supported by the Science Station, found at the rear of the bridge in Galaxy-class designs. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual)
Security and Tactical
The security station, integrated in the wooden handrail encircling the Galaxy-class bridge
The bridge station dedicated to defensive systems control and starship internal security is Tactical. Parts of the default control layout presents the security officer with information readouts dealing with the internal protection of the starship and its crew. A wide variety of starship defensive systems are available to the chief tactical officer (sometimes doubling as chief of security), ranging from the defensive shields to phaser and torpedo systems, as well as intrusion detection systems.
Other systems that may be commanded by Tactical include communications, long- and short-range sensor arrays, sensor probes, message buoys, and tractor beam devices.
Supportive stations
Every Starfleet bridge also includes several supportive consoles and backup stations. These may include consoles for Planetary sciences, Engineering, Mission Ops and Environmental Control. Most of these are meant to relieve the senior bridge officers of secondary duties during alert and crisis situations.
Mission Ops provides additional support to the operations officer, and is specifically responsible for monitoring activity relating to secondary missions. Mission Ops is responsible for assignment of resources and priorities according to guidelines specified by the operations officer and by operating protocols. This station is also responsible for monitoring away teams. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual)
The Environmental Control console provides similar relief to the operations officer, monitoring the starship's life support systems. Due to the highly automated nature of these systems, this console would be unattended under normal circumstances, but becomes of crucial importance during alert situations to maximize crew survivability.
The bridge's Engineering station duplicates in simplified form the Chief Engineer's primary status displays from Main Engineering. The purpose of this station is to permit the Chief Engineer to maintain supervision over engineering system while on the bridge.
So, if you are captain of a player crew, you would never actually do anything, you would tell others what to do. You don't take the helm, fire weapons, nothing.
Imagine a player crew of say, 4 people. One is the captain, one takes the helm, one fires weapons, what else is there??
So, if you are captain of a player crew, you would never actually do anything, you would tell others what to do. You don't take the helm, fire weapons, nothing.
Imagine a player crew of say, 4 people. One is the captain, one takes the helm, one fires weapons, what else is there??
I may be confused but are you saying that there won't be enough to do?
I was suggesting that there are ways to go about mixing and matching. The main complaint seemed to be about what happens when people go offline and the game AI does not have the ability to keep up. I don't think I've read one complaint from people saying there won't be enough to do. The building of content and finding "things to do" is the game devs main goal. I'm sure they can come up with plenty.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about. On the other hand it is hard to imagine them realistically pulling off multi player crews on a ship, because your average mmo player isn't as dedicated as a starfleet officer
That being said, its not hard to envision a system where ships have multiple stations that can be manned by npcs, affected by the level of the captain that can be manned by players if available. Convoluted and complicated? Yeah, but would be so much more satisfying.
The argument that it can't be done, is really an argument against making the game.
I surmise then that since a true Star Trek environement isn't being attempted that this game is just an attempt to milk easy bucks off of the built in playerbase of fans.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
You know, I've been reading that same phrase from the same people that make the claims that a game(most MMOs nowadays it seems to them) are just sinlge player games that aren't what MMOs were supposed to be.
1.) They aren't single player games. Period. Just because a person isn't forced to play with you doesn't mean the game is any less an MMO. If a game is only playable online then guess what? It's a massive multiplayer online game. Enough with this "it isn't an MMO if it isn't a virtual world where everyone HAS to work together to accomplish anything" tripe. That was how YOU saw it. Not everyone else. For the rest of us it's just a friggin game.You style of game was tried and failed miserably because most people have lives. There is options in this game(like ALL MMOs right now) for you to group up with your buddies and play whatever fantasy you want. If you can guild and group in it, then you can role play. You shouldn't need a game mechanic that forces everyone to play like you want to.
2.) Hate to burst your bubble, but you do not speak for the Trek fanbase. Go to the official website if you think you are. The majority of the people on that board are there because they are fans of Star Trek and want to play an online version of it. All of them(including me) have their own things that they want to see in the game. Nobody will get 100 percent everything they want, but the majority does agree that the core game should be first and foremost the priority. Ship interiors is not a priority. They are nice fluff, nothing more. This website is NOT indictive of what the entire community thinks. It's not even close.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
You know, I've been reading that same phrase from the same people that make the claims that a game(most MMOs nowadays it seems to them) are just sinlge player games that aren't what MMOs were supposed to be.
1.) They aren't single player games. Period. Just because a person isn't forced to play with you doesn't mean the game is any less an MMO. If a game is only playable online then guess what? It's a massive multiplayer online game. Enough with this "it isn't an MMO if it isn't a virtual world where everyone HAS to work together to accomplish anything" tripe. That was how YOU saw it. Not everyone else. For the rest of us it's just a friggin game.You style of game was tried and failed miserably because most people have lives. There is options in this game(like ALL MMOs right now) for you to group up with your buddies and play whatever fantasy you want. If you can guild and group in it, then you can role play. You shouldn't need a game mechanic that forces everyone to play like you want to.
