Having seen all the shows(even managed to sit through all of enterprise) and seen all the films bar the last one, mostly what the crew seemed to do is chat. I think the idea is that they man the stations and monitor the screens and don't actually do anything until needed. The tactical officer will only monitor for threats most of the time, science officer for anything interesting that shows up on scanners, communication for such etc.
Don't forget most of the people calling for player run ships have also unilaterally decided that star trek isn't about conflict and any online version must be an enterprise simulator and with the size of star trek ships you'll end up with only 1 per server
That is completely untrue. I've never heard anyone calling for that.Then you obviously haven't been posting in these threads for long as the reason I wrote this is because this seems to be exactly what alot of people seem to want and think and believe that's what we should all want and think Also just because you're incapable of imagining how players could play crewmembers in no way means it can't be done. Also, that YOU or others would find such play boring in no way means it couldn't be provided for those that wouldn't find it boring WHILE keeping the singleplayer/npc setup you want. Maybe you could point to where I said anything of the sor, I for one favour an actual working bridge view for a sense of immersion and couldn't that also be used for those wanting to replace the npc's with players, I mean after all this is meant to be an rpg so the ability to rp a crewmember should be there somewhere for those that want.So whats the problem? The problem comes when people call for an sto that doesn't have the choice and that anyone playing most only be part of a player run crew in an sto that conforms only to what their opinion of what sto should be
Having seen all the shows(even managed to sit through all of enterprise) and seen all the films bar the last one, mostly what the crew seemed to do is chat. I think the idea is that they man the stations and monitor the screens and don't actually do anything until needed. The tactical officer will only monitor for threats most of the time, science officer for anything interesting that shows up on scanners, communication for such etc.
Don't forget most of the people calling for player run ships have also unilaterally decided that star trek isn't about conflict and any online version must be an enterprise simulator and with the size of star trek ships you'll end up with only 1 per server
I wouldn't say unilaterally. I will say that some of my favorite episodes involve watching the crew avoid FIGHTING which isn't the same thing as conflict. One can have conflict and tension without resorting to the lazy, last-ditch dramatic tool of combat. And I would argue that it is only after ever OTHER avenue has been attempted does combative drama feel real and earned. The last two seasons of DS9 are a good example of that. You had a lot of non-combative conflict that heightens dramatic tension leading up to the war.I have to completely agree with this and add a reference to the like of data's sherlock holmes episodes which are conflict without the violence, but it still seems obsurd to me how people can say that star trek isn't about conflict, since it's a very big part of the star trek universe both inside and outside of the enterprise and it's crew, as is exploration and interaction In today's MMO's, all we get is 'the war' portion, and it feels lame.This is probably going to go down as complete sacrilage to the swg vets but i enjoyed playing a crafter in swg at least partly because it was a non-com profession. I guess it's hard to design a game with options for resolving conflict other than violence(especially if you aren't really bothering in the first place)
And the whole conard that STO must be an enterprise simulator is a straw man argument that has been debunked on every sight where it's appeared. Why people continue to use it, knowing full well it has been refuted, is beyond me. I guess it's to win the interwebs. Guess they're the same as any fanboy and are trying to control the opinions posted to get the game that they want
Let me get this straight, so the Bridge is just going to be a glorified 10-forward?
...with potential for future interaction. Yah, where have we all heard that before? Lets hope Cryptic gets the foundation of this game set and can move forward to these features.
And still it rages on..... I will never understand a core of players obsessions with having other players filling in roles on the bridge, I posted about this loads in the Official Forums. Yet soon as they go 'Yeah we will add bridges as a social aspect' this core once again starts up with 'Want player manned stations' chant again As people have already said it would represent a MAJOR shift in game concept and for these reasons 1) A ship with player manned stations will ALWAYS be superior to a ship with AI manned stations, thus giving groups of people on one ship and advantage over solo players 2) just how do you make player manned stations exciting? 'Engineering, transfer more power to shields *click* ahh am done' 3) Player manned ships would suffer from the lag and disconnects that occur on the interwebs daily, in middle of combat your tactical officer suddenly loses connection 'Fire Phasers.....Fire...damn it Tactical is LD again, someone fire the phasers' 'But captain I cannae fire phasers I am an engineer, oh let me try this button' *Warp Core Ejection in 5...4...3...2....1* 'Crap there goes the neighbourhood' I am all for customisable bridges, this is the first step to enhancing the custom aspect of ships, get you Defiant with extra tactical stations or maybe extra engineering stations etc
You may have posted loads (of BS), but it is painfully obvious that you haven't internalized the rebuttals to your very sophomoric arguments.
