PSA: STO Not A SIM

[JamesDBurke]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet:

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route. I trust that Cryptic is designing missions around the concept of Group Leader and Support for the characters and Flagship/Supoort Ship for the starships.

At this point we're within a year of launch so I severely doubt there will be any opportunity to change the coding for the game at this point in any major way. So please, appreciate the upcoming game for what it is and what it will be at launch. Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

[onesoul1982]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet:

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route. I trust that Cryptic is designing missions around the concept of Group Leader and Support for the characters and Flagship/Supoort Ship for the starships.

At this point we're within a year of launch so I severely doubt there will be any opportunity to change the coding for the game at this point in any major way. So please, appreciate the upcoming game for what it is and what it will be at launch. Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

I'm just glad somebody else said this first. I agree with you on these statements. However, I do think If I posted something simiar, I wouldn't be as dipolmatic. Blame my Taurus nature.

[ParkerHayden]

I'm starting to like you, Burke.

[Varrangian]

"But I don't wanna be a policemen I want to be a princess." :D

[LordDave]

"But I don't wanna be a policemen I want to be a princess." :D

I don't wanna be a princess! I wanna be the guy who brings the princess food, but is never seen. :p

[Varrangian]

I don't wanna be a princess! I wanna be the guy who brings the princess food, but is never seen. :p

Hmmm that's a worth goal ;-)

I stole mine from Kindergarten Cop though should I be ashamed? :(

[JamesDBurke]

If you want the Princess, you must win a challenge of the wits!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EkBuKQEkio

[marscentral]

I stole mine from Kindergarten Cop though should I be ashamed? :(

Yes, yes you should. :p

[jagerbolt]

Thank you for posting this.

This forum only has so much patience for those type of threads and it seems some people are insistent on beating on whatever dead horse they pick despite intelligent debates that debunk whatever they come up with.

[Rapace]

I wanna be able to play as my warp engine :eek: lmao

[Duras]

The BUBBLE really has burst now... :rolleyes:

[Flatfingers]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet: Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

For some people, simulating some aspects of reality is fun.

In particular, roleplaying games that allow us to simulate being characters in a fictional world need to simulate elements of that world as well. Without that "realism" (which is really just internal consistency to a fictional environment), what you'd have would be an abstract game like go or chess, not an RPG.

Rules-based games can be fun. Some people like them, and that's great. Other people enjoy exploring deeply-realized fictional worlds and systems, and telling interesting stories through characters in those worlds, and those are valid forms of fun as well. But without implementing some reasonable level of world-simulation, those kinds of fun are not available in a MMORPG.

Bottom line: there's more than just one kind of fun, and a massively multiplayer online roleplaying game is a special kind of game that needs to provide more than just one kind of fun. A good MMORPG offers exciting rules-based play, and engaging characters and stories... and a world to play in that is both broadly and deeply simulated.

Such balance doesn't make a game "a SIM game" any more than it makes it "a STORY game" or "a TWITCH game."

It just makes it fun for more potential players.

Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

I disagree. Once a game has been released, it's too late to make any kind of meaningful changes. (See "Order 66 (http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2005/11/order_66.html)".)

Bearing in mind that each of us is just one voice among many and none of us has any "right" to what we personally want from a game, there can never be a better time than Right Now for potential players of a game to express their hopes and concerns to the developers of that game.

--Flatfingers

[LordDave]

I don't think this issue isn't about what we want. Cryptic knows full well that Player Crews are something many people want and they have already tinkered with the idea. The problem is that what we want is not possible for Cryptic to do effectively right now. It's like asking Ford to make a hydrogen car in 2 years. They have neither the funding, nor the research that would be required to do it in those 2 years. THAT is the issue. It's not about the engine not handling it, it's not about having no "fun", it's not even about what we want vs what they want to give us. It's about what they CAN do. And, for everyone, you'd need the NPC only crew game as the core, THEN and only then can you put in an optional player crew system. So why not make the core game first and add onto it later?

-edit-
Also, RPers who need a full interface to pretend to be a fictional character aren't true roleplayers. They're posers. Imagination does a world of good.

[Duras]

I enjoyed your post Flatfingers, but have to point out, that another MMO I play updates the content through patching.

I think STO may inprove player depth through its progression.

[JamesDBurke]

Again, to reiterate, I am not saying "down to RPing" at all. But there is a definite difference between SIMing and RPing. Plain and simple RPing is 100% achievable in Cryptic's current build of the game. From what I am reading, it looks like they're designing the game with a heavy RP element in mind.

On the other hand, SIMing requires that characters play their role to a ' T ', and that is not massively appealing as it can lend itself to having generous stretches of time with not much for a player to do. I mean, seriously, it could be fairly uneventful for, say, a Transporter Chief or a Medic for long stretches of time if that is all they have available to them as action possibilities (ie Doctor stuff or Transporter stuff).

On the other hand, if you're the ship Captain you can specialize your character (be a scientist, a medic, a tactician, an engineer) and furthermore specialize your ship (science ship, escort ship, cruiser ship). Just as you character will play a particular role when you go on away missions (just like other MMOs Healer, Tank, DPS, Buffer) you ship - which is also YOUR character - will play either a support role, a front line role or be the group leader.

The RP possibility is very high in this kind of setup, especially since we know that there will be various sizes of ships. So if you would like more "authenticity" to your experience just have your fleet consist of a Capital ship (a Sovereign), an escort or two (Defiant or Akira), a Science ship (Nova or Intrepid) and a whole lot of shuttle-ish types to complement the fleet (like Runabouts or Delta Flyer types). That is an extremely 'authentic' way to approach a fleet set-up where you can have an Admiral on the Capital ship, Captains of the Escorts and Science ships and Lieutenants on the Runabouts. Bang, you have a respectable way to make it feel authentic Trek.

Please don't get me wrong, I love to RP. I even have a group that meets weekly to play everything from Star Wars, Star Trek, D&D - you name it. Hell, I just copyrighted my own game and I'm looking for a publisher. Trust me, I love to RP, but this is an MMO and the company needs to be fiscally viable first - in other words massively appealing. Once they have 1/2 a million or a million players then they can go and and start releasing mods/patches for a more SIM like experience.

Remember, no MMO releases the game and leaves it 'as is'. There are always and constantly updates and expansions. So again, let's see what they offer us and then see how what we 'think' we'll need could fit into the game. And the comparison to Star Wars Galaxies is a poor one. That has been the most lamented MMO around. All I ever hear about that game is how much the Devs over there have no clue what there doing and how badly the entire game has been nerfed.

[Thibor]

Agree with the first post.

And to add ... we're at a point in the development where many ideas are certainly fixed as for what will be in at release.

To that, there's a saying with IT ... you can have it fast, cheap, of excellent quality ... pick two.

Now then, I state that because what many are arguing for to make STO of excellent quality is taking it beyond the scope of what we've got impressions from Cryptic for what they're developing. So, if you're to give in to that, pick one of the other two then ... fast (ie. keep it on track for late '09 release) or cheap ($50 box/$15m0-sub)

I don't know about the rest of you but, I'm not sure I'm ready to let this game slide much into '10 before I think I should be looking elsewhere. Nor am I ready to consider paying $100/box and $50-sub to cover the added expenses of what it would take to add all our wants and desires to have it release on time.

So by all means lets keep discussing interesting ideas and possibilities. But lets keep reality ... no, not ST reality but, reality of what is likely possible in this game, in mind.

[_Pax_]

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.
** APPLAUSE!! **

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route.
Absolutely.

It would be more fruitful to petition Cryptic to, say, offer us some salvage and repair ships for the budding engineers among us (and honestly, I'd seriously consider playing one) ... than to somehow allow someone to play an Engineer who is not also the captain of his ship. :cool:

[Varrangian]

But lets keep reality ... no, not ST reality but, reality of what is likely possible in this game, in mind.

Bottom line up front. There is a actually difference between what can be achieved in reality and Star Trek's fictional "reality". This is a game, games are based in the reality of what can be accomplished and what is fun.

I know many here amoung the canon purists probably think of me as some "evil" blight on Trek because I can deal with some bending (probably even some breaking) of Trek canon to make a good game.

For me the core of Trek is made up of:

Unique lifeforms
Unique locations
Trek Tech (warp, transporters, phasers, etc...)
Exploring humanity by exploring the "other" both within and outside humanity
Adventure

[Duras]

For me the core of Trek is made up of:

Unique lifeforms
Unique locations
Trek Tech (warp, transporters, phasers, etc...)
Exploring humanity by exploring the "other" both within and outside humanity
Adventure

Which is why we will play STO... Roleplay is an added feature based on whats released mixed with the imagination of the user...

I think people on the server understand this, I do.

[Varrangian]

Which is why we will play STO... Roleplay is an added feature based on whats released mixed with the imagination of the user...

I think people on the server understand this, I do.

I agree. If they give me the core that I mentioned above I can use it to roleplay however I want. I will likely not roleplay to the detail of knowing how omicron radiation works on the human body, but if other want to the above core by no means prevents them.

It is about allowing freedom, and in doing that people have to take responsibility for their own game experience.

