Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
STO vs. Star Trek
Rollgunner
Member UncommonPosts: 61
At some point very early in the design process, I’m sure this showed up on a whiteboard:
“How do we make Star Trek into a MMO?”
Based on my experiences, somewhere along the process, that mission statement changed into this:
“How do we make a MMO into Star Trek?”
When I’d first heard that Star Trek was being made into a MMO, there were two things that I decided would really cement the ‘Star Trek Experience’ for me, and that I felt would have to be addressed. In the current state of STO, they have not. That having been said, Here's some constructive criticism:
In Star Trek, violence is always a very last resort, reluctantly pursued when all other options fail.
In every episode of every series and every movie, the Star Fleet Heroes only fight when they must. Why, then, is the default setting for every combat mission in this game to fight to the death? Shouldn’t there be an option to resolve the problem by some means other than force? A dialogue tree, perhaps, influenced by skills that a character might have in negotiation? Or Science? Or Engineering? Or Tactical? Something that would at least give you a chance to avoid “solving” every confrontation with a phaser? Or even allowing them to surrender when their ship is beaten to a pulp?
I’m convinced that the first game to truly break the “kill 10 rats” mold for questing has a chance to hit it big. I can’t tell you how that will be done, but I suspect that variety may have a hand in it. Make quests that are completable in more than one way. Again, this sounds like a natural choice for a Star Trek IP : You can help the Pirates with their leaky reactor, or follow the governor’s orders and destroy them. If you choose to destroy them, you can fight in space, or fight on the planet. And in Star Trek, things are very rarely as they first seem to be… Who is really the "bad guy" here? the Pirates? The Governor? Are they working together to steal your ship ?
Making content that *isn't* Kill 10 Rats is harder... but more rewarding for the player. Conflict resolution is at the very heart of Star Trek, and if well done, it can be just as rewarding as blasting someone out of space.
But In Star Trek, the conflict that ends in violence should be the exception rather than the rule. Or at the very least, because this *is* a game, it shouldn’t be the 99% likelihood that it is now.
That does open a can of worms in a different are of the game though: If we don’t ‘Kill’, how do we ‘Loot’ ? Well, that ties directly into the second thing I’d hoped for from a Star Trek MMO:
In Star Trek, humans are driven by other forces than the antiquated desire to accumulate wealth.
If there were ever a game in which breaking the “loot treadmill” mold were more appropriate, I can’t think of what that game would be. And this game design came so *very* close to doing it; Only the mental switch had to be thrown…
“Consumables”, such as hyposprays, power cells, ship weapon powerups and the like could still drop from combat, since if you choose to do combat, you’ll need ‘em.
But what we think of as “real loot”, the permanent buffs to our ships and characters; weapons, shields, kits, and the like *don’t need* to drop from things we kill.
This is a game we’re playing, and so we do, by tradition, need new things to help us be better at what we do. How will we get such things if not by the loot system? The alternate system is already in the game. There are four currencies in the game right now. Pay us for our successful conflict resolution (whether it be by the sword or by the word) in one of those currencies. Many missions already award Skill points, BO skill points and/or Reknown, just toss in the Energy Credits as well. Perhaps a mission rewards window might include a Science Console, Tricorder, or a handful of Science Officer BO skill points as choices.
Let us decide whether or not to spend those awards on ourselves, our ships or our gear.
This is probably coming a day late and a dollar short, but I felt compelled to say it because I truly believe that the implementation of these systems would go a huge distance towards making the game feel like the “Star Trek MMO” that so many of us had been hoping for, instead of the “MMO port of Star Trek” that many of us feel that we’ve gotten.
Comments
StarWars: TOR will be the first to do it, as far as I know. Multiple dialogue path, and the possibility to complete quests without fighting.
You have hit the nail firmly and directly on the head for how I feel about this as well. I knew from past experience and what we had been shown and told over the past several months that we weren't going to be getting the Star Trek MMO that should be made. I was hoping though that it would turn out to be at least palatable...
To be perfectly honest though I have a big problem with almost every major design decision that has been made with STO, and the most glaring are the ones that you have pointed out. I could write a laundry list of points but I won't even bother derailing your thread with them. Suffice it to say that this isn't the Star Trek Online that i think the majority of fans were looking for, not even close. Which is a really terribly sad and unfortunate waste of an awesome IP.