1). You mean they're superior just like, uhm groups of players are superior to solo players? What a tremendous grasp of the obvious.
2). Exciting? Oh, I don't know, how does one make any group combat exciting? I suppose my healer in a fantasy game could just have a group heal over time that heals 20,000 damage per second -- he'd only have to hit his skill once, then sit back. But then that would be poor game design, wouldn't it? You see, it can go both ways. One could, if they had sufficient creative ability, invent a similar time intensive tasking system for each station on the ship, just as you have time intensive tasks for a tank, a healer, a dps class, etc.
As a Hunter in LoTRO, I have several options in a group. I have my attack skills, I have some crowd control, I have healing (self and poison). At any one moment, I'm assessing and analyzing the situation to see which skill to use. Mostly I'm DPSing, but the situation is fluid. My health goes down, I pop a self heal. Oi, our Minstrel has been poisoned, so I target him and cure poison, then it's back to DPS.
So now I imagine myself Weapons Officer in our ideal STO. I'm at the Weapons Station. I'm DPSing with phasors. Oi, the cooldown on my photon torpedoes has finished, so I fire another volley. But now I'm getting reports that the enemy ship is phasing its shields, so I have to hit another skill that allows me to adjust my phasor frequencies. And then, suddenly, the enemy has beamed a boarding party aboard the ship. I have another skill that directs a security team to the location I need them. If the boarding team lands on the bridge where I'm at, I can actually leave my station to fight if need be. Maybe I have to fight the boarding party AND some how fire phasors at the same time, defending my weapons console from destruction.
You know, I could go on. But I suspect you, like undoubtedly countless other times, will fail to internalize this answer. It will wash over you in your determination to be right on the interwebs.
3). Yeah, what the poster above said. Disconnects happen in groups...in Raids, it happens solo. So your point is a non-issue. But I might add that with a proper STO implementation, if a crew member goes LD, the ship AI could take over and you'd be in a better situation than say your typical Fantasy Raid situation.
It could stem from the fact that you use LOTRO as an example and it is currently my favorite game but your ideas sound exciting to say the least. It doesn't really sway my desire to see the game as designed but I could actually imagine the way you envision it pulled of successfully to say the least.
Thank you for being reasonable. (I'm enjoying LoTRO as well, btw). My example is crude -- I'm not a game designer. I just feel there's a vast failure of imagination in many MMOs these days. STO happens to be at the forefront in my book in this regard. Perhaps Cryptic is being timid because of pressure from Paramount, and they need to play it safe. I don't know.
I agree that there are many ways to make multi-crew a possiblity, and I also agree that there is a failure of steping out of the mold and being a pioneer in the MMORPG genre, unfortunatelly for us the players, it has become a very big business that involves quite big investments and when there is lots of money to be risked, there is also a host of people whose job is to make sure the risk is minimised as much as possible, and hence, there is actually people that make decisions based upon what the average and majority of players would like in such a game.
So the problem is really financial really not creative in nature, if the devs had the go ahead for making a multi-crew game they would I am sure come up with many types of mechanics that would make the multi crew viable, but I fear they do not have that linency.
No one will actually risk multiple tens of millions of dollars to see if it would work and if players would embrace it. It is unfortunate not only for the players but for the genre as a whole since it seems to be pidgeonholed in to the same design parameters, and only the backdrop is actually different (fantasy, Sci-fi, post apocaliptic, Historical setting etc)..but same old same ol gameplay.
The only ones that can change the genre are the ones that have set the standard...so untill Blizzard comes up with something different to open the way for all the rest, the rest will continue to go like sheep to the pastures that blizzard has opened up.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Not to sound negative tho. But Cryptic AGAIN misses by a 100 yard mark!
Cryptic still doesn't get it and what the Star Trek franchise is about.
Opening up the bridge for people to gather as social hub is FAIL! Sorry but it is.
The bridge is NOT a social hub! So instead, as every player remains captain and captain only. Cryptic could have opened up the Ship's cantina instead, with bar and plenty of places to sit, instead! Would have been much better as just a social hub.
The moment they open up the bridge for more players to access one would expect multi-player manned stations. You know. On the bridge the officers are at work!
So this news just sounds like Cryptic shifting to panic mode, after they notice all the negativity on the internet about their game, so they make a rush decision with a rush solution with this Bridge as social hub thing.