[Stryklone]

Okay, people have vented. Nothing wrong with that. It won't stop anyone from making their suggestions, nor should it. Be prepared to say it again twice a week for a year. :o

I also hope that people won't nitpick the game to death. I'm sure many will, though, the nature of any game coming from a beloved IP. Some things can't be stopped. If people do complain, better they do it now, but BEST if anytime they ask for something or complain about it that they also give detailed reasons and explanations about how it can be done in the game, and done in a fun and interesting way.

Constructive criticism might have an effect.
-----------
Here's an interesting way to pass some time:

Everyone list your own Top 6 things you want in Star Trek Online. You must describe each in 12 words or less.

Now try to find a way to be happy with any 3 of those. That's probably what we're going to get. If you get 4 or more, celebrate wildly.

Regardless, have a great end of this year celebration, all!

Stryklone
========

[Trekkie]

Without a doubt, I could not agree more and I think a post like this needs to be made into a sticky so that players remember that even though realism may be nice in the game, it needs to be fun above all else.

[cocoa-jin]

Consistency, accuracy and variety of game play will make for a fun game. Use the diversity if the Star Trek universe to create content across the player spectrum.

Make it as encompassing as possible...so the model restrictions mean nothing because there is always some component of the STO universe that matches or nearly matches what you're looking for.

[Freejack]

If you want the Princess, you must win a challenge of the wits!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EkBuKQEkio

And this is what you win...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C0i9SZqMgc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C0i9SZqMgc)

:confused:

[k.mpok]

Sim vrs MMO ahh the never-ending debate.

The main problem IMO is that SIM is fun for many ppl. What is fun for one is not for another. A balance would be nice IMHO.

The main concern for many, I feel, is the fear that STO will just become another ho-hum MMO flavor of the month that a few ppl play for a few months before moving on to another MMO. For me I don't want a WoW with a ST skin I don't care if WoW makes a gajillion dollars a day. A ST WoW will never interest me just as WoW has never or ever will interest me.

[Thibor]

Sim vrs MMO ahh the never-ending debate.

The main problem IMO is that SIM is fun for many ppl. What is fun for one is not for another. A balance would be nice IMHO.

The main concern for many, I feel, is the fear that STO will just become another ho-hum MMO flavor of the month that a few ppl play for a few months before moving on to another MMO. For me I don't want a WoW with a ST skin I don't care if WoW makes a gajillion dollars a day. A ST WoW will never interest me just as WoW has never or ever will interest me.

No offense k.mpok but, that doesn't say anything really pointed .. ie. something for the devs to identify with. Not like WoW ... umm .. how?
Not level based?
Not have pvp as a seemingly tacked on side game?
Not gear progression based?
Not allow player made addons?
Not have oodles of content at launch?

The list could go on ...

I am a WoW player. I
The game has flaws.
The game has other things that work very well.

To say, "I don't want WoW with an ST skin" says little.

Warcraft has a fairly decent amount of lore ... granted virtual lore since it's pretty much entirely game based. Until the recent addition of books, etc. since WoW's popularity.

I don't think you're arguing that ST shouldn't be a lore based game.

So what is it exactly?

Understand that Cryptic IS making a MMORPG. There are going to be some elements of that genre that are inescapable.

If you want ot influence the deves and, have a more meaningful debate on the forums, then telll us what about your WoW experience did NOT tickle your gaming fancy. That gives the rest of us something to chew on in our replies as well as possibly something for the devs to consider.

And not to single out k.mpok .. the same holds true for those saying "I don't want it to be an EVE clone" or a clone of any other game. They ALL borrow ideas. They ALL build upon their predecessors. Give them some direction other than saying I don't want WoW: 2409.

[Cryptic_Fan_101]

Some people won't be satisfied 'til this game has more tedium and minutiae than real life, much less *any* Star Trek episode.

Set phasors to yawn.

[onesoul1982]

Some people won't be satisfied 'til this game has more tedium and minutiae than real life, much less *any* Star Trek episode.

Set phasors to yawn.

Some people will never be happy no matter what.

you learn that in a CSR position very quickly. People will always have something to ***** about, no matter what.


Long story short, you can't make everyone happy. All you can do, is do your best and move forward while taking suggestions. Although, for those who want an authentic Star Trek experience in an MMO, where you can get down into the ducts of your ship and inspect the isolinear chips, and whatever else have you...not much to say except sorry.

Personally, again, I don't want to log on and feel like im going to work. I do that enough with my real life job, I don't want that experience at home. And many others here also do not want that.


"Excuse me, can you tell me where the Naval Base in Alameda is? It's where they keep the nuclear wessels...Nuc-lear...Wessels"

[cocoa-jin]

I think there is a way to provide the super detailed Star Trek on-board starship experience. I have to admit i sometimes forget that even a faction based MMO with PvP and such doesnt exclude the option for a thoroughlt engrossing solo content. I have two types of solo sim conetnt.

1) There is no reason STO couldnt provide on-board content and expereince in addition to the massive outside experience. It shouldnt be mandatory, just optional content. Like allowing periodic on-board "issues" to arise and giving the player the option to let "ship" handle it(the player basically turning the content off), or allowing the player to "dive" into the various senior officers on the ship to handle the issue.

It could be mainly scripted and directed content in which the player essentially experience a basic MMO agent/quest mini-scenerio story driven mission. Key portions of the ship are modeled as required for the various missions made available. The various portions of the ship can be modular in design with different textures and trims for various ship hulls.

Missions would require significant understanding of the various disciplines/stations, some puzzle like features, pattern recognition, etc, etc.

These on-board scenerios would essemtially be instances, not available during combat, or in PvP areas or when hostile NPCs are present.


2) Ship tuning...basically tweaking. Various stations/sections/disciplines can be modeled significantly enough to allow for player tuning of the various sytems. This tuning process should be a lengthy and thoughtful process so that its not really viable to perform in combat. In addition, the benefits received from this tweaks are minor...so not to significantly impact the overall performance of the ship. It wouldnt replace upgrades by any stretch of the imagination.

Tunning could be done anytime, but because of the attention it requires, you'd be best served doing it in a safe place.



The thing is, no one has to do this stuff, its purely optional. It provides RP content, its immersive and promotes a Star Trek experience. Its "sim-like" without be a distraction or deterent to those not interested in going that deep into daily ship-board life.

[jonleach]

I can see both sides of this discussion, but over all I agree with the main post and the intent of the post. There have been several others that have posted something similar with the term “They will always complain…” I work in the IT business as a Manager and trust me I know what you mean when you can’t keep everybody happy. But I do believe in good discussion on wanted items and it doesn’t hurt to voice a want if it is still possible to have it added. But I do believe what we will see, in my opinion (like a nose everyone has one) :) , is MMORPG that will be as close to ST as possible but still allow for playability and for those of us who only have thirty minutes a day to play still have fun. But also allow those who want to dive deeper into the STO to have fun. And to be honest it won’t have everything for everyone but I can see Cryptic after the first release begin to do updates that will slowly bring in those items that may have been missed and those that the players are asking for. But keep in mind those updates will be addressing major items as far as patching and game playability.

In the end I am going to buy this game when it comes out and will play it to the fullest extent I can, will I find things I wished it had yes but I will not allow that to take the away from me enjoying something that I had been looking forward too for a very long time. :)

[_Pax_]

Okay, Cocoa ... those are ideas I can get behind; they're good ways to get to explore your own ship interior, while ALSO advancing your character's development. Well done!

[LordDave]

I think there is a way to provide the super detailed Star Trek on-board starship experience. I have to admit i sometimes forget that even a faction based MMO with PvP and such doesnt exclude the option for a thoroughlt engrossing solo content. I have two types of solo sim conetnt.

1) There is no reason STO couldnt provide on-board content and expereince in addition to the massive outside experience. It shouldnt be mandatory, just optional content. Like allowing periodic on-board "issues" to arise and giving the player the option to let "ship" handle it(the player basically turning the content off), or allowing the player to "dive" into the various senior officers on the ship to handle the issue.

It could be mainly scripted and directed content in which the player essentially experience a basic MMO agent/quest mini-scenerio story driven mission. Key portions of the ship are modeled as required for the various missions made available. The various portions of the ship can be modular in design with different textures and and t*******s for various ship hulls.

Missions would require significant understanding of the various disciplines/stations, some puzzle like features, pattern recognition, etc, etc.

These on-board scenerios would essemtially be instances, not available during combat, or in PvP areas or when hostile NPCs are present.


2) Ship tuning...basically tweaking. Various stations/sections/disciplines can be modeled significantly enough to allow for player tuning of the various sytems. This tuning process should be a lengthy and thoughtful process so that its not really viable to perform in combat. In addition, the benefits received from this tweaks are minor...so not to significantly impact the overall performance of the ship. It wouldnt replace upgrades by any stretch of the imagination.

Tunning could be done anytime, but because of the attention it requires, you'd be best served doing it in a safe place.



The thing is, no one has to do this stuff, its purely optional. It provides RP content, its immersive and promotes a Star Trek experience. Its "sim-like" without be a distraction or deterent to those not interested in going that deep into daily ship-board life.

Actually we know there will be ship interior events like boarding parties and such.

