Originally posted by Timzilla I guess I should have qualified that better. It's the only way the IP fit's inside a mmo wrapper in such a way as to make it fun for the vast majority of those who would try it.
It doesn't even have to do that. The vast majority of players will leave when the next shiney new MMO comes out, anyway.
Do a great job with the IP, and you can hold a few hundred thousand Trek fans for years.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Originally posted by MMO_Doubter I'm a gamer. I love games in general, and want them to get better. We don't encourage that by excusing and denying their flaws.
Valid criticism is one thing. Bashing a game under the pretense it's "IP breaking" because it doesn't impose permanent character death is a whole 'nother bushel of apples.
Seriously bro, you lost all credibility with that one.
I agree STO has way to much instancing, actually pretty much everything is instanced, they forgot to add a instance for your inventory.
Lol, too funny.
Is it worse than AoC? I think instancing could be the worst invention ever. At the very least, keep it to a minimum.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I agree STO has way to much instancing, actually pretty much everything is instanced, they forgot to add a instance for your inventory.
Lol, too funny. Is it worse than AoC? I think instancing could be the worst invention ever. At the very least, keep it to a minimum.
Well, first you play on shards that are limited to 100? players, then pretty much else is also instanced, missions are capped to team size (something like a lobby where you float in subspace LOL). The only thing where all players can gather are either at the Stardock (Earth) or Subspace.
There seems to be some special mission where allot of players can gather but didn't try them out. Like i said, pretty much everything is instanced.
I agree STO has way to much instancing, actually pretty much everything is instanced, they forgot to add a instance for your inventory.
Lol, too funny.
Is it worse than AoC? I think instancing could be the worst invention ever. At the very least, keep it to a minimum.
Well, first you play on shards that are limited to 100? players, then pretty much else is also instanced, missions are capped to team size (something like a lobby where you float in subspace LOL). The only thing where all players can gather are either at the Stardock (Earth) or Subspace.
There seems to be some special mission where allot of players can gather but didn't try them out. Like i said, pretty much everything is instanced.
Bleh, don't game designers even play MMOs or am I the only one that hates instancing?
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Bleh, don't game designers even play MMOs or am I the only one that hates instancing?
Well, considering the amount of MMOs that use instancing in one form or another are the majority.. Maybe you know something that all these developers don't?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Bleh, don't game designers even play MMOs or am I the only one that hates instancing?
Well, considering the amount of MMOs that use instancing in one form or another are the majority.. Maybe you know something that all these developers don't?
Oh I see, so instancing is a technological advancement in gaming? I seem to remember quite a few awesome games that didn't use instancing or very little. Considering your "review" of the game in another thread, I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, thanks.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I remember when instancing started with good intention of proving an intimate adventure for big story elements of game-play and then evolved into something that has turned away from the beauty of an open-world environment into an overly glorified lobby-system single-player type environment. That's my thought.
Originally posted by Zekiah Oh I see, so instancing is a technological advancement in gaming? I seem to remember quite a few awesome games that didn't use instancing or very little. Considering your "review" of the game in another thread, I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, thanks.
Yeah, 'cause login queues, excessive lag & server crashes are the epitomy of AWESOME!
Originally posted by Zekiah Oh I see, so instancing is a technological advancement in gaming? I seem to remember quite a few awesome games that didn't use instancing or very little. Considering your "review" of the game in another thread, I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, thanks.
Yeah, 'cause login queues, excessive lag & server crashes are the epitomy of AWESOME!
Working as intended?
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I remember when instancing started with good intention of proving an intimate adventure for big story elements of game-play and then evolved into something that has turned away from the beauty of an open-world environment into an overly glorified lobby-system single-player type environment. That's my thought.
I agree. AoC was the game that totally turned me off to instancing, I loathe it now. You'd think that game designers would have learned more from history and successful MMOs but perhaps not. Pretty soon they'll be instanced instances.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I remember when instancing started with good intention of proving an intimate adventure for big story elements of game-play and then evolved into something that has turned away from the beauty of an open-world environment into an overly glorified lobby-system single-player type environment. That's my thought.
One reason I am hopeful about TOR. It does have instancing, but they seem to be using it for the proper purpose. We'll have to see how it goes though, of course.