2.) Hate to burst your bubble, but you do not speak for the Trek fanbase. Go to the official website if you think you are. The majority of the people on that board are there because they are fans of Star Trek and want to play an online version of it. All of them(including me) have their own things that they want to see in the game. Nobody will get 100 percent everything they want, but the majority does agree that the core game should be first and foremost the priority. Ship interiors is not a priority. They are nice fluff, nothing more. This website is NOT indictive of what the entire community thinks. It's not even close.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly.
Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly. Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
You know, I've been reading that same phrase from the same people that make the claims that a game(most MMOs nowadays it seems to them) are just sinlge player games that aren't what MMOs were supposed to be.
1.) They aren't single player games. Period. Just because a person isn't forced to play with you doesn't mean the game is any less an MMO. If a game is only playable online then guess what? It's a massive multiplayer online game. Enough with this "it isn't an MMO if it isn't a virtual world where everyone HAS to work together to accomplish anything" tripe. That was how YOU saw it. Not everyone else. For the rest of us it's just a friggin game.You style of game was tried and failed miserably because most people have lives. There is options in this game(like ALL MMOs right now) for you to group up with your buddies and play whatever fantasy you want. If you can guild and group in it, then you can role play. You shouldn't need a game mechanic that forces everyone to play like you want to.
2.) Hate to burst your bubble, but you do not speak for the Trek fanbase. Go to the official website if you think you are. The majority of the people on that board are there because they are fans of Star Trek and want to play an online version of it. All of them(including me) have their own things that they want to see in the game. Nobody will get 100 percent everything they want, but the majority does agree that the core game should be first and foremost the priority. Ship interiors is not a priority. They are nice fluff, nothing more. This website is NOT indictive of what the entire community thinks. It's not even close.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly.
Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
Another big fat fail on your part. There will be grouping in this game, it;s just ships grouping together in space and players grouping together on land instead of everyone grouping together on a ship. Just because the grouping isn't exactly what you want doesn't mean it won't be an option in the game. So try another one.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly. Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
Look I know you and others don't agree with me, but a bunch of captains in ships grouped together as the ONLY option for a star trek mmo is just stupid. I still think that a star trek mmo should offer multi-player ship crews if only because its star trek. If this wasn't a star trek mmo, I wouldn't think twice about single player ships, hell, I love it in eve, but in star trek, gotta have crews.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly. Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
Look I know you and others don't agree with me, but a bunch of captains in ships grouped together as the ONLY option for a star trek mmo is just stupid. I still think that a star trek mmo should offer multi-player ship crews if only because its star trek. If this wasn't a star trek mmo, I wouldn't think twice about single player ships, hell, I love it in eve, but in star trek, gotta have crews.
I'd say that making sure that every players has equal opportunity to have fun and participate fully is a very smart move. Condemning newer players to have to be under the thumb of other players, and having their entire game experience dictated by what another player chooses to do, is what's "stupid", not to mention suicide for the game.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly. Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
Look I know you and others don't agree with me, but a bunch of captains in ships grouped together as the ONLY option for a star trek mmo is just stupid. I still think that a star trek mmo should offer multi-player ship crews if only because its star trek. If this wasn't a star trek mmo, I wouldn't think twice about single player ships, hell, I love it in eve, but in star trek, gotta have crews.
I'd say that making sure that every players has equal opportunity to have fun and participate fully is a very smart move. Condemning newer players to have to be under the thumb of other players, and having their entire game experience dictated by what another player chooses to do, is what's "stupid", not to mention suicide for the game.
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want. You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want. You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
You're right, Star Trek should be hardcore, it shouldn't be a game that even the most casual gamer can pick up and play...it should have a complex system that takes weeks to learn fully, it should be built so you have to spend months shipping ore, mining, or doing other fetch and carry missions until they're able to do anything in-game.
Oh, right that's been done...EVE online...Star Trek is not Eve Online.
The lamest thing i've ever heard is a so-called gamer who thinks that other gamers shouldn't be able to participate unless they're 'hardcore' and dedicated, so because a gamer and Star Trek fan who wants to play this game but can only afford to give one day a week shouldn't be able to get into the deeper part of the game because they've haven't earned it?
How elitist can one person get? must be a blast grouping up with you.
Nobody said anything about this game 'catering to the casual gamer' but for everybody to have fun and enjoy themselves, there is a difference, if you can't see it then i don't know what to tell you.
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want. You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
You're right, Star Trek should be hardcore, it shouldn't be a game that even the most casual gamer can pick up and play...it should have a complex system that takes weeks to learn fully, it should be built so you have to spend months shipping ore, mining, or doing other fetch and carry missions until they're able to do anything in-game.
Oh, right that's been done...EVE online...Star Trek is not Eve Online.
The lamest thing i've ever heard is a so-called gamer who thinks that other gamers shouldn't be able to participate unless they're 'hardcore' and dedicated, so because a gamer and Star Trek fan who wants to play this game but can only afford to give one day a week shouldn't be able to get into the deeper part of the game because they've haven't earned it?