[marscentral]

I think there is a way to provide the super detailed Star Trek on-board starship experience. I have to admit i sometimes forget that even a faction based MMO with PvP and such doesnt exclude the option for a thoroughlt engrossing solo content. I have two types of solo sim conetnt.

1) There is no reason STO couldnt provide on-board content and expereince in addition to the massive outside experience. It shouldnt be mandatory, just optional content. Like allowing periodic on-board "issues" to arise and giving the player the option to let "ship" handle it(the player basically turning the content off), or allowing the player to "dive" into the various senior officers on the ship to handle the issue.

It could be mainly scripted and directed content in which the player essentially experience a basic MMO agent/quest mini-scenerio story driven mission. Key portions of the ship are modeled as required for the various missions made available. The various portions of the ship can be modular in design with different textures and and t*******s for various ship hulls.

Missions would require significant understanding of the various disciplines/stations, some puzzle like features, pattern recognition, etc, etc.

These on-board scenerios would essemtially be instances, not available during combat, or in PvP areas or when hostile NPCs are present.


2) Ship tuning...basically tweaking. Various stations/sections/disciplines can be modeled significantly enough to allow for player tuning of the various sytems. This tuning process should be a lengthy and thoughtful process so that its not really viable to perform in combat. In addition, the benefits received from this tweaks are minor...so not to significantly impact the overall performance of the ship. It wouldnt replace upgrades by any stretch of the imagination.

Tunning could be done anytime, but because of the attention it requires, you'd be best served doing it in a safe place.

The thing is, no one has to do this stuff, its purely optional. It provides RP content, its immersive and promotes a Star Trek experience. Its "sim-like" without be a distraction or deterent to those not interested in going that deep into daily ship-board life.

Actually we know there will be ship interior events like boarding parties and such.

I look forward to fighting off Borg drones on my Bridge or matching wits with alien diplomats in the Conference Room or tracking a sabateur in Engineering. It seems that Cryptic are putting all that in. I can't understand people's obsession with putting in the part of being a Starfleet officer that is the same as the grind of regular work. That's not roleplaying, it's masochism.

[Jodocus]

I think Star Wars Galaxies is the best comparison to this. A bash, shoot 'n loot MMO with a Star Wars flavour, composed of both space and ground elements. STO may well approach the MMO concept with similarity.

[cocoa-jin]

Okay, Cocoa ... those are ideas I can get behind; they're good ways to get to explore your own ship interior, while ALSO advancing your character's development. Well done!

Thanks...Im bound to come up something you'd like :)

Im trying to focus on ideas that accomdate both sides of the coin if possible.

[cocoa-jin]

Actually we know there will be ship interior events like boarding parties and such.

I look forward to fighting off Borg drones on my Bridge or matching wits with alien diplomats in the Conference Room or tracking a sabateur in Engineering. It seems that Cryptic are putting all that in. I can't understand people's obsession with putting in the part of being a Starfleet officer that is the same as the grind of regular work. That's not roleplaying, it's masochism.

Oh, it can include boarding scenerios, but it can be so much more. It can be truly Star Trek episode like content. Like Dr. Crusher getting lost in the warp bubble universe, or Kirk's run in with the alien race that did everything at extreme speeds, or a containment leak, or it can be simple mundane stuff like diagnostic and tutorials which teaches you basic tunning for the system, or any other quest based mission.

The possibilitis are immense.

[JamesDBurke]

Guys and Gals, thank you for making this thread as interesting as it has become!

I'm just happy to see people trying to come up with ways to keep the RP aspect within a way that can actually be programmed into a fun and authentic experience in game. Cocoa, you are outstanding!

On a side not, can we seriously set phasers to 'yawn'? Maybe it will be an in-game item for the per-order people? Awesome ;).

[marscentral]

Oh, it can include boarding scenerios, but it can be so much more. It can be truly Star Trek episode like content. Like Dr. Crusher getting lost in the warp bubble universe, or Kirk's run in with the alien race that did everything at extreme speeds, or a containment leak, or it can be simple mundane stuff like diagnostic and tutorials which teaches you basic tunning for the system, or any other quest based mission.

The possibilitis are immense.

This is where we differ. The dramatic things that happen on a starship are great. I think we'll see it in game and I've never argued against that. The reason I'm against sims/player crews etc. is things like tuning warp coils and realligning plasma relays. There is no real way to make them fun. You said it yourself, they are mundane. I don't mind little bits of info like the codex in Mass Effect popping up, but I can't see how allowing me to use that to manually reconfigure the transporter's pattern buffer is a productive use of developer time.

[Mad-Max]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet:

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route. I trust that Cryptic is designing missions around the concept of Group Leader and Support for the characters and Flagship/Supoort Ship for the starships.

At this point we're within a year of launch so I severely doubt there will be any opportunity to change the coding for the game at this point in any major way. So please, appreciate the upcoming game for what it is and what it will be at launch. Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

In the terms of realism in an MMO, a SIM game doesn't even make it in the equation. Most games have realism, it's becoming more apparent each passing year. This leaves most MMOs in the dust.

I've seen more realism in a simple shooter like Gears of War 2 than I have in any current operating MMO, besides maybe AoC, but the unbearable bugs and gimped content make it impossible to play - let alone the fact of having to have a nice computer.

So, in a sense you bear truth in your words. But I have to disagree.

[Meehile]

I don't wanna be a princess! I wanna be the guy who brings the princess food, but is never seen. :p

I just want to be the frog.

[JamesDBurke]

In the terms of realism in an MMO, a SIM game doesn't even make it in the equation. Most games have realism, it's becoming more apparent each passing year. This leaves most MMOs in the dust.

I've seen more realism in a simple shooter like Gears of War 2 than I have in any current operating MMO, besides maybe AoC, but the unbearable bugs and gimped content make it impossible to play - let alone the fact of having to have a nice computer.

So, in a sense you bear truth in your words. But I have to disagree.

Mad-Max, I think you might be misinterpreting me here. By realism, I mean the realism of having a player being responsible of the oh-so fun job of scrubbing plasma conduits and routine maintenance, or adjusting communications frequencies and other realistic yet mundane and very unexciting activities that are a part of a ship's daily routine.

In Gears of War II were you required to conductive extensive maintenance on your gear to prevent malfunction? Anyone who has had to clean an M16 just once knows what I mean. It is essential work but tedious at the same time. Sure games have started to introduce a level of realism to them, but never at the cost of fun.

Take Fallout 3. A widely played game that has received average to great reviews. For the most part everyone calls this game (at the very least) "good". They have a few mini games within the game (lockpicking, item creation and hacking) that are fun in their own way. You even have weapon wear and tear, just like practically every MMO and RPG game made in the past couple of years. The maintenance aspect, however, is always kept fairly simple: either have a repair skill where [click] and you can fix it or you pay an NPC to fix it.

STO will have item creation and most likely hacking as well. There was a certain sense of realism from Fallout 3 with the well rendered environments that seem similar in quality to what have been released in the STO screenshots. Equipment damage is likely to be kept fairly simple. I would imagine that even starship repair (except for possibly 'Critical' style damage) will also be fairly routine at a starbase or if you have a good enough engineer and repair part [click] and ship is fixed. That way a player can get back to what they're playing for: playing the game and having fun.

Now if you mean by realism blood and gore flying everywhere when you kill an enemy (like Age of Conan and Fallout 3) then you're not talking realism in the entire sense. You're talking about only a small portion of what constitutes realism in gaming as a whole. A portion that for the most part does not make or break a game as far as playability, animation, graphics, storyline and quality (ie, non bugginess) go.

[Cryptic_Fan_101]

...By realism, I mean the realism of having a player being responsible of the oh-so fun job of scrubbing plasma conduits and routine maintenance, or adjusting communications frequencies and other realistic yet mundane and very unexciting activities that are a part of a ship's daily routine.

Or taking 14+ hours to travel to the nearest star at warp 9. Or re-arranging Geordi La Forge's sock drawer.

Believe it or not, I've seen people on these very forums requesting that degree of "realism" or "immersion" if you prefer. :rolleyes:

[Warspawn]

I think a happy medium has to be met in order to generate an adequate, long-term fan base.

For me, something totally unrealistic and with no attempt to be true to Star Trek's history and lore will lose me as a customer immediately. I have no desire to play WoW in space. If there's not a certain time cost, difficulty, and danger in areas like travel and character advancement, then there's absolutely no reason to play the game.

On the other hand, I also realize that we've made it into the development of our culture that the game has to provide for the ADD (want it NOW...ooh, shiney object!) crowd that's moved into the MMO world. Make little steps relatively easy to achieve, and make many of them? For goodness sake though, I certainly hope we don't see maxed out characters within the first month of the game's release! Every major MMO release lately has seen that, and some even reward gamers for achieving it. Of course the ensuing whines about the lack of high-level content within the first week of release are entertaining to read :D...

I do rather like some of the old Star Trek sims I've played (Star Fleet Command, and the old "Warp Factor"), and there's just got to be more in STO than just target an enemy and push a button til they're dead...Starship maneuver and tactics have to be well-represented here and available to be easily grasped initially, but difficult to master.

[onesoul1982]

Or taking 14+ hours to travel to the nearest star at warp 9. Or re-arranging Geordi La Forge's sock drawer.