This adolescently simplistic view of Star Trek is so incredibly sad on many level. If I had any doubts about this game or who Cryptic's audience was - Not any more.
Indeed. What a horrible waste of a great IP. It could have been SO much more.
It's not a watse of the IP at all. It's the only way the IP fit's inside a mmo wrapper. The IP is still available for the ST/2nd Life game that you're thinking of.
Yes, we have MMOs without any combat, MMOs based on puzzles, and a wide variety of other MMOs, yet somehow what Cryptic did is the ONLY WAY IT COULD BE DONE!
Bah, the apologists for STO's design are ridiculous. There's room for innovation and different things in all other aspects of gaming except for MMOs, eh? MMOs have to all be essentially the same!
And make no mistake, this IS a waste of the IP. A hastily put-together game is a waste at the very least, and that's what this is. That it also lacks vision or any of the more significant themes of Star Trek also makes it a waste, though it will be the haste that makes the game a financial failure.
I guess I should have qualified that better. It's the only way the IP fit's inside a mmo wrapper in such a way as to make it fun for the vast majority of those who would try it. I know there are people that would love to sit and chat uselessly with Whoopi on the observation deck for hours on end. But aside from those 16 people, the other tens of thousands of players want to blow stuff up, level up and grab the loot as often as possible. You know, actually play a game. Personally, I don't see where STO has any legs to speak of, and it will be another flash in the pan. But I think it got the best of the IP, and I'll enjoy it for a few weeks at least and longer if the PvP works.
The games I referred to are successes. They have healthy populations and continue to prosper. Also, I wasn't proposing that a Trek game should be all puzzles or all non-combat, but I was saying that such elements can work and be popular. Innovation in gaming generally doesn't hurt, as long as you take the time to polish the game.
I don't see how you can think STO "got the best of the IP." It has the Federation as largely dealing in combat, Klingons with no PvE to speak of, and many other races (in terms of factions) can't even be played. Certainly the ideals of exploration, thoughtfulness, civilization, and ethics are only present in a very perverted sense. They could have easily done a lot better if they just branched out the types of gameplay from combat. Well, "they" being someone that wasn't Cryptic, probably, since Cryptic hasn't shown any ability to handle non-combat elements with significant skill -- they certainly aren't innovators of any sort there.
Overall the game seems pretty similar from what I've heard of PotBS, and I won't be surprised if it is doing terribly 6 months from now.
Heh, the "beauty" of those "open world" environments was you seldom had more than 50k concurrent users (if not significantly less) and could afford to gamble that they wouldn't all try to congregate in one location. This was also facilitated by the fracturing of the playerbase across multiple independent servers (which is effectively instancing on a grand scale).
I'm a pretty big snob when it comes to MMO's, admitted, there. The rest of you need to do the same and realize that that fact is coloring all of your opinions and perceptions.
When I discovered I got in to the beta for STO I kinda shrugged and said 'meh'. Usually I play a beta with the mind of feeling out how proactive the devs are, how stable the client/server is and generally how the base mechanics of the game feel. With STO I didn't really give a crap because I wasn't expecting much.
So I downloaded it, patched it, made a character that I didn't alter at all because the only thing I really wanted to do was ship combat anyway. Much to my surprise the space combat is actually pretty fun. The starter ship turns really slow, but it's a starter ship....I expect it to have terrible weapons, terrible turning and generally terrible everything. Making an opinions based around how the starter ship handles and everything is just plain silly.
Beyond how terrible the starter ship is I actually like the space combat. The ground combat is...well, it's not /terrible/, but it's still not that great. That doesn't bother me...because, as I said, I don't care about ground combat.
If enough people are like me then maybe Cryptic will have plenty of time to smooth out the ground combat and add more content. Although, to be frank, content design is fairly limited. For example - Let's say it takes a day to lay out and design an average quest and it takes a week to design an incredibly awesome, super in depth quest.
Considering dev time constraints this means you can (in this example) get out seven average quest per 1 super amazing and more easily lay out level progression over a period of time. Which are you going to do as a dev?
I would love more complex missions and quests in mmo's, but there would be fewer of them that diversity across classes would suffer anyway and it would end up being more frustrating.
