Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Star Trek Online: DevLog 3.0
Szark
News ManagerMember Posts: 4,420
The Star Trek Online official site has been updated with the third installment of their DevLog series. DevLog 3.0 focuses on the process of taking concept art and seeing the vision realized in the game.
Welcome back to the STO DevLog, a recurring glimpse into the planning, plotting and production of Star Trek Online, the game so big it takes half the galaxy to tell it.
For this installment we'd like to mix things up a bit. For the past couple of months we've closed out the DevLog with stunning pieces of concept art, showing off the elite skills of our concept team.
This time around, we'd like to start with one of these boffo images, and take everyone on a whirlwind tour of how they're broken into increasingly tiny pieces.
Let's start with the snazzy "Vulcan Village" concept by Ryan Dening that we shared in last months' DevLog:
That's darned pretty, but if we're going to build more than one Vulcan-style village in Star Trek Online (and we are), this beautiful drawing will have to be broken down into its component parts, so that our modelers and texture artists can create dozens of bits and pieces that can be easily be re-assembled into a nigh-infinite variety of combinations. This process is usually handed off to a member of the concept team, who has "ownership" of the concept breakdown.
;)
Read more here.
Comments
This post is a little old (like a week) as the date posted on official site was Oct 1st and www.startrek-online.net had it posted a week before that.
Thank you for also pointing this out. Is this late news a new problem, or just something I've never noticed before?
LOL lets not forget to point out who is making this game!
PE they couldn't ven make GnH. I mean they couldn't even get the server stability under control. maybe if stability wasn't an issue with GnH I might think different.
Sorry no way will STO be successful. GL Perpetual you all have now officially made it clear your one step above the DL makers but 3 steps behind Funcom.
You're holding up Funcom as a standard? You're on crack. Two words: Anarchy Online.
You're holding up Funcom as a standard? You're on crack. Two words: Anarchy Online.
I think that's the whole point, get it?
You're holding up Funcom as a standard? You're on crack. Two words: Anarchy Online.
Ao has lasted more than six years.It now has brand new servers, is getting a new graphics engine with all the bells and whistles within the next year, and new updated graphics are inline after that. All of this provided by work done on AoC, which happens to be one of the most anticipated mmorpgs coming out. The World is also currently in development.
Perpetual couldn't even get their first game ( already 85% complete) out of the starter gate. Success on making good on a Star Trek mmo, one of the most prolific IPs ever, is highly doubtful.
So, which one is on crack, now?
Are you actually defending Funcom? Then the crackhead in question would be you.
AO was totally buggy for a year after launch, the devs ignored beta testers begging them not to go gold, the devs completely ignored hundreds of reports about the double armor bug, the only time a quick patch came out was when Yalmahas were dropping in chests at an ultra-high rate, and they only saved the game as a commercial product by adding the fantasy-looking Shadowlands. The adding of yet another fantasy realm was the clincher. If I wanted a fantasy game, I could have stayed in EQ.
As I wrote in 2002 on the many, many, many reasons why I left.......................
No Linux version. This was one of the reasons I came to AO from EQ. They just dropped it.
Bugs. See the official bulletin boards—if they haven't been erased yet—for a complete listing. My favorite was the one where you would get disconnected deep in a dungeon, relog, and find out that every mob in the dungeon had respawned.
Early release. The beta testers begged the devs not to release the game in it's buggy initial state. Anarchy Online isn't ready for retail now, and it sure as hell wasn't ready then.
No xp payback from bugs. If bugs were few and far between, I could rationalize this, but ARKs would tell you to your virtual face that Funcom knew there were lots of problems, but it was against Funcom policy to reimburse anything.
No guild support. A lot of cool stuff that should have been in from day one still isn't in. Guild housing is still absent, and the bank was added only recently. Part of what makes AO a bland levelling treadmill is the lack of support for guild customization, guild housing, et cetera.
No apartment upgrades. Same idea. If the devs would have fixed the stupid 10-item bug in the apartments, I would have spent time customizing my apartment when I got bored with killing yet another Omni stooge.
No character customization. We were promised "head shops" to change the look of our characters. Not even mentioned since beta.
Illuvatar. They couldn't even keep their stories straight when a friend of a dev got to move his character from RK1 to RK2.
Minimum damage bug. They were being told about this forever, and ignored the reports over and over again. Finally, months later, they admitted that the AC of the mobs was being added in twice.
Adding deliberate timesinks. From the beginning, the devs thought that, unlike every other MMORPG, no one would level really fast the first few monthsin Anarchy Online! Because the devs got the levelling curve all wrong, they started adding mob debuffs to add downtime and adding mob hit points and nano to slow us down. The effect is that everything in this game is severely underconned. At level 64, I had to kill 120-140 mobs to level. Compare this to 40 mobs around level 20.
Erasing of beta boards. To cover up the buggy state of the retail release, the devs erased the beta boards, including the bug reports, the posts by testers begging them not to release, and statements from some of those who had been waiting the longest time that they were leaving.
Bugs reported on test making it to live. This is just insulting. The 13.8 patch didn't even fix the minimum damage bug! That had to wait until 13.9, and I remain convinced that the only reason we saw 13.9 so quickly was that 13.8 was giving out lots of Yalmahas in the mission chests. All this happened despite the fact that these bugs and many others were reported by the 13.8 playetesters!