Believe it or not, I've seen people on these very forums requesting that degree of "realism" or "immersion" if you prefer. :rolleyes:


Or better yet, going to sickbay and being treated for the Klingon equivilant of an STD! yay

In all seriousness, thank you,but no :D

[cocoa-jin]

This is where we differ. The dramatic things that happen on a starship are great. I think we'll see it in game and I've never argued against that. The reason I'm against sims/player crews etc. is things like tuning warp coils and realligning plasma relays. There is no real way to make them fun. You said it yourself, they are mundane. I don't mind little bits of info like the codex in Mass Effect popping up, but I can't see how allowing me to use that to manually reconfigure the transporter's pattern buffer is a productive use of developer time.

It may be mundane, but like any grind(for which it is not), there are rewards for putting in the time. Tunning can be made engaging. By creating some reasoning behin dit, with a dash of th eunexpected, one will feel some level of fulfillment by realizing his action sjust increased sensory out-put for a certain detection type by 2% across the spectrum...or that they boosted shield resistance to energy weapons by 1%...or that they reduced their torpedo yields by 2%...so they better reset it back to a previous setting.

You learn more about your system by each tweak, each improvement, each mess up. You make yourself that much better taking damage, or that much better detecting faint signals. Its especially useful for those who will already be i non-combat science oriented operations already...and they'll like have the time to do it. And who knows, by grasping a better understanding of teh system, you may be able to manipulate situtations to your advanatage. Detect that anamoly sooner, from farther out...maybe detect that rare item amoungst the background interference its hiding in.

If you dont want to do it...dont. But Star Trek as always shown the significance of aspiring for that minute improvement becaus eit just might be the difference betwen success and failure...and if someone goes for that minor improvment and succeeds due to it...then they deserve it in a Star Trek universe.

It is worth developer time, is part of building a robust system, robust interactions, pertinent systems/profession content.

[slydragon4]

For me, something totally unrealistic and with no attempt to be true to Star Trek's history and lore will lose me as a customer immediately. I have no desire to play WoW in space.

I'm always perplexed as to what people really mean when they say that. I don't think anyone is advocating... I don't know, Night elf druids flying around in space fighting the trolls and their totemic magics, or crap like that. What exactly do people mean when they say they don't want WoW in space?

When I say it (and I do occasionally) what I mean is that I'd really rather not have a game where the 'entire point' (as defined by the player community first with devs following along) is to race to max-level/max-skill/however-endgame-works as quickly as you possibly can, assuming that all that comes before that point is just stupid, unnecessary work. I'd much rather have a game where the 'entire point' is to play and have fun the whole time, not to race to 'endgame' and then brag about how much you rock for having THIS MANY endgame toons.

Other aspects of WoW would be cool, as basically they are in any other MMO ever to a greater or lesser degree. I like having story and backstory available, though in a perfect world I'd want it more front and center - difficult to do in an MMO. I like having a player-run economy that doesn't require relevant real-world business degrees to succeed in (I'm looking at you, EVE). I like having a lot of communication options and ways to deal with other people, and also the ability to turn them off easily. I like always having something interesting to see or do, whether it's a quest/mission or a seasonal event or just exploring to see if I can find cool things to look at.

WoW is a collection of a lot of different and distinct gameplay elements, some of which are actually really good. Saying 'I don't want WoW in space' doesn't seem to me to be saying much of anything at all.

YMMV of course.

[LordDave]

I'm always perplexed as to what people really mean when they say that. I don't think anyone is advocating... I don't know, Night elf druids flying around in space fighting the trolls and their totemic magics, or crap like that. What exactly do people mean when they say they don't want WoW in space?

When I say it (and I do occasionally) what I mean is that I'd really rather not have a game where the 'entire point' (as defined by the player community first with devs following along) is to race to max-level/max-skill/however-endgame-works as quickly as you possibly can, assuming that all that comes before that point is just stupid, unnecessary work. I'd much rather have a game where the 'entire point' is to play and have fun the whole time, not to race to 'endgame' and then brag about how much you rock for having THIS MANY endgame toons.

Other aspects of WoW would be cool, as basically they are in any other MMO ever to a greater or lesser degree. I like having story and backstory available, though in a perfect world I'd want it more front and center - difficult to do in an MMO. I like having a player-run economy that doesn't require relevant real-world business degrees to succeed in (I'm looking at you, EVE). I like having a lot of communication options and ways to deal with other people, and also the ability to turn them off easily. I like always having something interesting to see or do, whether it's a quest/mission or a seasonal event or just exploring to see if I can find cool things to look at.

WoW is a collection of a lot of different and distinct gameplay elements, some of which are actually really good. Saying 'I don't want WoW in space' doesn't seem to me to be saying much of anything at all.

YMMV of course.

Your confusion is understandable. The concept of "WoW in space" has never actually been defined. It could easily be an MMO with simple combat, easy to use interfaces, simple crafting (get pattern, get materials, make), or the classic "healer, Tank, DPS" group dynamic. Unfortunately, these are things that nearly all MMOs need to function. WoW is, at it's heart, probably the simplest MMO out there. Anyone from age 10 to 50 can pick it up and play it without trouble. The mechanics are easy to understand (Higher numbers win) and you don't even get to the harder stuff (like how to properly tank or heal) until you've already gotten into the game.
Granted, the template of "Healer, Tank, DPS" doesn't work very well in a ship vs ship dynamic. Ships don't have repair beams after all. (not trek ships anyway)
But generally speaking, I think the idea is that the person doesn't want "The most basic MMO" but something more complex that better differentiates it to the theme. Personally, I don't think any MMO will ever get away from that. (Except maybe EVE Online) After all, in designing software, simple is better.

[cocoa-jin]

I'm always perplexed as to what people really mean when they say that. I don't think anyone is advocating... I don't know, Night elf druids flying around in space fighting the trolls and their totemic magics, or crap like that. What exactly do people mean when they say they don't want WoW in space?

When I say it (and I do occasionally) what I mean is that I'd really rather not have a game where the 'entire point' (as defined by the player community first with devs following along) is to race to max-level/max-skill/however-endgame-works as quickly as you possibly can, assuming that all that comes before that point is just stupid, unnecessary work. I'd much rather have a game where the 'entire point' is to play and have fun the whole time, not to race to 'endgame' and then brag about how much you rock for having THIS MANY endgame toons.

Other aspects of WoW would be cool, as basically they are in any other MMO ever to a greater or lesser degree. I like having story and backstory available, though in a perfect world I'd want it more front and center - difficult to do in an MMO. I like having a player-run economy that doesn't require relevant real-world business degrees to succeed in (I'm looking at you, EVE). I like having a lot of communication options and ways to deal with other people, and also the ability to turn them off easily. I like always having something interesting to see or do, whether it's a quest/mission or a seasonal event or just exploring to see if I can find cool things to look at.

WoW is a collection of a lot of different and distinct gameplay elements, some of which are actually really good. Saying 'I don't want WoW in space' doesn't seem to me to be saying much of anything at all.

YMMV of course.

I'd think it means no turn based, no levels having large impacts on PvP, no typical MMO "class" based relationships/roles, not too simple, etc, etc

[marscentral]

It may be mundane, but like any grind(for which it is not), there are rewards for putting in the time. Tunning can be made engaging. By creating some reasoning behin dit, with a dash of th eunexpected, one will feel some level of fulfillment by realizing his action sjust increased sensory out-put for a certain detection type by 2% across the spectrum...or that they boosted shield resistance to energy weapons by 1%...or that they reduced their torpedo yields by 2%...so they better reset it back to a previous setting.

You learn more about your system by each tweak, each improvement, each mess up. You make yourself that much better taking damage, or that much better detecting faint signals. Its especially useful for those who will already be i non-combat science oriented operations already...and they'll like have the time to do it. And who knows, by grasping a better understanding of teh system, you may be able to manipulate situtations to your advanatage. Detect that anamoly sooner, from farther out...maybe detect that rare item amoungst the background interference its hiding in.

If you dont want to do it...dont. But Star Trek as always shown the significance of aspiring for that minute improvement becaus eit just might be the difference betwen success and failure...and if someone goes for that minor improvment and succeeds due to it...then they deserve it in a Star Trek universe.

It is worth developer time, is part of building a robust system, robust interactions, pertinent systems/profession content.

Obviously, we do differ on this. My basic point is that I don't think I should be rewarded for "putting in the time". That's a job. If I'm spending time disinterestedly pushing buttons, I want the reward of cold, hard cash. In a game, you should be doing things because they are fun. I think the whole idea of a grind is antithetical to gaming and a weakness to MMOs, whether it's "slay 100 rats" or "repair 50 plasma injectors".

[slydragon4]

I'd think it means no turn based,

Nearly every MMO out there at the moment is like this. WoW is not the first, nor will it be the last. If you want to blame a game, blame EQ for setting the trend. And yet I never ever see anyone complaining about how they're scared STO will be EQ in space.

no levels having large impacts on PvP,

There's no such thing, ever, as completely even PvP. Let go of that dream, if you have it. Character skill levels will be different, player skill levels will be different. New PvPers will still be mercilessly stomped on by the people who do it all the time, mercilessly mocked/tormented for it, and then the PvPers will wonder why they never see any new faces in the PvP zones. (I might be a touch biased here, I admit.)