How elitist can one person get? must be a blast grouping up with you.
Nobody said anything about this game 'catering to the casual gamer' but for everybody to have fun and enjoy themselves, there is a difference, if you can't see it then i don't know what to tell you.
Where did I say the game should be hardcore to the point where it eliminates anyone but the hardcore gamer? No where. My argument is it shouldn't be so lame and one dimensional as to give every player regardless of level of interest the same opportunity. Between lame and hardcore is a happy middle.
If you want to make up things I've said just to argue against them, no need to wait for me to post, go ahead and just write what you want.
I'd say that making sure that every players has equal opportunity to have fun and participate fully is a very smart move. Condemning newer players to have to be under the thumb of other players, and having their entire game experience dictated by what another player chooses to do, is what's "stupid", not to mention suicide for the game.
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want. You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
What does not making new players have to play the game under the control of some other player have to do with catering to casual ,least dedicated players? I'll answer that for you. Absolutely nothing is what.
Player crew in a mmo has got to be THE most foolish thing I ever heard of. As a feature in a few of the episodic missions maybe, but as a general game play feature it's just too silly a concept for a gaming company to take seriously. The only people that think it is viable are those that have no idea about these games. Simple as that.
There were ... thousands? ... of people in the Cantinas of Star Wars Galaxies who enjoyed nothing more than hanging out and offering the occassional buff. Apparently that's such a horrible idea and couldn't possibly be applied to a ship's crew. Come to think of it, I don't recall Galaxies lasting much longer after they did away with the social aspects of the game.
And yes, just because there won't be player crewed ships doesn't mean you can't group. There could be Hospital Ships that heal armor ... Stealth ships that sneak around and do lots of damage... Missile boats to shoot from long range ... and Tanking ships to fight. Maybe we could come up with clever names for them like umm ... Cleric, Rogue, Wizard and Fighter just pop into my head. But this game is going to be SOOO different from every other MMO out there ever because its going to have a Star Trek skin ...
... not so much ...
I think the player crew crowd sees in this IP the possibility to really push the genre into something different, something no one has seen before. EVE's already done the single ship, single player, skill based game and they've done it very well.
And I bet the game is live less than 24 months before skills are replaced with 'Iconic Star Trek' classes because people don't want to be bothered with learning the skill system. The PvP crowd will complain that their hospital ship can't fight a cruiser. And the potential that is STO now will be reduced to a ... well ... an NGE.
There were ... thousands? ... of people in the Cantinas of Star Wars Galaxies who enjoyed nothing more than hanging out and offering the occassional buff. Apparently that's such a horrible idea and couldn't possibly be applied to a ship's crew. Come to think of it, I don't recall Galaxies lasting much longer after they did away with the social aspects of the game. And yes, just because there won't be player crewed ships doesn't mean you can't group. There could be Hospital Ships that heal armor ... Stealth ships that sneak around and do lots of damage... Missile boats to shoot from long range ... and Tanking ships to fight. Maybe we could come up with clever names for them like umm ... Cleric, Rogue, Wizard and Fighter just pop into my head. But this game is going to be SOOO different from every other MMO out there ever because its going to have a Star Trek skin ... ... not so much ... I think the player crew crowd sees in this IP the possibility to really push the genre into something different, something no one has seen before. EVE's already done the single ship, single player, skill based game and they've done it very well. And I bet the game is live less than 24 months before skills are replaced with 'Iconic Star Trek' classes because people don't want to be bothered with learning the skill system. The PvP crowd will complain that their hospital ship can't fight a cruiser. And the potential that is STO now will be reduced to a ... well ... an NGE.
You know, you can get everything you want in your text based simming. Why not just stick to that if everyone having the opportunity to have fun and not be controlled by other players all the time bothers you so much? I'm sure there's plenty of masochists you can boss around that still participate. You see what popularity it has though. Do you honestly think those tiny numbers would sustain a mmo? Nah, you don't think so. In fact you know so. Then again, you have no care about whether the game can succeed do you?You just want the experience of it being around for a few months. Then when they have to shut out the lights because not enough are subscribing you'll just move on to try and ruin the next game n development.
By the way, those thousands of people standing around in cantinas? They were a large part of why people hated SWG at release. They never seemed to want to do anything. Face it, mmos aren't going to be glorified chat rooms ever again. Get over it already. It's been how many years since the market spoke and that was clear?
Coming from and playing the most succesful mmorpg ever designed : I am not willing to offer my time and fun for a "group". Grouping has to be freely volontary and in MY time frame and time interest. Im not playing a surrogate NPC for a 14 year old kid yelling at the micro that "HE" is the captain. My wife gets priority, then my kid and then my mmorpg. And I still play 3 hours per day on average. And I hope to do it in STO also.