-------------------------
"Searchers after horror haunt strange, far places..." ~ H.P.Lovecraft, "From Beyond"
Member Since March 2004
You might recall though, in Star Trek TNG, there was an episode where there was a time anomaly where the enterprise shifted back and forth from the normal reality to a reality where they were at war with the Klingons. It's been a while since I saw it, but I'm pretty sure the point of the whole episode was how differently that "last resort" was used due to that war footing.
This game is set in a time of war.
There's an argument to be had that it SHOULDN'T be set in a time of war as that's not how most the series' operated. But on a war footing, "Fire at Will" is certainly in the trek vocabulary.
PS: This is certainly the same debate that raged when SWG was originally being designed, and the latter question certainly won over. When a guy who can barely hold his own against a couple stormtroopers can get doctor buffs and take on a nest of Rancor hand to hand, you know Star Wars canon went right out the window for what was considered at the time, "Good MMO Gameplay".
I understand your concern for a beloved IP, but as ya said, what's done is done. And it's actually a pretty decent game compared to what's been spewing out of the market lately. Shallow, yes, but there's fun to be had.
That's my problem with STO.
It's not a terrible game at all.
It's just a terrible *Star Trek* game...
That's my problem with STO.
It's not a terrible game at all.
It's just a terrible *Star Trek* game...
EXACTLY!
So much crap, so little quality.
They would of been better served to call it Star Fleet Battles, but to me it has a lot of the Star Trek feel in it as is. One thing you left out is the Klingon side which is half the game. I think you will agree they usually don't look for a peaceful way first, more like shoot first ask question later. Many people seem to forget this game isn't all about the Federation, but a time of conflict between the two empires. Sure they could add more content and will as the game matures, but so far the game has been fun to play in my opinion. I have done missions were there has been no combat and I haven't even tried the exploration missions of yet (not sure if Gensis is in the game of yet). I will say this game is no push over and requires time and skill to be succesful.
Yep, this is my exact misgivings about STO. Entire fleets get obliterated without an eyebrow raised, NPCs get massacred by the dozen, and we loot the destroyed ships and dead NPCs to sell the plunder on the open market. Not very Federation is it? I could see the Klingon Empire run roughly this way, but even then the destruction of ships in such vast quantities is unrealistic even for them!
Yet given all this combat, borders don't move and systems remain uncaptured - at least if combat allowed this there'd be SOME point to it.
"STO vs. Star Trek" - from my perspective, the two are not related
I certainly agree with the Op's view as posted. This is not the Star Trek online game I would have preferred to play. This is however, a game that I've had fun playing in open beta.
Accept that which cannot be changed;
Maintain focus to change that which can be changed;
Roll 1d6 for wisdom check to know the difference.
so...
How else would you propose they introduce mmo things like.....XP gain, looted items etc.
Apart from the BETA seeing off my old 8600GT (its acually burnt out trying to play the game) I@m having a bit of fun in the game. I'm not that far into it and I havent seen it all but its cool. I sometimes watch Star Trek late at night/early morning and so far I'd say from what I know and have seen the game is very Star Trekky.
The above is my opinion and not gospel.
This is what I hoped would be available as an option, even if pursing that option occasionally caused you to miss the first shot.
I find it very telling that when beaming onto the space dock or even onto your own bridge, you always arrive with phaser drawn.
Only because this is the limit of your (or Cryptic's) vision for the genre, doesn't make it a good excuse... on the contrary
Only because this is the limit of your (or Cryptic's) vision for the genre, doesn't make it a good excuse... on the contrary
Exactly,
That's the single most reason a good and decent quality MMO takes at least 4 to 5 years to develop!
The first year is wasted on Concept & Design alone already.
6 months after that, you might have a primitive first prototype to experiment and test your concept and design ideas.
When that's done. You already are 2 years into development.
Then you spend at least 2 years in creating all the art assets, 2D and 3D models and all the content, game features, etc.
Cryptic spend roughly 2, maybe 2 and half years max on this game. And it clearly shows.