Adding more dimensions instead of folding existing ones. One of the reasons I moved from EQ was the fact that EQ didn't follow through on initial plans for long-term effects of player actions, like taking over territory. One of the reasons this couldn't happen was that there was no way to coordinate a story line over 30 different worlds! Now, instead of folding up the ill-begotten and misconceived Rubi Ka 2, the devs have added a new dimension! I interpret this as meaning that there will be no storyline ever.
Asking money for an expansion. The initial release isn't even debugged and balanced, effectively being in a player-paid beta mode, and they have the nerve to ask for more money?
Soloing not supported. The devs claimed that you would be able to solo. Technically you can solo, but the rate of xp gathering between soloing and a team of six is running about 10 or 12 to 1 at level 64. Soloing is theoretically possible, but not even remotely practical if you HAVE A JOB!!!
Gee Geno, you had a bad experience with Funcom. Big deal, most of the other devs in the genre have players with similar experiences.
If you had taken the time to play AO lately, it is a much better game although the graphics are pretty old school now. AO is not a great game, but yet not a bad game either. Let's hope they have learned from their mistakes.
As to Perpetual, all you have to do is read their forums, they have a really wierd idea what a STO MMO should be. I cannot imagine that it will be very successful, they have a complete lack of understanding of what a MMO should be.
Are you actually defending Funcom? Then the crackhead in question would be you.
AO was totally buggy for a year after launch, the devs ignored beta testers begging them not to go gold, the devs completely ignored hundreds of reports about the double armor bug, the only time a quick patch came out was when Yalmahas were dropping in chests at an ultra-high rate, and they only saved the game as a commercial product by adding the fantasy-looking Shadowlands. The adding of yet another fantasy realm was the clincher. If I wanted a fantasy game, I could have stayed in EQ.
As I wrote in 2002 on the many, many, many reasons why I left.......................
Number 1: AO actually launched.
Number 2: AO is sill alive and well.
Number 3: You are using what you wrote in 2002 to substantiate your current argument in 2007? Put the pipe down.
Edit: by the way, every little "fault" you listed in your "review" has been solved long ago. Welcome to 2007, go play the actual game you critique.
I read the Devlog (to get back on topic here -- don't care about AO). Wow your standard library....where have I seen this before....oh yeah SWG where almost every building in every city on every planet was the same (at least the ones you could enter in). I think Tatooine had a few different cantina designs....
This is such a lame cost-cutting approach to MMO design. It makes the worlds feel generic, and deprives them of character.
Say what you will about LOTRO, but at least all the functional buildings are DIFFERENT. This is important to immersion in a world created by diverse peoples even within a culture. Cookie-cutter buildings rearranged to form different villages isn't fooling anyone (okay, maybe it fools some people).
_____________________________
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/
Unless STO is done by some one else, its DOA..if it gets completion at all. As for Funcom, AO had bugs, so what, it is still supported and from what I hear ppl still play it so Funcom learned from there investment. And to bump Funcom and discredit them.......does that mean Age of Conan is gonna stink?
OK so I never played AO, and so I can't say anything good or bad on that topic... but look at how it affects who is the crack head on logic thought process.
So you claim Funcom released AO and it had issues in 2002.. it was their first game and they now can learn from these mistakes moving forward into AoC
Can perpetual say they have had a game up for 6 years? That issues croped up and were dealt with, learned from, bugs squashed, patches updated, expansions planned and implemented?
No MMO goes out flawless, and problem free. Just as no person doing anything for the first time is an expert. Funcom may have had problems with the AO launch, but at least they have a track record, and a little experience in this market.
Perpetual has had STO since 2004 and no previous forray into MMO production, maintenance, upkeep, or expansions. Many STO hopefull were glad G&H was comming first to let that game stink, and give the what not to do problems an avenue to run without hampering STO.
Do you really think Perpetual can deliver a better product in STO, than Funcom will be able to produce with AoC? Having no pervious oportunities to run, code, patch, or fix anything?
If your in a fantasy football league, do you select a rookie quarterback without a single NFL snap to his credit, and bet heavily on his odds of a superbowl win against say Bret Farve, Tom Brady, or Peyton Manning?
You gain experiance by doing, and Perpetual Ent has only proved they can cancel a MMO that was at the point of accepting pre-orders on their official site. No learning curve to get the early bumps undercontrol for a smotther STO launch..
Yeah that screams of a confidence booster
Mankind is not limited by imagination, but the courage to reach....
Originally posted by HandsomeRob
No MMO goes out flawless, and problem free. Just as no person doing anything for the first time is an expert. Funcom may have had problems with the AO launch, but at least they have a track record, and a little experience in this market.
Hey, you're mis-characterizing what I said.
I was in EQ back in December of 1999 when EQ frequently consisted of three or four hours in the pre-world chatroom complaining about the server being down. I'm not criticizing AO for having technical issues. I hate Funcom five years later because of their crappy attitude and mismanagement. They were compulsive over-promisers, they ignored the playerbase including their player bug-testers, they showed favoritism to their buddies and they changed the theme and feel of the game from sci-fi to fantasy.
Those aren't technical problems or bugs. Those are profound attitude problems on Funcom's part. If you reread my 2002 comments, you'll see that bugs were a small part of why I left, in the context of the poor handling of the problems.
And to be absolutely clear, I say this about a world that, to this day, I still think of as remarkably beautiful. I've never since been in an MMO that had the huge and gorgeous environments AO had.
But I will never trust Funcom.