Well said. I'm not going to take pay 15 a month to have some dork tell me what to do. Much as I hate to destroy the fantasies of the the SIM fans, that type of game will never have enough subscribers for a developer to spend money on. Any time a game starts to become a job I lose interest.
It's taken me a bit, but I think I've figured it out.
The Anti-crew people are also the same group of people that insist on getting the same rewards for their $15 and 30 minutes of play a week as my $15 and 5 hours of play a week.
A good analogy might be college ... this group of players wants to pay their tuition but are shocked when they get a worse grade than the students who pay the same, but invest all sorts of time and energy.
They have to believe in this or the whole concept of grouping wouldn't be the worst idea in the world. Every MMO requires! grouping for the best equipment in the game. Ever go on a Raid Zorndorf? Welcome to forced grouping. However, to do otherwise, would be to take the very things people are striving for and make them meaningless. NGE Jedi?
To go back to the college example, what's a degree in advanced genetics worth from a school that will print you the degree for a one time fee of $50,000, or you can spread those payments out over a period of four years.
Obviously the value of the college, or in our context, the game, is devalued and becomes worthless.
Unfortunately, since there isn't a price per time model, the 'value' of the player that plays a little is the same that plays alot ... even though the one that plays alot might have 5x or 10x the impact on players joining or staying (or leaving, as the case may be).
It's also unfortunate that, even though the Pro-Crew players have pointed it out several times, that the Anti-Crew folks believe you'd always have to be the peon of some douche ... while still clinging to their stance that grouping in their only little ship is different.
What's the difference between grouping when you want as a Crewmember or grouping when you want as your own ship? As Hagonbak, one of the most ardent Ahabs, pointed out earlier ... there isn't one.
What do you do if the only Borg Raid is being led by a tween screaming into the microphone that 'HE' is the Admiral?
The same thing you'd do if the Captain of your ship was a jerk ... you'd leave and find or make a new group, or you'd just fly off on your own and work on something else.
The Pro-Crew way, Guilds would be able to work together to create something they could ALL be invested in. Like a giant traveling guild hall ... with phasers! The social aspect of the game would be given a place to flourish. New players could be embraced and encased in a HUGE ship from the very first day.
Imagine if your first day in the game, you get transported half-way across the galaxy to a friend's ship whos in the middle of a titanic struggle against a guild enemy ...
... or you get snatched up because you've picked an unusual skill set that not many people play and your first day is spent delving into some unknown nebula in uncharted space.
... or, as the Anti-Crew players would have it ... you're a runabout, flying about the starting area gathering asteroids. You certainly can't group with that Galaxy class that is headed into Klingon space, you wouldn't be a help to them or a hinderance to the Klingons ... and that nebula would burn right through your runabout's shield. Sorry, stay here and grind until you're useful.
I can hear the nay-sayers now: But what would you DO if you were a n00b in a guild ship. Honestly? Who cares! You'd still be making a greater impact and be included more, even if all you did was a mini-game ... or ran around the ship healing other players who got injured at their stations. I guess I just don't see how that could be any less boring than grinding through the starter zones shooting 15 rogue probes that threaten Earth ... but respawn harmlessly again in 25 to 30 seconds.
The Pro-Crew way, the avenue is AVAILABLE, to contribute to a larger group, anywhere in space, from your very first log in.
The Anti-Crew way, you're NEVER worth more than the ship you bring to the table.
Comments
I still really haven't seen a solution.
As was posted, there are a limited number of tasks involved in any given shipboard scenario. What will everyone be doing?
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of player crews, but what would they do?
Lackey, open a hailing frequency, I need to talk to that Romulan Captain. Okay, now that you have pushed 1-5 buttons, just hang out and look pretty until I need another hail. That may not happen until the next mission, but good work. Chair comfy?
Lackey, set a course for _______. Okay, course is set, just hang out and look pretty.
If you watch any ST series, you will see folks sitting around on the bridge, actually doing very little for long periods of time.
There are more problems with human bridge crew.
What happen if you can't find anyone? Having a human bridge crew = force grouping to play and forced grouping just does not work.
People have different schedules and you can't force a group of 5 to play together all the time. And people don't want to spend half an hour to put a crew together before you can play.
You also have issue about what people want to do. There are few who would want to play the communication officers. So what happen if we have a shortage of that?
Why is everyone consumed with this being a forced either or?
I'm sure most of us have played WoW at one point or another.
Single Player (You and your Ship) - Grinding/Rep Farming/Farming/Exploring/ect (smaller "shuttlecraft")
Multiple player (Differing crew types) - Similar to Instances, jump in LFG, find what you need and depart from a common "star port" (actual starships)
It not hard to add have a multiple human player crew. Eliminating it is just silly and the game will lose a lot from it.
That still doesn't address the other issues. What does everyone do during battle?
List the posts that would be on the bridge, and then find something for all of them to do during a battle.