Heh, the "beauty" of those "open world" environments was you seldom had more than 50k concurrent users (if not significantly less) and could afford to gamble that they wouldn't all try to congregate in one location. This was also facilitated by the fracturing of the playerbase across multiple independent servers (which is effectively instancing on a grand scale).
Yeah the more I've thought about it the more the 'open world' ideal that people have is silly. It's well known that mmo's are specifically designed so that even a single server's population is staggered across multiple zones. Not even the vaunted WoW can stand up to the 'massive' part of a 'concurrent' world.
Before I quite (about two months ago) whenever WG would get near capacity the server would begin to suffer horribly. And that was 120vs120....340 people. Those servers hold up to 8k(?) concurrent users? That's not even 10% of maximum server capacity.
The same thing goes for almost any other mmo out there. Whenever truly large amounts of players congregate in the same zone the entire server will begin to suffer. This makes the idea of a huge, open world a complete myth that is only propagated by zones designed to intentionally sparse out player populations.
Valid criticism is one thing. Bashing a game under the pretense it's "IP breaking" because it doesn't impose permanent character death is a whole 'nother bushel of apples. Seriously bro, you lost all credibility with that one.
1 - permadeath would match the IP. Other than Spock, who ever came back from the dead? I realize that with this game's over-indulgence in combat, it would be problematic.
2 - I didn't actually ask for permadeath. People put those words in my mouth. I asked for some sort of death penalty. Combat is devoid of tension when you stand to lose nothing.
As I posted a while back - I would have liked to have a 'emergency warp' option in space combat. Running away from a fight that has gone bad is a major part of Trek. If you don't use that escape option and are destroyed, then you lose your ship and are downgraded in what you can command.
In ground combat - Drach had a very good idea with something like a 'luck' meter, which turns hits into near-misses until it runs out. Those personal shields both break the IP and the spirit of Trek ground combat which was all about using cover and maneuver to win. Now, some of the ground combat design seems interesting (expose/exploit) I admit, but standing around taking repeated phaser blasts screams "not Trek" to me.
Don't even get me started on ranged healing.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
I'm a pretty big snob when it comes to MMO's, admitted, there. The rest of you need to do the same and realize that that fact is coloring all of your opinions and perceptions. When I discovered I got in to the beta for STO I kinda shrugged and said 'meh'. Usually I play a beta with the mind of feeling out how proactive the devs are, how stable the client/server is and generally how the base mechanics of the game feel. With STO I didn't really give a crap because I wasn't expecting much. So I downloaded it, patched it, made a character that I didn't alter at all because the only thing I really wanted to do was ship combat anyway. Much to my surprise the space combat is actually pretty fun. The starter ship turns really slow, but it's a starter ship....I expect it to have terrible weapons, terrible turning and generally terrible everything. Making an opinions based around how the starter ship handles and everything is just plain silly. It is and it isn't. Nothing will affect the number of subscribers more than the starting experience. Most people are not going to stick with a game when they don't enjoy it from the start. The days of 'it gets better later on' are numbered. I'd be fine with a design like that - IF I wasn't paying from the start.
Beyond how terrible the starter ship is I actually like the space combat. The ground combat is...well, it's not /terrible/, but it's still not that great. That doesn't bother me...because, as I said, I don't care about ground combat. If enough people are like me then maybe Cryptic will have plenty of time to smooth out the ground combat and add more content. Although, to be frank, content design is fairly limited. For example - Let's say it takes a day to lay out and design an average quest and it takes a week to design an incredibly awesome, super in depth quest. Considering dev time constraints this means you can (in this example) get out seven average quest per 1 super amazing and more easily lay out level progression over a period of time. Which are you going to do as a dev? I would love more complex missions and quests in mmo's, but there would be fewer of them that diversity across classes would suffer anyway and it would end up being more frustrating.
Well, diversity between classes is meaningless in this particular game - as there is only one class, but I see your point WRT other games.