Also, we already know there'll be no levels in STO, so complaining about this aspect of WoW in relation to STO starts off weird to me.

no typical MMO "class" based relationships/roles,

I'd like to point out that Cryptic's previous MMO (CoX) does actually a pretty fine job of relaxing those 'class' restrictions - to the point where it's actually kind of an insult in many ways to call someone a 'healer'. Any group of any makeup of archetypes can succeed, and frequently do. Worrying that Cryptic is going to backtrack on that design attitude instead of pressing forward, especially given that the STO advancement system is skill-based and not class/level based... why?

Also, I tend to think that in at least some part, the class-based restrictions/roles are things that players do to the game, not intrinsic to the game itself. Even in WoW, which we both seem to agree is fairly tightly structured, most classes can fill 2 or 3 different roles in a group at the whim of the player - the only truly limited-to-one-role class is probably Rogue. Does anyone take advantage of that flexibility? No. Is that the game's fault? No again.

not too simple, etc, etc

How simple is too simple? I don't think anyone is advocating Pong, here. I'd like to point out also that simplicity of gameplay does not make a bad or shallow game. Case in point, for me, will always be Psychonauts - though it's single player I think it still counts for an example. Simple controls, simple platforming - deep, rich, entertaining game.

[cocoa-jin]

Obviously, we do differ on this. My basic point is that I don't think I should be rewarded for "putting in the time". That's a job. If I'm spending time disinterestedly pushing buttons, I want the reward of cold, hard cash. In a game, you should be doing things because they are fun. I think the whole idea of a grind is antithetical to gaming and a weakness to MMOs, whether it's "slay 100 rats" or "repair 50 plasma injectors".

It wouldnt be a "grind", more like a mini-game...I see it as research, exploring and learning your system. There is no "do this 100 times" or build this or fix that and then get a reward.

In my mind it would be like this. Im attempting to tune my warp core. "hmmm, what if I increase injector ratios by 1%, reduce the coil output by .5%...hey it increased plasma concentrations by .5%, resulting in a 1.25% increase in warp core output!....I did all that and it resulted in nothing, or a reduction.

So know Im curious to know what was the catalyst for the change...was it the injector ratio, was it the coil output...can I tweak something else all together different to increase the 1.25% increase to something more?

The thing thats needs to considered is that if things are to linear, it'll be too predictable...and eventually there will be no challenge. I dont have a problem with players sharing knowledge about tweaking..they should...plus thats how factions work. Im sure any breakthrough the enterprise finds regarding a system is spread down the chain...but STO throws a wonderfully beautiful wrench into things...customization.

Those of us who build our own computers, or customize cars(im into muscle cars too) know how each computer build or custom car build has a personality of its own(even amoung similar or near identical builds) and every little change affects how that total system responds to various changes, tweaks, etc.

Yes, they may respond similarly to same tweak, but some respond more or less than the other. Sometimes the system's preference is totally counter-intuitive...and thats where the challenge comes from in this tunning model.

Because each item you add and each tweak previously performed changes your ship's(as the total system) "personality" different. As a community we may be able to come up with general rules and expectations of tweaking waht will give what type of result, but because every ship is different, these results will not only vary in degree but possibly also in response(positive or negative).

I'll try to explain how this can be done. In my mind each system on a ship is build with a formula, an equation(that we as players are never privy to, its hidden in the code and modeling). Each hull type has a range value, each individual hull provided to the player as a specific value with that range. Each upgrade item type as its range value and each unit has its own specific value within that range.

Each tweak is actually changing a corresponding variable is the equation...because the formula of each systems it tied into the ship hull the system is installed in and also impacted by every system or upgrade on the ship, one will find the formula and the corresponding output to vary between even ships of the same type.

Now the tough part is modeling formulas and values diverse enough to cause a wide variety of outputs. I assume this would require the use of not just integers, but decimals, positive and negative values, exponents, limit equations and such that system improvements wouldnt rely solely on just increasing values, but also decreasing some...or having just a few variables overly important, allowing ine to ignore the others....though I guess sometimes, that would be the case if thats how that formula plays out. This model might require that these variable be entered into a preliminary equation before being introduced into the final system formula or vice verse in order to cap, limit or convert the preliminary value into a suitable final value for the final output value.

They key is making it exceedingly difficult for players to break the code/formula.

**EDIT**
Remember, we arent privy to or directly concerned with the mathematics, its hidden in the code, we only tweak and tune...and our naturally inherit desire to figure out patterns will undoubtably play a part.

The thing is, because its formula based, there will be some reason behind it, and we will undoubtably find some patterns in the chaos. Hopefully the devs can build equations around actual Star Trek and real natural law/science as much as appicable and approriate...but if not, its fine...the science and natural law would be beyond our grasp anyway...they can just try and have it make sense.

[Admiral_Patrick]

Dont forget:

BANK SITTING TRUMPS FUN

[cocoa-jin]

what does that mean?

[Admiral_Patrick]

what does that mean?

I'll spell it out for you. The OP was making the point that the game is an mmorpg not a smiluation of Star Trek. He thought up a witty zinger to contrast the two: FUN TRUMPS REALISM. I, being equally or in all likelyhood more intelligent than the OP, though up my own little zinger to make an observation that mmorpg's arent all they are cracked up to be and require long hours of doing nothing in-game such as sitting in one area. So I decided to make an obscure reference to a game called Ultima Online, which was notorious for a very high percentage of players sitting around the bank attempting to sell items all day (bank sitting), by saying BANK SITTING TRUMPS FUN. At which point you got confused and needed to have your hand held.

It's really pretty funny.

[_Pax_]

I, being equally or in all likelyhood more intelligent than the OP, [...]
Arrogant little thing, aren't you?

[...] though up my own little zinger to make an observation that mmorpg's arent all they are cracked up to be and require long hours of doing nothing in-game such as sitting in one area.
I have not done any such thing, not even once, in World of Warcraft. Nor did I ever do any such thing in City of Heroes. Nor, again, in Auto Assault (which I still miss).

...

Got anything to base your "witty" quip on, that's ... you know ... current ...?

[Admiral_Patrick]

Arrogant little thing, aren't you?


I have not done any such thing, not even once, in World of Warcraft. Nor did I ever do any such thing in City of Heroes. Nor, again, in Auto Assault (which I still miss).

...

Got anything to base your "witty" quip on, that's ... you know ... current ...?

Sure. The games you listed are a good start.

[marscentral]

It's really pretty funny.

If you have to explain a joke, then it probably isn't funny, but I don't have to explain that to someone of your intellect. :p

[OrabIbo]

If you want the Princess, you must win a challenge of the wits!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EkBuKQEkio

For some people, simulating some aspects of reality is fun.

Hmm, from these to quotes I have to question.

Why do ppl insist on a simulation of a fictional universe, that which does not exist? Sure it's fantasy derived by science, but how does one come up with a realistic simulation on something that which does not exist?

I wonder.... hmmmm.

While I am a Star Trek myself, and I do enjoy the Star Trek Academy series for it's simulation aspects. I really don't understand why ppl get their panties all up in a bunch when science console gets placed on the wrong side of the bridge! really do we have to take what we have seen on television as the gospel that cannot be changed?

Why can't we just enjoy the game for what it is. And not ridicule and speculate it to death to the point that it is no longer fun, nor entertaining?

[_Pax_]

Sure. The games you listed are a good start.
Fine; go on and explain when it is best to sit and do NOTHING in-game, while playing World of Warcraft, for more than a minute here and there. PLEASe, do try.

Then, try again for City of Heroes.

And for Auto Assault, other than the one case of "Waiting for somethign specific to spawn" (which usually was not terribly long, anyway).

[Magnuson]

I totally agree with the original post. If you want a trek simulation go back to Bridge Commander or try some Trek mod for The Sims. This game is meant to appeal to a WIDE audience that has an appreciation for the Trek universe, this is not, I repeat IS NOT a game dedicated to the hardcore Trekker/Trekkie/Fanboys. Sure Cryptic wants the hardcore Trek fans to play, but they're not designing the game for a limited few, this game is intented to appeal to a general audience that has a fondness for Trek. *****ing and moaning about it, WILL NOT change that. Either learn to live with what the game is/will be or simply play something else.

[JamesDBurke]

I'll spell it out for you. The OP was making the point that the game is an mmorpg not a smiluation of Star Trek. He thought up a witty zinger to contrast the two: FUN TRUMPS REALISM. I, being equally or in all likelyhood more intelligent than the OP, though up my own little zinger to make an observation that mmorpg's arent all they are cracked up to be and require long hours of doing nothing in-game such as sitting in one area. So I decided to make an obscure reference to a game called Ultima Online, which was notorious for a very high percentage of players sitting around the bank attempting to sell items all day (bank sitting), by saying BANK SITTING TRUMPS FUN. At which point you got confused and needed to have your hand held.

It's really pretty funny.

First off, Admiral Patrick, I'd like to wholeheartedly thank you for attempting to disparage my intellect with poorly placed sarcastic undertones and in the process displaying to the entire STO community what an arrogant individual you are. I'm amazed that an IP such as the one we are all here to discuss would attract such a pompous individual to come down from his ivory tower and mingle with us common folk. Perhaps one of us simple peasants can show you how to use spellchecker?