From http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Bridge#Command_stations
Command stations
The bridge of a 24th-century Galaxy-class starship featuring three command chairs at center
The bridge command stations provide seating and information displays for the commanding officer and one or two other officers, typically including the first officer (though in past times, usually a senior bridge officer doubled as first officer). The command chairs are located in the center of the bridge, designed to maximize interaction with all key bridge personnel, while permitting an unobstructed view of the main viewscreen.
Typically, the armrests of the captain's chair feature miniaturized status displays. Using keyboard or vocal commands, the captain can use these controls to override the basic operation of the starship.
Flight Control
The 24th century Flight Control position evolved from the 23rd century helm and navigation positions. Also referred to as Conn, the officer manning the Flight Control console is responsible for the actual piloting and navigation of the starship. Despite many of these functions being heavily automated, their criticality demands a humanoid officer to oversee these operations at all times.
During spaceflight at impulse, Conn is responsible for monitoring relativistic effects as well as inertial damping system status. When traveling at warp speed, Conn is required to monitor the subspace field geometry in parallel with the engineering department. During warp flight, the Conn console continually updates long-range sensor data and makes automatic course corrections to adjust for minor variations in the density of the interstellar medium. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual)
Operations management
The Ops and Conn consoles on the Galaxy-class bridge
Many shipboard operations involve scheduling resources or hardware that affect a number of departments. In many such cases, it is common for various operations to present conflicting requirements. It is the responsibility of the operations officer to coordinate such activities so that mission goals are not jeopardized.
The operations position (also known simply as "Ops") evolved from older 23rd century positions. The bulk of the duties held by the helm and navigation positions were combined into the Conn position. Other functions of the helm panel, such as internal systems control, became the purview of Ops, as have some communications and sensor system usages. (Star Trek: The Next Generation)
The Ops panel presents the operations officer with a continually updated list of current major shipboard activities. This list permits Ops to set priorities and allocate resources among current operations. This is especially critical in cases where two or more requests require the use of the same equipment, entail mutually exclusive mission profiles, or involve some unusual safety or tactical considerations.
During away team missions or emergency situations, the Ops station is supported by the Science Station, found at the rear of the bridge in Galaxy-class designs. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual)
Security and Tactical
The security station, integrated in the wooden handrail encircling the Galaxy-class bridge
The bridge station dedicated to defensive systems control and starship internal security is Tactical. Parts of the default control layout presents the security officer with information readouts dealing with the internal protection of the starship and its crew. A wide variety of starship defensive systems are available to the chief tactical officer (sometimes doubling as chief of security), ranging from the defensive shields to phaser and torpedo systems, as well as intrusion detection systems.
Other systems that may be commanded by Tactical include communications, long- and short-range sensor arrays, sensor probes, message buoys, and tractor beam devices.
Supportive stations
Every Starfleet bridge also includes several supportive consoles and backup stations. These may include consoles for Planetary sciences, Engineering, Mission Ops and Environmental Control. Most of these are meant to relieve the senior bridge officers of secondary duties during alert and crisis situations.
Mission Ops provides additional support to the operations officer, and is specifically responsible for monitoring activity relating to secondary missions. Mission Ops is responsible for assignment of resources and priorities according to guidelines specified by the operations officer and by operating protocols. This station is also responsible for monitoring away teams. (Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual)
The Environmental Control console provides similar relief to the operations officer, monitoring the starship's life support systems. Due to the highly automated nature of these systems, this console would be unattended under normal circumstances, but becomes of crucial importance during alert situations to maximize crew survivability.
The bridge's Engineering station duplicates in simplified form the Chief Engineer's primary status displays from Main Engineering. The purpose of this station is to permit the Chief Engineer to maintain supervision over engineering system while on the bridge.
So, if you are captain of a player crew, you would never actually do anything, you would tell others what to do. You don't take the helm, fire weapons, nothing.
Imagine a player crew of say, 4 people. One is the captain, one takes the helm, one fires weapons, what else is there??
I may be confused but are you saying that there won't be enough to do?
I was suggesting that there are ways to go about mixing and matching. The main complaint seemed to be about what happens when people go offline and the game AI does not have the ability to keep up. I don't think I've read one complaint from people saying there won't be enough to do. The building of content and finding "things to do" is the game devs main goal. I'm sure they can come up with plenty.
I think its clear that the star trek fan-base would want crews. I mean, its kind of what Star Trek is all about. On the other hand it is hard to imagine them realistically pulling off multi player crews on a ship, because your average mmo player isn't as dedicated as a starfleet officer
That being said, its not hard to envision a system where ships have multiple stations that can be manned by npcs, affected by the level of the captain that can be manned by players if available. Convoluted and complicated? Yeah, but would be so much more satisfying.
The argument that it can't be done, is really an argument against making the game.
I surmise then that since a true Star Trek environement isn't being attempted that this game is just an attempt to milk easy bucks off of the built in playerbase of fans.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
edit- posted in wrong forum, sorry, please remove.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
You know, I've been reading that same phrase from the same people that make the claims that a game(most MMOs nowadays it seems to them) are just sinlge player games that aren't what MMOs were supposed to be.