Frankly, I would prefer fewer but longer and more involved quests as long as they rewarded the time spent doing them. Same with PvE fights - fewer, but tougher and taking longer to finish.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
This isn't Star Wars: Galaxies Pre-CU with a Star Trek skin. If that's what you were hoping for, too bad. This ain't it. It's also not EVE Online with ambulation (and a Star Trek skin), World of Warcraft (with a Star Trek skin), Ultima Online (with a Star Trek skin), Dark Age of Camelot (with a Star Trek skin), Asheron's Call (with a Star Trek skin), or EverQuest (with a Star Trek skin). Again, if that's what you were hoping for, too bad. This ain't it. Are there similarities to Pirates of the Burning Sea? Without a doubt. But there's just as many significant differences. Will it please everyone? Not a chance. Particularly those with pie-in-the-sky expectations, and/or are too stubborn to concede they're burned out on the MMO genre in general.
I am about to test this game in 3 hours and i am not expecting much,so anything will be a bonus.people can cry and complain all they want about SOE ,but you are not going to get the type of complete content from these other developers as you would from SOE.It does not matter pre cu or after,SOE delivers content,weather you like the content is a matter of taste,but they do deliver content.
I do applaud effort,i am not one of these superficial gamers,that look for some meaningless end game PVP,i login i expect to play and see a good game from day1,i could not care less about endgame.I am so versed in games at this point,i will know what type of effort went into STO in the first 15 minutes.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Valid criticism is one thing. Bashing a game under the pretense it's "IP breaking" because it doesn't impose permanent character death is a whole 'nother bushel of apples. Seriously bro, you lost all credibility with that one.
1 - permadeath would match the IP. Other than Spock, who ever came back from the dead? I realize that with this game's over-indulgence in combat, it would be problematic.
2 - I didn't actually ask for permadeath. People put those words in my mouth. I asked for some sort of death penalty. Combat is devoid of tension when you stand to lose nothing.
As I posted a while back - I would have liked to have a 'emergency warp' option in space combat. Running away from a fight that has gone bad is a major part of Trek. If you don't use that escape option and are destroyed, then you lose your ship and are downgraded in what you can command.
In ground combat - Drach had a very good idea with something like a 'luck' meter, which turns hits into near-misses until it runs out. Those personal shields both break the IP and the spirit of Trek ground combat which was all about using cover and maneuver to win. Now, some of the ground combat design seems interesting (expose/exploit) I admit, but standing around taking repeated phaser blasts screams "not Trek" to me.
Don't even get me started on ranged healing.
1. Other than Spock, who ever died?
2. The death penalty is that everything resets. Those Klingons you've been whittling down over the past ten minutes? Prepare to spend yet another ten minutes (or more) attempting to kill them all over again if you bite it before they do.
It's effectively the same thing: a timesink, just like *every* other conceivable death penalty (including the one you've proposed).
And a 'luck' meter? What are you, Han Solo?
The ridiculousness of that aside, once again you're talking about the *exact* same thing... it's just a matter of semantics. And btw, I don't know what Star Trek you've been watching, but personal shields are hardly a 'break' in the IP. Borg used them in virtually every episode they appeared in. And given that the setting for this game is THIRTY YEARS after Nemesis, it's far from implausible such technology would be relatively commonplace.
As for 'ranged' healing, it amounts to standing within five feet of someone with a tricorder. You're not a quarterback lobbing hyposprays 'cross the length of a football field. But even if you were, once again it's by no means a stretch for the IP... or are you unfamiliar with the Vidiians?
Originally posted by hanshotfirst 1. Other than Spock, who ever died? Is that a joke? Hmmm. Khan, Tasha Yar, the captain of the Reliant in WoK (he shot himself), Commodore Decker, Data (in Nemesis). I'm sure there are more. The question is who ever survived their ship blowing up while on board?