Seriously, why the arrogance and the put down? I'm honestly a little shocked as I always took you for a more magnanimous type of individual from posts of yours I've come across. Sure like the rest of us they were highly opinionated, but I really expect no less from one of us forum junkies - especially in a Trek related forum.

So, in classic forum style I ask WTF bro?

[Flatfingers]

Why do ppl insist on a simulation of a fictional universe, that which does not exist? Sure it's fantasy derived by science, but how does one come up with a realistic simulation on something that which does not exist?

...

I really don't understand why ppl get their panties all up in a bunch when science console gets placed on the wrong side of the bridge! really do we have to take what we have seen on television as the gospel that cannot be changed?

Since my name got mentioned :), I'll take a swing at this.

I put it down mostly to personality. Some people care about details. It doesn't matter what the context is; these folks feel strongly that since it's just as easy to get this stuff right (by just watching the TV shows and movies), the only possible reasons for not getting the details right must be either laziness or deliberate sloppiness. Paradoxically, they get more upset about those things precisely because they're so trivial -- it's understandable that big things are hard to get right, but when we're talking about something like the artwork for a bridge console, there's so little cost to do it right (versus doing it wrong) that there's just no good reason not to get it right.

I don't necessarily subscribe to this viewpoint myself; I'm not a detail-oriented kind of person. But I know people who are, and I've learned to value their attention to getting the small stuff right. It's occasionally really irritating to me (like when I'm trying to get a software release out the door on schedule and someone's still tinkering with the placement of a data entry field), but most of the time I can see the value in doing things right from the very start. That "you ought to get the details right from the start" mindset is one possibility for why some of us here

(Speaking for myself, I get into conversations about Star-Trek-universe issues because I enjoy systems-building. Creating consistent and workable systems is fun for me, whether it's making a game out of the Star Trek world or something else. In other words, it's not the Star Trek part I care most about, although that's interesting; it's the general opportunity to help create a logically coherent and functionally effective system of systems. That's what lures me into threads like how to create aliens and what's the relative combat strength of different starships. But there aren't many of us who are wired in this way, so it's hard for most people to distinguish our enjoyment of systems-design conversations with the attention to locking down specifics of the detail-oriented people. So it goes.)

One other possibility is that those who speak forcefully in favor of world- and story-based content feel that being a high-quality representation of the fictional Star Trek universe is a form of gameplay, and one that needs serious attention by STO's designers. When they see mocking and dismissive comments from those who feel that STO absolutely must emphasize conventional Achiever-focused gameplay over everything else, they get concerned that Cryptic will be swayed by those comments. So they figure they need to be equally strong in their pro-simulationist or pro-story comments, and the result is extreme statements on both the game-focused ("play in") and world-focused ("live in") sides of the design question.

At any rate, there are some possibilities for you. I personally think Star Trek Online can and should be designed to offer a balance between simulation and story and pure rules-based gameplay, but I can appreciate the feeling of some here that simulation and story offer so much value to this particular game that they deserve an energetic defense.

Others may see things differently.

--Flatfingers

[Stryklone]

Detail is also a component of storytelling. The more specific, the more real the fiction becomes. The trick is knowing when to stop. I once read a book about vampires that ran out of story on page 110. Unfortunately, it had another 50 pages to go. The author had the main character change batteries in his mini recorder. There wasn't any plot advanced or new character insight. The author took up space spelling out the battery brand name, the model number, voltage, and the details of opening the battery compartment and aligning the positive post to the holder. That's as far as I got. That's the only book I ever burned. I did it to prevent it from ever falling into other hands and stopping them from ever enjoying reading again.

Stryklone
========

[Duras]

Detail is also a component of storytelling. The more specific, the more real the fiction becomes. The trick is knowing when to stop.
========

I wrote that down, nice advice...

I think, words betraying visual content is an art.

[OrabIbo]

it's understandable that big things are hard to get right, but when we're talking about something like the artwork for a bridge console, there's so little cost to do it right (versus doing it wrong) that there's just no good reason not to get it right.
I chalk this up as more of a mistake, that was overlooked. Instead of laziness. After all if it was so minute of a detail that hardly anybody would notice but a hardened fan. Then It could stand to reason that it could have just as easily have been overlooked.

It also stands to reason that such simple things, can and will be fixed quickly and without much effort. It is usually not something that should be the deciding factor that will make or break the game.

Which is precisely what quite a few ppl claim. And they do so for dramatic flair to get attention drawn to what they are saying, as if it has some importance. Actually I shouldn't say that. Everybody just as much opportunity to make their point as anybody else on the forums. It is just not necessary to blow things out of proportion and make slanderous comments just to get your voice heard out of the many. In short I should just say, I grow tired of the drama queens/Kings on these forums.

When they see mocking and dismissive comments from those who feel that STO absolutely must emphasize conventional Achiever-focused gameplay over everything else, they get concerned that Cryptic will be swayed by those comments. So they figure they need to be equally strong in their pro-simulationist or pro-story comments, and the result is extreme statements on both the game-focused ("play in") and world-focused ("live in") sides of the design question.

Yes, I can see why ppl do it. It's just this method of posting just degrades into a bunch of endless bickering that gives everybody a headache. Much less, an endless supply of pointless threads that everybody has to sift through while they try to find something legitimately worthy of continuing the OP discussion.

[LordDave]

On the subject of accuracy and no reason why it shouldn't be....
you are incorrect. I remember reading about Elite Force and how they were designing the different parts of the ship. Did you know that they could not actually make the measurements exactly to specifications and have a functioning game? It's true. The player's hitbox was too big for the "actual" sizes (like the upper area of Engineering) that they had to widen the path a bit. The bridge is the same thing. Different areas has to be increased in size from the exact detail.

Another issue you run into, for something like console artwork, is... which one? Throughout the shows, we see the consoles change. If you notice, the consoles never actually have real text, but numbers everywhere. Occasionally you'll see a word or two, but for the most part, the buttons are all labeled with numbers. They also change often and the studio doesn't usually care what image comes up so long as it shows what is needed. (ie. someone pressing a button) So in that case, small detail like a console can be a major undertaking in adapting it to function as something a player could use rather then something that only a highly trained professional could.

[Vulcan_Sipho]

It is sadthat people don't feel theycan rp with Cryptics setup for the game. checkout
http://www.stogeek.com/wiki/Main_Page

there are all kinds of fanfiction and rpsetups in the works based around fleets that will be in STO like Lonestar Fleet has a large RP aspect to it.but instead of having a Captain with a crew with have a Fleet Admiral with many captains under him to do missions with.

think about the rp aspects like this, you have inclose rp where your within a shipand members of a crew, then you step back a notch and you have starfleet issuing orders to different fleets same thing just one step back and for those Q fans u could go back one more step and show how maybe the Q's are influencing different empires via rp.

so relax and find the way you can love the game and do just that enjoy it.

[marscentral]

Another issue you run into, for something like console artwork, is... which one? Throughout the shows, we see the consoles change. If you notice, the consoles never actually have real text, but numbers everywhere. Occasionally you'll see a word or two, but for the most part, the buttons are all labeled with numbers. They also change often and the studio doesn't usually care what image comes up so long as it shows what is needed. (ie. someone pressing a button) So in that case, small detail like a console can be a major undertaking in adapting it to function as something a player could use rather then something that only a highly trained professional could.

I was under the impression that they were essentially touch screen monitors and the buttons could technically be any where depending on what's happening and who's operating it. We can do that now.

As to the text, they knew people could never read it on a TV screen, so there's some unTrek things on them. According to the TNG tech manual, one of the monitors in Engineering had an Infinite Improbability Drive (a nod to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Technically, that makes it a canon part of the Warp Drive. :D

While I think detail is important, I think it's equally important not to get bogged down in it.

[Duckdee]

As to the text, they knew people could never read it on a TV screen, so there's some unTrek things on them. According to the TNG tech manual, one of the monitors in Engineering had an Infinite Improbability Drive (a nod to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Technically, that makes it a canon part of the Warp Drive. :D
I needs me a copy of that book. :)

*ponders what other H2G2 stuff to use*

[thefreshjedi]

I think, words betraying visual content is an art.

Yep, for example "politics and the media". And just think if you have a bachelors in political science, you quite litterally have a degree in BS.

Art will always be subjective.

-avery

[thefreshjedi]

...

I'm not the only arrogant one in this forum. I'm just not an idiot.

...

See that's the problem with teh internetz.

Everyone automatically assumes that everyone else is stupid, lying, impractical, or idiotic. The other problem is that nothing ever gets resolved in net-space. I mean, people just argue and argue and argue, over and over, until one or the other gets tired of arguing, or someone else steps in and says stfu, or gtfo, or any other acryonomious cliche... Then everyone gets pist and nothing gets resolved, no-one listens anymore, and the point of the OP is lost. The reality is that we all have opinions. Some of us agree, while many others don't or wont. Some like to play devil's advocate, and then just sit back and watch it burn. That's why anonyminoty on any forum is just a warm blanket. I mean you wouldn't talk like this to people close to you, family, co-workers, etc. Because you know damn well they would put you in your place. You would lose your job, or would be publicly ostrasized from everything.