1.) They aren't single player games. Period. Just because a person isn't forced to play with you doesn't mean the game is any less an MMO. If a game is only playable online then guess what? It's a massive multiplayer online game. Enough with this "it isn't an MMO if it isn't a virtual world where everyone HAS to work together to accomplish anything" tripe. That was how YOU saw it. Not everyone else. For the rest of us it's just a friggin game.You style of game was tried and failed miserably because most people have lives. There is options in this game(like ALL MMOs right now) for you to group up with your buddies and play whatever fantasy you want. If you can guild and group in it, then you can role play. You shouldn't need a game mechanic that forces everyone to play like you want to.
2.) Hate to burst your bubble, but you do not speak for the Trek fanbase. Go to the official website if you think you are. The majority of the people on that board are there because they are fans of Star Trek and want to play an online version of it. All of them(including me) have their own things that they want to see in the game. Nobody will get 100 percent everything they want, but the majority does agree that the core game should be first and foremost the priority. Ship interiors is not a priority. They are nice fluff, nothing more. This website is NOT indictive of what the entire community thinks. It's not even close.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
You know, I've been reading that same phrase from the same people that make the claims that a game(most MMOs nowadays it seems to them) are just sinlge player games that aren't what MMOs were supposed to be.
1.) They aren't single player games. Period. Just because a person isn't forced to play with you doesn't mean the game is any less an MMO. If a game is only playable online then guess what? It's a massive multiplayer online game. Enough with this "it isn't an MMO if it isn't a virtual world where everyone HAS to work together to accomplish anything" tripe. That was how YOU saw it. Not everyone else. For the rest of us it's just a friggin game.You style of game was tried and failed miserably because most people have lives. There is options in this game(like ALL MMOs right now) for you to group up with your buddies and play whatever fantasy you want. If you can guild and group in it, then you can role play. You shouldn't need a game mechanic that forces everyone to play like you want to.
2.) Hate to burst your bubble, but you do not speak for the Trek fanbase. Go to the official website if you think you are. The majority of the people on that board are there because they are fans of Star Trek and want to play an online version of it. All of them(including me) have their own things that they want to see in the game. Nobody will get 100 percent everything they want, but the majority does agree that the core game should be first and foremost the priority. Ship interiors is not a priority. They are nice fluff, nothing more. This website is NOT indictive of what the entire community thinks. It's not even close.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly.
Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
I've been a Star Trek fan for @ 35 years, and I don't want player crews at all, and don't think they're what Star Trek is about at all either.
That's been part and parcel of this issue from the beginning. A small chunk of Star Trek fandom thinking that they speak for the rest of us.I can speak for myself. Thanks though mate.
I specifically used the phrase 'fan base' to indicate I was making a generalization. Not speaking for any individual member. Obviously we disagree but mashing together the context of Star Trek and MMO (and its the MMO part thats crucial) mulitple player crews for ships is the obvious end result. I'm not saying single player ships in a Star Trek game couldn't be enjoyable or desired, but to my way of thinking about game genres, that would be more of a standalone game with multiplayer, not necessarily an MMO. And that was my ultimate point. More about current trends in MMO's away from what MMO are supposed to be about, rather than in Star Trek.
You know, I've been reading that same phrase from the same people that make the claims that a game(most MMOs nowadays it seems to them) are just sinlge player games that aren't what MMOs were supposed to be.
1.) They aren't single player games. Period. Just because a person isn't forced to play with you doesn't mean the game is any less an MMO. If a game is only playable online then guess what? It's a massive multiplayer online game. Enough with this "it isn't an MMO if it isn't a virtual world where everyone HAS to work together to accomplish anything" tripe. That was how YOU saw it. Not everyone else. For the rest of us it's just a friggin game.You style of game was tried and failed miserably because most people have lives. There is options in this game(like ALL MMOs right now) for you to group up with your buddies and play whatever fantasy you want. If you can guild and group in it, then you can role play. You shouldn't need a game mechanic that forces everyone to play like you want to.
2.) Hate to burst your bubble, but you do not speak for the Trek fanbase. Go to the official website if you think you are. The majority of the people on that board are there because they are fans of Star Trek and want to play an online version of it. All of them(including me) have their own things that they want to see in the game. Nobody will get 100 percent everything they want, but the majority does agree that the core game should be first and foremost the priority. Ship interiors is not a priority. They are nice fluff, nothing more. This website is NOT indictive of what the entire community thinks. It's not even close.
There is a difference between not being forced to group and not being allowed to group at all. A Star Trek game where every player represents a ship crewed by himself may be fun for some people, but as far as representing the IP its just silly.
Didn't mean to get your stick-on vulcan ears all a-quiver.