2. The death penalty is that everything resets. Those Klingons you've been whittling down over the past ten minutes? Prepare to spend yet another ten minutes (or more) attempting to kill them all over again if you bite it before they do. It's effectively the same thing: a timesink, just like *every* other conceivable death penalty (including the one you've proposed). What about PvP? Meh, a short debuff and run back. More PvP design for those who can't take it. And a 'luck' meter? What are you, Han Solo? Han Solo is a Kirk knock-off. Ever see the stormtroopers shoot straight at a major character? Leiea got hit once. I think that was it in the original trilogy. Same deal for Kirk and Spock when facing serious weaponry. The ridiculousness of that aside, once again you're talking about the *exact* same thing... it's just a matter of semantics. And btw, I don't know what Star Trek you've been watching, but personal shields are hardly a 'break' in the IP. Borg used them in virtually every episode they appeared in. Yup, and that's fine when you're actually playing Borg. And given that the setting for this game is THIRTY YEARS after Nemesis, it's far from implausible such technology would be relatively commonplace. Cryptic set it in the future for just that excuse. Hey, why do they even still need ships? As for 'ranged' healing, it amounts to standing within five feet of someone with a tricorder. Oh, I'll be testing that claim, Sir. I rather suspect it's a lot more than five feet. You're not a quarterback lobbing hyposprays 'cross the length of a football field. But even if you were, once again it's by no means a stretch for the IP... or are you unfamiliar with the Vidiians?
Never heard of them. Never seen the Federation or Klingons (the two factions in the game) ever do it, though.
Odo's people could shape-shift. Is that justification for every other race/faction to have that ability?
A Cryptic dev admitted that ranged healing wasn't canon, but they added it for fun. Well, a constant reminder that this isn't really Trek isn't fun for me.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Have you played STO yet? No? oh, ok.. so you have no idea how much fun the game actually is?
I pre-ordered the collector's edition after playing on Saturday, because I am having that much fun.
Yes! I can honestly say,i stand by my original thoughts. It is potbs all over again, and perhaps worse with the gross fragmentation of community, lack of motivating story-line, no community crafting, economy, faction drive, etc.
Essentailly the game-play boils down to, as someone else mentioned, you having a starship and you blowing up an endless stream of bad guys; a rudamentary shooter.
Im sure you wont have buyers remorse for dolling out almost $300 for a linear space-shooter, but boy, I wish I thought of it first.
When Wrath of Khan premiered it broke the record for highest grossing opening weekend for a film. Ever. You may not remember but I do, and it was a big deal to go see it at the time. Of course that was 1982 dollars so the bottom line looks much bigger for the newest film. And if you were to calculate Khan's take in 2009 dollars, the new film would probably still win.
That having been said, that's kind of the point: the last real hit for the franchise was way back in 82. And you know what? Apart from its hate crimes against astrophysics I found that the latest flick did exactly what needed to be done, which was to divorce Star Trek from the boring technobabble of the TNG+ era. Ok, so maybe it's a little on the ADD side of pacing but hey -- it's Captain Kirk kicking someone's ass, and that's good Star Trek to me.
When Wrath of Khan premiered it broke the record for highest grossing opening weekend for a film. Ever. You may not remember but I do, and it was a big deal to go see it at the time. Of course that was 1982 dollars so the bottom line looks much bigger for the newest film. And if you were to calculate Khan's take in 2009 dollars, the new film would probably still win.
Star Trek IV made more money than II. Anyhow, it isn't directly comparable with modern movies as the industry and consumer habits have changed a lot, as well as the prices. VI was pretty popular as well.
Really the only thing the TNG movies prove is that they were bad movies. The new movie only shows that people will watch idiotic action flicks regardless of the IP. Neither is surprising, and neither does anything to demonstrate that a more thoughtful movie would have done badly.
Comments
It doesn't even have to do that. The vast majority of players will leave when the next shiney new MMO comes out, anyway.
Do a great job with the IP, and you can hold a few hundred thousand Trek fans for years.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Valid criticism is one thing. Bashing a game under the pretense it's "IP breaking" because it doesn't impose permanent character death is a whole 'nother bushel of apples.
Seriously bro, you lost all credibility with that one.
I agree STO has way to much instancing, actually pretty much everything is instanced, they forgot to add a instance for your inventory.
Lol, too funny.
Is it worse than AoC? I think instancing could be the worst invention ever. At the very least, keep it to a minimum.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Well, first you play on shards that are limited to 100? players, then pretty much else is also instanced, missions are capped to team size (something like a lobby where you float in subspace LOL). The only thing where all players can gather are either at the Stardock (Earth) or Subspace.
There seems to be some special mission where allot of players can gather but didn't try them out. Like i said, pretty much everything is instanced.