Unless of course you are in fact retarded and run around yelling at buildings, parking meters, or trash bins for a hobby, in which case, then at least you have a valid excuse.

I mean, if you guys really hate each other so much, then just privately exchange phone numbers or addresses go and physically meet each other, and beat the crap out of each other. I mean that's all it is. Just two egotistical apes that instead of breaking bones over each other's heads, all you're doing is slinging verbal poo at each other, which in turn is the internet equivalent of FAIL. Just stop it already. Whether you agree or not, you both look stupid in the end, because it's like watching two kids arguing over who's turn it is to play with the new Spider-man with the kung-fu-grip. Just play with another damn toy, already and get over it.

-avery

[Skelly]

I believe that now is the time for people to make there request. Let's face it, this is the only chance for a great while that a trek fan has for the game they are hoping for. Some want to be "Scotty", others want to be "McCoy", and some just want to be a red shirt. To them, this is the only chance. There are several Kirk and Picard games out there, but not the supporting role games. So this is the only hope they have right now, and they will be vocal in order to get what they want.

I have always seen an MMO to give that. To be several games in one. But that comes at a cost to the developer that they may not want. However the fan still wants it, this game is still the best medium for making it, and this forum is the best place to keep bring it up.

[Blackfire2]

I hate to break it to the OP here but all MMO's are a sim in one way or the other. WOW is a sim of the fantasy genre, characters use swords and magic and go on adventures. Eve is a sim in the science fiction vane of ship combat, economics and more, so to say you dont want trek to be a sim , you've already lost the arguement before it got started. If rather you are saying you dont want immersive rp then say that instead.

[Thibor]

I hate to break it to the OP here but all MMO's are a sim in one way or the other. WOW is a sim of the fantasy genre, characters use swords and magic and go on adventures. Eve is a sim in the science fiction vane of ship combat, economics and more, so to say you dont want trek to be a sim , you've already lost the arguement before it got started. If rather you are saying you dont want immersive rp then say that instead.

Yes and no. Much as to do with the level of detail involved.
Someone playing a melee class in WoW is not playing a medieval weapons simulator as no matter how many mobs you slay, you no more know how to handle an edged or blunt weapon then when you started playing.
Nor does some with 450 blacksmith profession skill in WoW know any more about how to forge a blade then they did when they started the game.
WoW does not require the user to have any knowledge of such things to do them well.

Whereas in contrast, in a Gamespot review of MS' Flight Simulator X:
" ... realism that makes the sim a great trainer for those seeking a real pilot's license; ... "

Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with what computer gamers view as a "simulation" vs. the generic dictionary definition.

[_Pax_]

I needs me a copy of that book. :)
Also in that book, you learn that in Sickbay ... you know the big, wall-sized display usually behind Dr. Crusher? One of the tiny entries on that was "Medical Insurance Remaining". :)

[RE-Kirk]

Darn...

I really wanted my shipmates to act as an extra layer of armor coating the hull of the ship

Serious note - the game will be what it is. We can either learn to love it or hate it shortly after release.

Personal Examples...
Played EQ2 for a year and LOVED IT!!! - then they nerfed my main into uselessness
Played City of Villians - cool concept, no depth, boring... but that's just my opinion
Tried WoW - learned to hate WoW players, didn't even make it through the 10 day trial

STO may be everything I want until they change it and I hate it, or it may be lacking a particular component and I will get it later if at all

It would be nice if folks would stop whining (guilty of earlier whiny post) about what the game isn't going to be and start intelligently critiquing what the game will be

GL to those at Infogrames/Atari/Cryptic - here's to continued employment

[eventhorizen]

Generally speaking all games need some form of simulation to make any kind of sense whatsoever. What this thread is an example of is the reduction of complex issues down to single phrases for ease of argument, that have no actual relevance to the reality of game development.

A great many features of Star Trek will have to be simulated for this game to have any relevance to its title, or even to work as a game, let alone be successful as a product. The real question is not if ST-O will be a "sim" but rather what will be simulated and the effects that will have upon the finished, or released, product.

Personally speaking I am a fan of complex simulations of abstract rules that produce the abstract replication of environments and interesting, logical, purpose driven and fun interactions within those abstract replicated environments. These kind of systems, for example those within the Europa Universalis series, force roleplay and logical, relevant interaction through simulation and provide to the fans of the genre in question a highly detailed, highly playable, highly enjoyable simulation of the relevant material.

Another type of simulation is the FPS, an action packed twitch combat game that generally consists of nothing more than movement and firing throughout an environment. Yet the better FPS will simulate weapons systems, lighting and shadows, accurate motion animation, cover, destructible environments, grenade trajectories, weapon recoil, object physics etc. The FPS also forces the player to roleplay the exact character that he or she is playing as, that being the whole point of the game.

It has always been my opinion that the more accurately Star Trek is simulated in ST-O the better the eventual game will be, however my understanding of simulation within gaming is a lot more complex than "cleaning jefferies tubes" or any other mundane and tedious single interaction. This is not an understanding shared by the majority of those I have ever had a discussion with on ST-O fansites.

[AdmGillis]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet:

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route. I trust that Cryptic is designing missions around the concept of Group Leader and Support for the characters and Flagship/Supoort Ship for the starships.

At this point we're within a year of launch so I severely doubt there will be any opportunity to change the coding for the game at this point in any major way. So please, appreciate the upcoming game for what it is and what it will be at launch. Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

What are you to say to those who think that REALISM IS FUN?

Sorry, people who run simulators don't do so because they hate it... they do it because they enjoy it. Why is your idea of fun more important than theirs?

[Magnuson]

What are you to say to those who think that REALISM IS FUN?

Sorry, people who run simulators don't do so because they hate it... they do it because they enjoy it. Why is your idea of fun more important than theirs?

He's not saying that people who enjoy simulations are wrong or bad or stupid or any other demeaning term. What he's saying and what many others are saying is that this game is not intended to be a SIM, that it's not going to be a SIM and that anyone who *****es about this game not being a SIM is wasting their breath.

Listen it's waaaay too early to say whether the game will be great or horrible or somewhere in between. It's been in development for less than a year which in development time is nothing. So for people to ***** about an unfinished product is frankly RIDICULOUS. Now I can understand if there are people out there that are dissapointed that the game is not a SIM, but to say the game is going to be $h!t because of that, is frankly again RIDICULOUS. I think that's the basic message of the original poster and it's a sentiment that I share.

[JamesDBurke]

See that's the problem with teh internetz.

Everyone automatically assumes that everyone else is stupid, lying, impractical, or idiotic. The other problem is that nothing ever gets resolved in net-space. I mean, people just argue and argue and argue, over and over, until one or the other gets tired of arguing, or someone else steps in and says stfu, or gtfo, or any other acryonomious cliche... Then everyone gets pist and nothing gets resolved, no-one listens anymore, and the point of the OP is lost. The reality is that we all have opinions. Some of us agree, while many others don't or wont. Some like to play devil's advocate, and then just sit back and watch it burn. That's why anonyminoty on any forum is just a warm blanket. I mean you wouldn't talk like this to people close to you, family, co-workers, etc. Because you know damn well they would put you in your place. You would lose your job, or would be publicly ostrasized from everything.

Unless of course you are in fact retarded and run around yelling at buildings, parking meters, or trash bins for a hobby, in which case, then at least you have a valid excuse.

I mean, if you guys really hate each other so much, then just privately exchange phone numbers or addresses go and physically meet each other, and beat the crap out of each other. I mean that's all it is. Just two egotistical apes that instead of breaking bones over each other's heads, all you're doing is slinging verbal poo at each other, which in turn is the internet equivalent of FAIL. Just stop it already. Whether you agree or not, you both look stupid in the end, because it's like watching two kids arguing over who's turn it is to play with the new Spider-man with the kung-fu-grip. Just play with another damn toy, already and get over it.

-avery

I am totally sorry for almost becoming the type of flamer/argumentative jack@$$ forum dweller that I have always disliked. I only got steamed because of the personal insults. Again, sorry to the community at large for the spectacle.


What are you to say to those who think that REALISM IS FUN?

Sorry, people who run simulators don't do so because they hate it... they do it because they enjoy it. Why is your idea of fun more important than theirs?

As another poster said, I am not saying that simulators (and the people who play them) are not fun. I myself enjoy a good flight sim. Not even the combat oriented ones! My point is though that as much as STO is a simulated environment the devs have told us time and again that STO will not be a SIM. Which means that hardcore particulars and minutiae will likely be left out of the mix when it comes time to launch the title.

My whole point was that the mentality Cryptic is aiming for when we log off of the game is thoughts like, "Cool, I repelled a Borg incursion, rescued hostages from an enemy station, discovered a planet and may have developed a new type of sensor array that extends my range by 5%." That sounds like pure good time fun within the Trek universe. All these things happen regularly on the episodes, what else can we ask for as far as mission options?