Here's a thought; How will Cryptic adapt the Nemesis System from CO into STO? Its a feature unique to thier company so why not? I can think of a few reason but it might happen.
It could be a Gorn Battleship with a notorious captain, a betrayed Andorian freelancer or a Klingon General out to avenge his family's honor to your Federation Captain. Maybe it could be all three as it might require you to make them as you advance. At any rate, this would allow for more "combat" encounters. Some will love this, other will view it as more pew pew for the fire.
You seriously need to read more up on the Bridges added in the game. This is not for realism: The fans WANTED it. Sorry that your disappointed and all but this game is not just for Star Trek fans. JJ Abrams' Star Trek ( though not all that great to me) was hit because it deviated from the traditional concept.
STO is the chance to play an MMO in the Star Trek universe and that universe is always changing. Get used to it and jump onboard.
You seriously need to read more up on the Bridges added in the game. This is not for realism: The fans WANTED it. Sorry that your disappointed and all but this game is not just for Star Trek fans. JJ Abrams' Star Trek ( though not all that great to me) was hit because it deviated from the traditional concept. STO is the chance to play an MMO in the Star Trek universe and that universe is always changing. Get used to it and jump onboard.
KK, how did JJ Abrams' Star Trek deviate from the traditional concept? The alternate reality is a given but how did it change the "traditional concept"?
You seriously need to read more up on the Bridges added in the game. This is not for realism: The fans WANTED it. Sorry that your disappointed and all but this game is not just for Star Trek fans. JJ Abrams' Star Trek ( though not all that great to me) was hit because it deviated from the traditional concept. STO is the chance to play an MMO in the Star Trek universe and that universe is always changing. Get used to it and jump onboard.
So which game are you abandoning to play Star Trek?
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
You seriously need to read more up on the Bridges added in the game. This is not for realism: The fans WANTED it. Sorry that your disappointed and all but this game is not just for Star Trek fans. JJ Abrams' Star Trek ( though not all that great to me) was hit because it deviated from the traditional concept. STO is the chance to play an MMO in the Star Trek universe and that universe is always changing. Get used to it and jump onboard.
KK, how did JJ Abrams' Star Trek deviate from the traditional concept? The alternate reality is a given but how did it change the "traditional concept"?
well for starters they made Spok more emotional then a flamming liberache queer at a wedding....
KK, how did JJ Abrams' Star Trek deviate from the traditional concept? The alternate reality is a given but how did it change the "traditional concept"?
There's a reason it is called a Star Trek reboot. The entire set is redone, cast redone, the timeline is changed. So they didn't add onto Nemesis or tie up some of the loose ends in the existing lore: they remade the entire ST universe!
So which game are you abandoning to play Star Trek?
All the MMOs I play I will be leaving for STO. Aion and WOW (well a friend is paying me to help him in WoW). I will not be abandoning my FPS: like CoD: MW2, HL2: DM, BF2, and others RTS.
well for starters they made Spok more emotional then a flamming liberache queer at a wedding....
LOL, good call!
The problem I see in posters flaming STO is that they are trying todiscredit a game they have never played all based unfounded accusation. Constructive criticism is fine, Even complaining about paying a life-time sub to CO and not being invited to Beta is fine. But why choose to just rail on STO? There are many worse games out there.
Comments
Having seen all the shows(even managed to sit through all of enterprise) and seen all the films bar the last one, mostly what the crew seemed to do is chat. I think the idea is that they man the stations and monitor the screens and don't actually do anything until needed. The tactical officer will only monitor for threats most of the time, science officer for anything interesting that shows up on scanners, communication for such etc.
Don't forget most of the people calling for player run ships have also unilaterally decided that star trek isn't about conflict and any online version must be an enterprise simulator and with the size of star trek ships you'll end up with only 1 per server
That is completely untrue. I've never heard anyone calling for that.Then you obviously haven't been posting in these threads for long as the reason I wrote this is because this seems to be exactly what alot of people seem to want and think and believe that's what we should all want and think Also just because you're incapable of imagining how players could play crewmembers in no way means it can't be done. Also, that YOU or others would find such play boring in no way means it couldn't be provided for those that wouldn't find it boring WHILE keeping the singleplayer/npc setup you want. Maybe you could point to where I said anything of the sor, I for one favour an actual working bridge view for a sense of immersion and couldn't that also be used for those wanting to replace the npc's with players, I mean after all this is meant to be an rpg so the ability to rp a crewmember should be there somewhere for those that want.So whats the problem? The problem comes when people call for an sto that doesn't have the choice and that anyone playing most only be part of a player run crew in an sto that conforms only to what their opinion of what sto should be
Having seen all the shows(even managed to sit through all of enterprise) and seen all the films bar the last one, mostly what the crew seemed to do is chat. I think the idea is that they man the stations and monitor the screens and don't actually do anything until needed. The tactical officer will only monitor for threats most of the time, science officer for anything interesting that shows up on scanners, communication for such etc.