Lol, too funny.
Is it worse than AoC? I think instancing could be the worst invention ever. At the very least, keep it to a minimum.
Well, first you play on shards that are limited to 100? players, then pretty much else is also instanced, missions are capped to team size (something like a lobby where you float in subspace LOL). The only thing where all players can gather are either at the Stardock (Earth) or Subspace.
There seems to be some special mission where allot of players can gather but didn't try them out. Like i said, pretty much everything is instanced.
Bleh, don't game designers even play MMOs or am I the only one that hates instancing?
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Well, considering the amount of MMOs that use instancing in one form or another are the majority.. Maybe you know something that all these developers don't?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Well, considering the amount of MMOs that use instancing in one form or another are the majority.. Maybe you know something that all these developers don't?
Oh I see, so instancing is a technological advancement in gaming? I seem to remember quite a few awesome games that didn't use instancing or very little. Considering your "review" of the game in another thread, I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, thanks.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I remember when instancing started with good intention of proving an intimate adventure for big story elements of game-play and then evolved into something that has turned away from the beauty of an open-world environment into an overly glorified lobby-system single-player type environment. That's my thought.
Yeah, 'cause login queues, excessive lag & server crashes are the epitomy of AWESOME!
Yeah, 'cause login queues, excessive lag & server crashes are the epitomy of AWESOME!
Working as intended?
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I agree. AoC was the game that totally turned me off to instancing, I loathe it now. You'd think that game designers would have learned more from history and successful MMOs but perhaps not. Pretty soon they'll be instanced instances.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
One reason I am hopeful about TOR. It does have instancing, but they seem to be using it for the proper purpose. We'll have to see how it goes though, of course.
It's not a watse of the IP at all. It's the only way the IP fit's inside a mmo wrapper. The IP is still available for the ST/2nd Life game that you're thinking of.
Yes, we have MMOs without any combat, MMOs based on puzzles, and a wide variety of other MMOs, yet somehow what Cryptic did is the ONLY WAY IT COULD BE DONE!
Bah, the apologists for STO's design are ridiculous. There's room for innovation and different things in all other aspects of gaming except for MMOs, eh? MMOs have to all be essentially the same!
And make no mistake, this IS a waste of the IP. A hastily put-together game is a waste at the very least, and that's what this is. That it also lacks vision or any of the more significant themes of Star Trek also makes it a waste, though it will be the haste that makes the game a financial failure.
I guess I should have qualified that better. It's the only way the IP fit's inside a mmo wrapper in such a way as to make it fun for the vast majority of those who would try it. I know there are people that would love to sit and chat uselessly with Whoopi on the observation deck for hours on end. But aside from those 16 people, the other tens of thousands of players want to blow stuff up, level up and grab the loot as often as possible. You know, actually play a game. Personally, I don't see where STO has any legs to speak of, and it will be another flash in the pan. But I think it got the best of the IP, and I'll enjoy it for a few weeks at least and longer if the PvP works.
The games I referred to are successes. They have healthy populations and continue to prosper. Also, I wasn't proposing that a Trek game should be all puzzles or all non-combat, but I was saying that such elements can work and be popular. Innovation in gaming generally doesn't hurt, as long as you take the time to polish the game.
I don't see how you can think STO "got the best of the IP." It has the Federation as largely dealing in combat, Klingons with no PvE to speak of, and many other races (in terms of factions) can't even be played. Certainly the ideals of exploration, thoughtfulness, civilization, and ethics are only present in a very perverted sense. They could have easily done a lot better if they just branched out the types of gameplay from combat. Well, "they" being someone that wasn't Cryptic, probably, since Cryptic hasn't shown any ability to handle non-combat elements with significant skill -- they certainly aren't innovators of any sort there.
Overall the game seems pretty similar from what I've heard of PotBS, and I won't be surprised if it is doing terribly 6 months from now.
Heh, the "beauty" of those "open world" environments was you seldom had more than 50k concurrent users (if not significantly less) and could afford to gamble that they wouldn't all try to congregate in one location. This was also facilitated by the fracturing of the playerbase across multiple independent servers (which is effectively instancing on a grand scale).