Another big fat fail on your part. There will be grouping in this game, it;s just ships grouping together in space and players grouping together on land instead of everyone grouping together on a ship. Just because the grouping isn't exactly what you want doesn't mean it won't be an option in the game. So try another one.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
Look I know you and others don't agree with me, but a bunch of captains in ships grouped together as the ONLY option for a star trek mmo is just stupid. I still think that a star trek mmo should offer multi-player ship crews if only because its star trek. If this wasn't a star trek mmo, I wouldn't think twice about single player ships, hell, I love it in eve, but in star trek, gotta have crews.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
Look I know you and others don't agree with me, but a bunch of captains in ships grouped together as the ONLY option for a star trek mmo is just stupid. I still think that a star trek mmo should offer multi-player ship crews if only because its star trek. If this wasn't a star trek mmo, I wouldn't think twice about single player ships, hell, I love it in eve, but in star trek, gotta have crews.
I'd say that making sure that every players has equal opportunity to have fun and participate fully is a very smart move. Condemning newer players to have to be under the thumb of other players, and having their entire game experience dictated by what another player chooses to do, is what's "stupid", not to mention suicide for the game.
How does not having player crews stop players from grouping?
I'll answer. It doesn't at all. In fact it makes certain that every player in the group is having a fun and interesting experience. Instead of only a couple in the group, and the rest doing some mundane task not really knowing what's going on or not being able to feel like they've made an equal contribution.
Look I know you and others don't agree with me, but a bunch of captains in ships grouped together as the ONLY option for a star trek mmo is just stupid. I still think that a star trek mmo should offer multi-player ship crews if only because its star trek. If this wasn't a star trek mmo, I wouldn't think twice about single player ships, hell, I love it in eve, but in star trek, gotta have crews.
I'd say that making sure that every players has equal opportunity to have fun and participate fully is a very smart move. Condemning newer players to have to be under the thumb of other players, and having their entire game experience dictated by what another player chooses to do, is what's "stupid", not to mention suicide for the game.
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want.
You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want.
You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
You're right, Star Trek should be hardcore, it shouldn't be a game that even the most casual gamer can pick up and play...it should have a complex system that takes weeks to learn fully, it should be built so you have to spend months shipping ore, mining, or doing other fetch and carry missions until they're able to do anything in-game.
Oh, right that's been done...EVE online...Star Trek is not Eve Online.
The lamest thing i've ever heard is a so-called gamer who thinks that other gamers shouldn't be able to participate unless they're 'hardcore' and dedicated, so because a gamer and Star Trek fan who wants to play this game but can only afford to give one day a week shouldn't be able to get into the deeper part of the game because they've haven't earned it?
How elitist can one person get? must be a blast grouping up with you.
Nobody said anything about this game 'catering to the casual gamer' but for everybody to have fun and enjoy themselves, there is a difference, if you can't see it then i don't know what to tell you.
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want.
You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
You're right, Star Trek should be hardcore, it shouldn't be a game that even the most casual gamer can pick up and play...it should have a complex system that takes weeks to learn fully, it should be built so you have to spend months shipping ore, mining, or doing other fetch and carry missions until they're able to do anything in-game.
Oh, right that's been done...EVE online...Star Trek is not Eve Online.
The lamest thing i've ever heard is a so-called gamer who thinks that other gamers shouldn't be able to participate unless they're 'hardcore' and dedicated, so because a gamer and Star Trek fan who wants to play this game but can only afford to give one day a week shouldn't be able to get into the deeper part of the game because they've haven't earned it?
How elitist can one person get? must be a blast grouping up with you.
Nobody said anything about this game 'catering to the casual gamer' but for everybody to have fun and enjoy themselves, there is a difference, if you can't see it then i don't know what to tell you.
Where did I say the game should be hardcore to the point where it eliminates anyone but the hardcore gamer? No where. My argument is it shouldn't be so lame and one dimensional as to give every player regardless of level of interest the same opportunity. Between lame and hardcore is a happy middle.
If you want to make up things I've said just to argue against them, no need to wait for me to post, go ahead and just write what you want.
I apologize, i thought you were insinuating that casual gamers shouldn't be involved in higher-tier aspects of the game, my bad.
Not only is that the lamest thing I ever heard, its also a sure fire plan for making a game that fails. Go play tic-tac-toe if thats what you want.
You want a game that caters to the most casual, least dedicated player?
What does not making new players have to play the game under the control of some other player have to do with catering to casual ,least dedicated players? I'll answer that for you. Absolutely nothing is what.
Player crew in a mmo has got to be THE most foolish thing I ever heard of. As a feature in a few of the episodic missions maybe, but as a general game play feature it's just too silly a concept for a gaming company to take seriously. The only people that think it is viable are those that have no idea about these games. Simple as that.
There were ... thousands? ... of people in the Cantinas of Star Wars Galaxies who enjoyed nothing more than hanging out and offering the occassional buff. Apparently that's such a horrible idea and couldn't possibly be applied to a ship's crew. Come to think of it, I don't recall Galaxies lasting much longer after they did away with the social aspects of the game.