Don't forget most of the people calling for player run ships have also unilaterally decided that star trek isn't about conflict and any online version must be an enterprise simulator and with the size of star trek ships you'll end up with only 1 per server
I wouldn't say unilaterally. I will say that some of my favorite episodes involve watching the crew avoid FIGHTING which isn't the same thing as conflict. One can have conflict and tension without resorting to the lazy, last-ditch dramatic tool of combat. And I would argue that it is only after ever OTHER avenue has been attempted does combative drama feel real and earned. The last two seasons of DS9 are a good example of that. You had a lot of non-combative conflict that heightens dramatic tension leading up to the war.I have to completely agree with this and add a reference to the like of data's sherlock holmes episodes which are conflict without the violence, but it still seems obsurd to me how people can say that star trek isn't about conflict, since it's a very big part of the star trek universe both inside and outside of the enterprise and it's crew, as is exploration and interaction In today's MMO's, all we get is 'the war' portion, and it feels lame.This is probably going to go down as complete sacrilage to the swg vets but i enjoyed playing a crafter in swg at least partly because it was a non-com profession. I guess it's hard to design a game with options for resolving conflict other than violence(especially if you aren't really bothering in the first place)
And the whole conard that STO must be an enterprise simulator is a straw man argument that has been debunked on every sight where it's appeared. Why people continue to use it, knowing full well it has been refuted, is beyond me. I guess it's to win the interwebs. Guess they're the same as any fanboy and are trying to control the opinions posted to get the game that they want
Let me get this straight, so the Bridge is just going to be a glorified 10-forward?
No signature, I don't have a pen
...with potential for future interaction. Yah, where have we all heard that before? Lets hope Cryptic gets the foundation of this game set and can move forward to these features.
You may have posted loads (of BS), but it is painfully obvious that you haven't internalized the rebuttals to your very sophomoric arguments.
1). You mean they're superior just like, uhm groups of players are superior to solo players? What a tremendous grasp of the obvious.
2). Exciting? Oh, I don't know, how does one make any group combat exciting? I suppose my healer in a fantasy game could just have a group heal over time that heals 20,000 damage per second -- he'd only have to hit his skill once, then sit back. But then that would be poor game design, wouldn't it? You see, it can go both ways. One could, if they had sufficient creative ability, invent a similar time intensive tasking system for each station on the ship, just as you have time intensive tasks for a tank, a healer, a dps class, etc.
As a Hunter in LoTRO, I have several options in a group. I have my attack skills, I have some crowd control, I have healing (self and poison). At any one moment, I'm assessing and analyzing the situation to see which skill to use. Mostly I'm DPSing, but the situation is fluid. My health goes down, I pop a self heal. Oi, our Minstrel has been poisoned, so I target him and cure poison, then it's back to DPS.
So now I imagine myself Weapons Officer in our ideal STO. I'm at the Weapons Station. I'm DPSing with phasors. Oi, the cooldown on my photon torpedoes has finished, so I fire another volley. But now I'm getting reports that the enemy ship is phasing its shields, so I have to hit another skill that allows me to adjust my phasor frequencies. And then, suddenly, the enemy has beamed a boarding party aboard the ship. I have another skill that directs a security team to the location I need them. If the boarding team lands on the bridge where I'm at, I can actually leave my station to fight if need be. Maybe I have to fight the boarding party AND some how fire phasors at the same time, defending my weapons console from destruction.
You know, I could go on. But I suspect you, like undoubtedly countless other times, will fail to internalize this answer. It will wash over you in your determination to be right on the interwebs.
3). Yeah, what the poster above said. Disconnects happen in groups...in Raids, it happens solo. So your point is a non-issue. But I might add that with a proper STO implementation, if a crew member goes LD, the ship AI could take over and you'd be in a better situation than say your typical Fantasy Raid situation.
It could stem from the fact that you use LOTRO as an example and it is currently my favorite game but your ideas sound exciting to say the least. It doesn't really sway my desire to see the game as designed but I could actually imagine the way you envision it pulled of successfully to say the least.