I'm a pretty big snob when it comes to MMO's, admitted, there. The rest of you need to do the same and realize that that fact is coloring all of your opinions and perceptions.
When I discovered I got in to the beta for STO I kinda shrugged and said 'meh'. Usually I play a beta with the mind of feeling out how proactive the devs are, how stable the client/server is and generally how the base mechanics of the game feel. With STO I didn't really give a crap because I wasn't expecting much.
So I downloaded it, patched it, made a character that I didn't alter at all because the only thing I really wanted to do was ship combat anyway. Much to my surprise the space combat is actually pretty fun. The starter ship turns really slow, but it's a starter ship....I expect it to have terrible weapons, terrible turning and generally terrible everything. Making an opinions based around how the starter ship handles and everything is just plain silly.
Beyond how terrible the starter ship is I actually like the space combat. The ground combat is...well, it's not /terrible/, but it's still not that great. That doesn't bother me...because, as I said, I don't care about ground combat.
If enough people are like me then maybe Cryptic will have plenty of time to smooth out the ground combat and add more content. Although, to be frank, content design is fairly limited. For example - Let's say it takes a day to lay out and design an average quest and it takes a week to design an incredibly awesome, super in depth quest.
Considering dev time constraints this means you can (in this example) get out seven average quest per 1 super amazing and more easily lay out level progression over a period of time. Which are you going to do as a dev?
I would love more complex missions and quests in mmo's, but there would be fewer of them that diversity across classes would suffer anyway and it would end up being more frustrating.
Yeah the more I've thought about it the more the 'open world' ideal that people have is silly. It's well known that mmo's are specifically designed so that even a single server's population is staggered across multiple zones. Not even the vaunted WoW can stand up to the 'massive' part of a 'concurrent' world.
Before I quite (about two months ago) whenever WG would get near capacity the server would begin to suffer horribly. And that was 120vs120....340 people. Those servers hold up to 8k(?) concurrent users? That's not even 10% of maximum server capacity.
The same thing goes for almost any other mmo out there. Whenever truly large amounts of players congregate in the same zone the entire server will begin to suffer. This makes the idea of a huge, open world a complete myth that is only propagated by zones designed to intentionally sparse out player populations.
Meh, says I .
1 - permadeath would match the IP. Other than Spock, who ever came back from the dead? I realize that with this game's over-indulgence in combat, it would be problematic.
2 - I didn't actually ask for permadeath. People put those words in my mouth. I asked for some sort of death penalty. Combat is devoid of tension when you stand to lose nothing.
As I posted a while back - I would have liked to have a 'emergency warp' option in space combat. Running away from a fight that has gone bad is a major part of Trek. If you don't use that escape option and are destroyed, then you lose your ship and are downgraded in what you can command.
In ground combat - Drach had a very good idea with something like a 'luck' meter, which turns hits into near-misses until it runs out. Those personal shields both break the IP and the spirit of Trek ground combat which was all about using cover and maneuver to win. Now, some of the ground combat design seems interesting (expose/exploit) I admit, but standing around taking repeated phaser blasts screams "not Trek" to me.
Don't even get me started on ranged healing.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Well, diversity between classes is meaningless in this particular game - as there is only one class, but I see your point WRT other games.
Frankly, I would prefer fewer but longer and more involved quests as long as they rewarded the time spent doing them. Same with PvE fights - fewer, but tougher and taking longer to finish.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
I am about to test this game in 3 hours and i am not expecting much,so anything will be a bonus.people can cry and complain all they want about SOE ,but you are not going to get the type of complete content from these other developers as you would from SOE.It does not matter pre cu or after,SOE delivers content,weather you like the content is a matter of taste,but they do deliver content.
I do applaud effort,i am not one of these superficial gamers,that look for some meaningless end game PVP,i login i expect to play and see a good game from day1,i could not care less about endgame.I am so versed in games at this point,i will know what type of effort went into STO in the first 15 minutes.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
1 - permadeath would match the IP. Other than Spock, who ever came back from the dead? I realize that with this game's over-indulgence in combat, it would be problematic.
2 - I didn't actually ask for permadeath. People put those words in my mouth. I asked for some sort of death penalty. Combat is devoid of tension when you stand to lose nothing.