They copied everything from Champions Online, what they could copy and recycle to death.
It's a huge disgrace to this rich and most popular IP of all time.
Cryptic should have taken more care, consideration, more effort, more respect and above all, more time into developing this game. Just like Bioware is doing now with their Star Wars MMO!
Instead, Cryptic just took on this IP to dish out some fast, shallow game, to quickly cash on and move on to get the next IP.
It's just a huge huge waste... and all we can hope for, is that this game is going to fail HARD and FAST. Cryptic to lose the IP as quickly as possible after that.
And then hope another studio will try to pick up the Star Trek IP and treat it with more respect.
Cheers
As long as the combat itself is good and trekie, thats fine with me. In truth all games are metagames to represent a reality, it doesn't matter form it takes to me. I don't want to be going around on diplomatic missions all day, learning how to greet people in different tongues as a staple activity for my gaming, I just don't see that as being fun in the long run.
While it's true that ST is pretty much all about avoiding combat, so long as it fits in with a time of war I can see past it.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
You sort of have to have kill X, loot and repeat or it wouldn't be a mmo. Not one worth playing anyways. They are the essential fun parts. I think STO is very ST as well. It has the uniforms, the ships and all the visual trappings. The episodes are right out of any TV series. The feel is captured perfectly for anyone who wants it.
Wow...
Now that's very limited vision. I don't mean to be rude, i am only stating a fact: If everyone thought like that we would not have any games at all except for Pong Online - Because it's "not a video game if it doesn't have 2 paddles and a ball".
We already have so many games where the objective is to get XP and loot items. Why make yet another one? Why would i play STO for the "kill x mobs and loot stuff" gameplay when i have WoW, EQ2 and all those other games which do it far better, with less bugs and have much, much more content?
That's the point of the OP. What we wanted was a good Star Trek MMO. What we got was a weak MMO with a Star Trek skin.
Playing: WF
Played: WoW, GW2, L2, WAR, AoC, DnL (2005), GW, LotRO, EQ2, TOR, CoH (RIP), STO, TSW, TERA, EVE, ESO, BDO
Tried: EQ, UO, AO, EnB, TCoS, Fury, Ryzom, EU, DDO, TR, RF, CO, Aion, VG, DN, Vindictus, AA
Wow...
Now that's very limited vision. I don't mean to be rude, i am only stating a fact: If everyone thought like that we would not have any games at all except for Pong Online - Because it's "not a video game if it doesn't have 2 paddles and a ball".
We already have so many games where the objective is to get XP and loot items. Why make yet another one? Why would i play STO for the "kill x mobs and loot stuff" gameplay when i have WoW, EQ2 and all those other games which do it far better, with less bugs and have much, much more content?
That's the point of the OP. What we wanted was a good Star Trek MMO. What we got was a weak MMO with a Star Trek skin.
But going back to the OP, this is what happens when they are designing MMOs. Someone might come up with some suggestions on how to create a different sort of MMO, which is quickly over ruled by those who want to create what is proven to be popular on the market today. (hence STO very much looks like WOW in space with its end game raiding focus)
No one is going to take a risk with 20-150M riding on the line, they'll keep delivering slight variations of what is already out on the market today.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Yes, but look at what is popular on the market today: DA:O for one has large branching decision trees, and it is very popular.
I think it goes back to "world" vs "game". I like playing in large, persistent worlds, where it can be fun just to wander around and explore. If there is a main plot to the "game", then it can be followed, or not. A Star Trek Universe could be done with complexity and depth, and it would sell.
That type of "world" probably takes twice as long as a game to make, so it is easy to see the math here: make a "game" that costs 1/2 as much to play, and milk it for all it is worth.
------------
2025: 48 years on the Net.
The simple fact is, that this would have made a dandy single player game. I imagine that a lot of people are going to balk at shelling out $15 (plus Item Shop) for what Cryptic has come up with.
"Soloists and those who prefer small groups should never have to feel like they''re the ones getting the proverbial table scraps, as it were." - Scott Hartsman, Senior Producer, Everquest II
"People love groups. Its a fallacy that people want to play solo all the time." - Scott Hartsman, Executive Producer, Rift