Thank you for being reasonable. (I'm enjoying LoTRO as well, btw). My example is crude -- I'm not a game designer. I just feel there's a vast failure of imagination in many MMOs these days. STO happens to be at the forefront in my book in this regard. Perhaps Cryptic is being timid because of pressure from Paramount, and they need to play it safe. I don't know.
I agree that there are many ways to make multi-crew a possiblity, and I also agree that there is a failure of steping out of the mold and being a pioneer in the MMORPG genre, unfortunatelly for us the players, it has become a very big business that involves quite big investments and when there is lots of money to be risked, there is also a host of people whose job is to make sure the risk is minimised as much as possible, and hence, there is actually people that make decisions based upon what the average and majority of players would like in such a game.
So the problem is really financial really not creative in nature, if the devs had the go ahead for making a multi-crew game they would I am sure come up with many types of mechanics that would make the multi crew viable, but I fear they do not have that linency.
No one will actually risk multiple tens of millions of dollars to see if it would work and if players would embrace it. It is unfortunate not only for the players but for the genre as a whole since it seems to be pidgeonholed in to the same design parameters, and only the backdrop is actually different (fantasy, Sci-fi, post apocaliptic, Historical setting etc)..but same old same ol gameplay.
The only ones that can change the genre are the ones that have set the standard...so untill Blizzard comes up with something different to open the way for all the rest, the rest will continue to go like sheep to the pastures that blizzard has opened up.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Not to sound negative tho. But Cryptic AGAIN misses by a 100 yard mark!
Cryptic still doesn't get it and what the Star Trek franchise is about.
Opening up the bridge for people to gather as social hub is FAIL! Sorry but it is.
The bridge is NOT a social hub! So instead, as every player remains captain and captain only. Cryptic could have opened up the Ship's cantina instead, with bar and plenty of places to sit, instead! Would have been much better as just a social hub.
The moment they open up the bridge for more players to access one would expect multi-player manned stations. You know. On the bridge the officers are at work!
So this news just sounds like Cryptic shifting to panic mode, after they notice all the negativity on the internet about their game, so they make a rush decision with a rush solution with this Bridge as social hub thing.
/facepalm
Here's a thought; How will Cryptic adapt the Nemesis System from CO into STO? Its a feature unique to thier company so why not? I can think of a few reason but it might happen.
It could be a Gorn Battleship with a notorious captain, a betrayed Andorian freelancer or a Klingon General out to avenge his family's honor to your Federation Captain. Maybe it could be all three as it might require you to make them as you advance. At any rate, this would allow for more "combat" encounters. Some will love this, other will view it as more pew pew for the fire.
You seriously need to read more up on the Bridges added in the game. This is not for realism: The fans WANTED it. Sorry that your disappointed and all but this game is not just for Star Trek fans. JJ Abrams' Star Trek ( though not all that great to me) was hit because it deviated from the traditional concept.
STO is the chance to play an MMO in the Star Trek universe and that universe is always changing. Get used to it and jump onboard.
Would Ryker really say that?
KK, how did JJ Abrams' Star Trek deviate from the traditional concept? The alternate reality is a given but how did it change the "traditional concept"?
So which game are you abandoning to play Star Trek?
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
KK, how did JJ Abrams' Star Trek deviate from the traditional concept? The alternate reality is a given but how did it change the "traditional concept"?
well for starters they made Spok more emotional then a flamming liberache queer at a wedding....
KK, how did JJ Abrams' Star Trek deviate from the traditional concept? The alternate reality is a given but how did it change the "traditional concept"?
There's a reason it is called a Star Trek reboot. The entire set is redone, cast redone, the timeline is changed. So they didn't add onto Nemesis or tie up some of the loose ends in the existing lore: they remade the entire ST universe!
So which game are you abandoning to play Star Trek?
All the MMOs I play I will be leaving for STO. Aion and WOW (well a friend is paying me to help him in WoW). I will not be abandoning my FPS: like CoD: MW2, HL2: DM, BF2, and others RTS.
well for starters they made Spok more emotional then a flamming liberache queer at a wedding....
LOL, good call!
The problem I see in posters flaming STO is that they are trying todiscredit a game they have never played all based unfounded accusation. Constructive criticism is fine, Even complaining about paying a life-time sub to CO and not being invited to Beta is fine. But why choose to just rail on STO? There are many worse games out there.
For all those interested, here's a link!
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/setView/videos/gameID/352/videoId/1560
Those who hope the game will fail..don't bother.
Would Ryker really say that?