As I posted a while back - I would have liked to have a 'emergency warp' option in space combat. Running away from a fight that has gone bad is a major part of Trek. If you don't use that escape option and are destroyed, then you lose your ship and are downgraded in what you can command.
In ground combat - Drach had a very good idea with something like a 'luck' meter, which turns hits into near-misses until it runs out. Those personal shields both break the IP and the spirit of Trek ground combat which was all about using cover and maneuver to win. Now, some of the ground combat design seems interesting (expose/exploit) I admit, but standing around taking repeated phaser blasts screams "not Trek" to me.
Don't even get me started on ranged healing.
1. Other than Spock, who ever died?
2. The death penalty is that everything resets. Those Klingons you've been whittling down over the past ten minutes? Prepare to spend yet another ten minutes (or more) attempting to kill them all over again if you bite it before they do.
It's effectively the same thing: a timesink, just like *every* other conceivable death penalty (including the one you've proposed).
And a 'luck' meter? What are you, Han Solo?
The ridiculousness of that aside, once again you're talking about the *exact* same thing... it's just a matter of semantics. And btw, I don't know what Star Trek you've been watching, but personal shields are hardly a 'break' in the IP. Borg used them in virtually every episode they appeared in. And given that the setting for this game is THIRTY YEARS after Nemesis, it's far from implausible such technology would be relatively commonplace.
As for 'ranged' healing, it amounts to standing within five feet of someone with a tricorder. You're not a quarterback lobbing hyposprays 'cross the length of a football field. But even if you were, once again it's by no means a stretch for the IP... or are you unfamiliar with the Vidiians?
Never heard of them. Never seen the Federation or Klingons (the two factions in the game) ever do it, though.
Odo's people could shape-shift. Is that justification for every other race/faction to have that ability?
A Cryptic dev admitted that ranged healing wasn't canon, but they added it for fun. Well, a constant reminder that this isn't really Trek isn't fun for me.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Have you played STO yet? No? oh, ok.. so you have no idea how much fun the game actually is?
I pre-ordered the collector's edition after playing on Saturday, because I am having that much fun.
Yes! I can honestly say,i stand by my original thoughts. It is potbs all over again, and perhaps worse with the gross fragmentation of community, lack of motivating story-line, no community crafting, economy, faction drive, etc.
Essentailly the game-play boils down to, as someone else mentioned, you having a starship and you blowing up an endless stream of bad guys; a rudamentary shooter.
Im sure you wont have buyers remorse for dolling out almost $300 for a linear space-shooter, but boy, I wish I thought of it first.
Didn't JJ Abram's sexed up reboot beat them all?
Depends on how you look at it.
When Wrath of Khan premiered it broke the record for highest grossing opening weekend for a film. Ever. You may not remember but I do, and it was a big deal to go see it at the time. Of course that was 1982 dollars so the bottom line looks much bigger for the newest film. And if you were to calculate Khan's take in 2009 dollars, the new film would probably still win.
That having been said, that's kind of the point: the last real hit for the franchise was way back in 82. And you know what? Apart from its hate crimes against astrophysics I found that the latest flick did exactly what needed to be done, which was to divorce Star Trek from the boring technobabble of the TNG+ era. Ok, so maybe it's a little on the ADD side of pacing but hey -- it's Captain Kirk kicking someone's ass, and that's good Star Trek to me.
Didn't JJ Abram's sexed up reboot beat them all?
Depends on how you look at it.
When Wrath of Khan premiered it broke the record for highest grossing opening weekend for a film. Ever. You may not remember but I do, and it was a big deal to go see it at the time. Of course that was 1982 dollars so the bottom line looks much bigger for the newest film. And if you were to calculate Khan's take in 2009 dollars, the new film would probably still win.
Star Trek IV made more money than II. Anyhow, it isn't directly comparable with modern movies as the industry and consumer habits have changed a lot, as well as the prices. VI was pretty popular as well.
Really the only thing the TNG movies prove is that they were bad movies. The new movie only shows that people will watch idiotic action flicks regardless of the IP. Neither is surprising, and neither does anything to demonstrate that a more thoughtful movie would have done badly.