And yes, just because there won't be player crewed ships doesn't mean you can't group. There could be Hospital Ships that heal armor ... Stealth ships that sneak around and do lots of damage... Missile boats to shoot from long range ... and Tanking ships to fight. Maybe we could come up with clever names for them like umm ... Cleric, Rogue, Wizard and Fighter just pop into my head. But this game is going to be SOOO different from every other MMO out there ever because its going to have a Star Trek skin ...
... not so much ...
I think the player crew crowd sees in this IP the possibility to really push the genre into something different, something no one has seen before. EVE's already done the single ship, single player, skill based game and they've done it very well.
And I bet the game is live less than 24 months before skills are replaced with 'Iconic Star Trek' classes because people don't want to be bothered with learning the skill system. The PvP crowd will complain that their hospital ship can't fight a cruiser. And the potential that is STO now will be reduced to a ... well ... an NGE.
You know, you can get everything you want in your text based simming. Why not just stick to that if everyone having the opportunity to have fun and not be controlled by other players all the time bothers you so much? I'm sure there's plenty of masochists you can boss around that still participate. You see what popularity it has though.
Do you honestly think those tiny numbers would sustain a mmo? Nah, you don't think so. In fact you know so. Then again, you have no care about whether the game can succeed do you?You just want the experience of it being around for a few months. Then when they have to shut out the lights because not enough are subscribing you'll just move on to try and ruin the next game n development.
By the way, those thousands of people standing around in cantinas? They were a large part of why people hated SWG at release. They never seemed to want to do anything. Face it, mmos aren't going to be glorified chat rooms ever again. Get over it already. It's been how many years since the market spoke and that was clear?
I have more of an Ensign Ro personality, i'm not ready for captainship SIR !
Well said. I'm not going to take pay 15 a month to have some dork tell me what to do. Much as I hate to destroy the fantasies of the the SIM fans, that type of game will never have enough subscribers for a developer to spend money on. Any time a game starts to become a job I lose interest.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
It's taken me a bit, but I think I've figured it out.
The Anti-crew people are also the same group of people that insist on getting the same rewards for their $15 and 30 minutes of play a week as my $15 and 5 hours of play a week.
A good analogy might be college ... this group of players wants to pay their tuition but are shocked when they get a worse grade than the students who pay the same, but invest all sorts of time and energy.
They have to believe in this or the whole concept of grouping wouldn't be the worst idea in the world. Every MMO requires! grouping for the best equipment in the game. Ever go on a Raid Zorndorf? Welcome to forced grouping. However, to do otherwise, would be to take the very things people are striving for and make them meaningless. NGE Jedi?
To go back to the college example, what's a degree in advanced genetics worth from a school that will print you the degree for a one time fee of $50,000, or you can spread those payments out over a period of four years.
Obviously the value of the college, or in our context, the game, is devalued and becomes worthless.
Unfortunately, since there isn't a price per time model, the 'value' of the player that plays a little is the same that plays alot ... even though the one that plays alot might have 5x or 10x the impact on players joining or staying (or leaving, as the case may be).
It's also unfortunate that, even though the Pro-Crew players have pointed it out several times, that the Anti-Crew folks believe you'd always have to be the peon of some douche ... while still clinging to their stance that grouping in their only little ship is different.
What's the difference between grouping when you want as a Crewmember or grouping when you want as your own ship? As Hagonbak, one of the most ardent Ahabs, pointed out earlier ... there isn't one.
What do you do if the only Borg Raid is being led by a tween screaming into the microphone that 'HE' is the Admiral?
The same thing you'd do if the Captain of your ship was a jerk ... you'd leave and find or make a new group, or you'd just fly off on your own and work on something else.
The Pro-Crew way, Guilds would be able to work together to create something they could ALL be invested in. Like a giant traveling guild hall ... with phasers! The social aspect of the game would be given a place to flourish. New players could be embraced and encased in a HUGE ship from the very first day.
Imagine if your first day in the game, you get transported half-way across the galaxy to a friend's ship whos in the middle of a titanic struggle against a guild enemy ...
... or you get snatched up because you've picked an unusual skill set that not many people play and your first day is spent delving into some unknown nebula in uncharted space.
... or, as the Anti-Crew players would have it ... you're a runabout, flying about the starting area gathering asteroids. You certainly can't group with that Galaxy class that is headed into Klingon space, you wouldn't be a help to them or a hinderance to the Klingons ... and that nebula would burn right through your runabout's shield. Sorry, stay here and grind until you're useful.
I can hear the nay-sayers now: But what would you DO if you were a n00b in a guild ship. Honestly? Who cares! You'd still be making a greater impact and be included more, even if all you did was a mini-game ... or ran around the ship healing other players who got injured at their stations. I guess I just don't see how that could be any less boring than grinding through the starter zones shooting 15 rogue probes that threaten Earth ... but respawn harmlessly again in 25 to 30 seconds.
The Pro-Crew way, the avenue is AVAILABLE, to contribute to a larger group, anywhere in space, from your very first log in.
The Anti-Crew way, you're NEVER worth more than the ship you bring to the table.