What they won't be having us do is adjusting our sensor calibration by .003 microns to see if we get a better resolution in the graviton flux spectrum. That is SIM. That is cool if you are into Treknobabble. Very realistic. Learning the customs of an indigenous sentient species prior to making first contact to avoid a negative result. Again very realistic and it is a SIM style approach that would require a decent amount of research to accomplish. We won't be having to write personnel assessments or reprimands and commendation for our crew. These things are enjoyable for a few people but not for most.

A SIM game would be great but would only be marketable to a niche group. Cryptic devs have already said that they are targeting the entire gamer community with STO so while I anticipate some SIM-ish type of opportunities with the game the simple fact is that if it isn't something that will be readily accessible and enjoyable to the general gaming audience it will most likely not have a high priority for inclusion into the game. You see what I meant by Fun Trumps Realism?

[Tribbler]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet:

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route. I trust that Cryptic is designing missions around the concept of Group Leader and Support for the characters and Flagship/Supoort Ship for the starships.

At this point we're within a year of launch so I severely doubt there will be any opportunity to change the coding for the game at this point in any major way. So please, appreciate the upcoming game for what it is and what it will be at launch. Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

Please say it isn't so.

I like to watch people argue and use up their time in pointless debate as the devs continue forward without reading these posts.

A time will come when devs will come out of the BATCAVE and get a few ideas, tweak the game, and implement the idea.

But they are not going to re-arrange anything, if it upsets the "unknown to us" launchdate. Their creditors and associates will not have it.

[Duras]

But they are not going to re-arrange anything, if it upsets the "unknown to us" launchdate. Their creditors and associates will not have it.

I have to dissagree there ,Tribbler. I suspect CS and others hide a launch date for many reasons, as well as being flexable within the developer's production requirements, another amongst the many, is for reviewing possible game content prior to beta. If an idea can be introduced within the time barrier...

As well as staying loyal to those loverly creditors and associates they are in league with. :rolleyes:

[thefreshjedi]

I am totally sorry for almost becoming the type of flamer/argumentative jack@$$ forum dweller that I have always disliked. I only got steamed because of the personal insults. Again, sorry to the community at large for the spectacle.
...


Meh, it's no problem James... we all do it from time to time, myself included. You get on a tangent because you have a shiny new idea, and you want to express it as succincly as possible, but them someone else comes in, unzips their fly and lets loose all over it. And you're just sitting there watching your idea get coated in someone else's wasteful byproduct. It especially burns me up when people only read the first few paragraphs and then assume they have the whole story, or the full picture, instead of really reading between the lines.

But we're all guilty of mouthbreathing, we're all guilty of being too busy or overwhelmed with information in our day to day life, and we're all guilty of "sea-gull" managing someone elses threads.

It's the way it is.



-avery

[Duras]

But we're all guilty of mouthbreathing, we're all guilty of being too busy or overwhelmed with information in our day to day life, and we're all guilty of "sea-gull" managing someone elses threads.

I'm guity too... :o

[Dwidian]

... but I can't see how allowing me to use that to manually reconfigure the transporter's pattern buffer is a productive use of developer time.

And that is the crux of this whole issue. Could they create an entire starship, broom closet by broom closet, room by room, corridor by corridor, and deck by deck? Yes, they certainly could. At the expense of something else. The vast majority of people might walk the entirety of their ship once (if at all) and then never do it again, favoring the use of turbolifts and other in-game mechanics to move about more quickly. Seems like an awful lot of work that could be used on something more useful and game-oriented.

[Kinneas]

Space Madness.

It happens. All is forgiven and I thank those who have forgiven me mine in the past years.
----------


"Evolution" has been promised. If we can sustain STO...everyone will eventually get the STO they want.

The STO we might be able to have have after all the 'I need something new' crew have gone could be very interesting.

It is nice to think as a long-term project how STO is going to look ten, twenty, forty years from now.
---

What? You aren't interested in participating in this financially for the rest of your life? What? It's just a game?
:D


The simulation will be perfect some day, Mr. Spock.

[LawLessOne]

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Last time I checked, SIM means simulation. If that is still true then STO better be a SIM game. It better simulate Space Combat, Exploration, etc.etc.

As far as making major changes to the game, it may well be 'too late'. Given what Cryptic has said they have certainly chosen a direction and will continue to persue that direction for as long as they believe it is the correct choice. Going back now may be 'impossible'.

[Stryklone]

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary

sim·u·la·tion
1: the act or process of simulating
2: a sham object : counterfeit
3 a: the imitative representation of the functioning of one system or process by means of the functioning of another <a computer simulation of an industrial process> b: examination of a problem often not subject to direct experimentation by means of a simulating device

game
1 a (1): activity engaged in for diversion or amusement : play (2): the equipment for a game b: often derisive or mocking jesting : fun , sport <make game of a nervous player>
2 a: a procedure or strategy for gaining an end : tactic b: an illegal or shady scheme or maneuver : racket
3 a (1): a physical or mental competition conducted according to rules with the participants in direct opposition to each other (2): a division of a larger contest

STO is an attempt to create an activity for diversion or amusement. Within that, luckily for everyone, it will try to simulate the feel and attitude in the Star Trek universe - except where the game makers decide it would either override the game part, take too long to implement, or take too many resources away from solving thousands of other checklist items.

Even the TV series, the movies and the novels are not simulations of living in the Star Trek universe. Let's face it, even in the TV series, if something broke and it took 3 days to fix it, that doesn't mean the viewers had to wait 3 days for the result. Personally, I'm glad to not have to wait that long. If STO ever does add detail to the nth degree and it would fit on your home computer and Internet connection, that would be nice - if they include an option to not use it for those who only want to game and not sim. Yes, for some, the simulation would indeed be the ultimate diversion. This game will not be it.

There's no harm in speculating about this detail or that; that's part of what makes fans fans. We can all choose to play or not play this game when it comes out. I'm just like anyone else: the only way a game or simulation can please me 100% is to do 100% of what I want. ;) Just please consider that, by the measure of "this game is a poor simulation," all Star Trek games ever made - or that will be made - are utter failures.

Stryklone
========

[cocoa-jin]

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary

sim·u·la·tion
1: the act or process of simulating
2: a sham object : counterfeit
3 a: the imitative representation of the functioning of one system or process by means of the functioning of another <a computer simulation of an industrial process> b: examination of a problem often not subject to direct experimentation by means of a simulating device

game
1 a (1): activity engaged in for diversion or amusement : play (2): the equipment for a game b: often derisive or mocking jesting : fun , sport <make game of a nervous player>
2 a: a procedure or strategy for gaining an end : tactic b: an illegal or shady scheme or maneuver : racket
3 a (1): a physical or mental competition conducted according to rules with the participants in direct opposition to each other (2): a division of a larger contest

STO is an attempt to create an activity for diversion or amusement. Within that, luckily for everyone, it will try to simulate the feel and attitude in the Star Trek universe - except where the game makers decide it would either override the game part, take too long to implement, or take too many resources away from solving thousands of other checklist items.

Even the TV series, the movies and the novels are not simulations of living in the Star Trek universe. Let's face it, even in the TV series, if something broke and it took 3 days to fix it, that doesn't mean the viewers had to wait 3 days for the result. Personally, I'm glad to not have to wait that long. If STO ever does add detail to the nth degree and it would fit on your home computer and Internet connection, that would be nice - if they include an option to not use it for those who only want to game and not sim. Yes, for some, the simulation would indeed be the ultimate diversion. This game will not be it.

There's no harm in speculating about this detail or that; that's part of what makes fans fans. We can all choose to play or not play this game when it comes out. I'm just like anyone else: the only way a game or simulation can please me 100% is to do 100% of what I want. ;) Just please consider that, by the measure of "this game is a poor simulation," all Star Trek games ever made - or that will be made - are utter failures.

Stryklone
========

I remember in college being told the worst and most cliche way to start an argument or thesis is to use a dictionary to define something your arguing...especially since the dictionary rarley encompasses the complexity of the argument.

STO will undoubtly contain aspects of both while excluding aspects of both.

Your use of the definitions seems to imply that each is mutually exclusive of both when we know thats not the case. Ive played several "computer entertainment products" that apply aspects of both.

What is MSFlight sim? Combat Flight sim? WWIIOnline? Silent Hunter III and IV? GTR? Madden Football? the Sims?....not games? not simulators? gamulators? simulames? If we are going to use a book of definitions to define them, then based on the FAA's definition...nothing even close to what's been suggested in forum or even reasonable to be developed for STO would make it a simulator.

[Stryklone]

I remember in college being told the worst and most cliche way to start an argument or thesis is to use a dictionary to define something your arguing...especially since the dictionary rarley encompasses the complexity of the argument.
Fortunately, this case is the "rarely." People were arguing over definitions, which makes citing defintions perfectly vailid.
STO will undoubtly contain aspects of both while excluding aspects of both.

Your use of the definitions seems to imply that each is mutually exclusive of both when we know thats not the case. Ive played several "computer entertainment products" that apply aspects of both.
Perhaps you missed this part of my post?
STO is an attempt to create an activity for diversion or amusement. Within that, luckily for everyone, it will try to simulate the feel and attitude in the Star Trek universe - except where the game makers decide it would either override the game part, take too long to implement, or take too many resources away from solving thousands of other checklist items.

The point is where is the line drawn between the extremes of the two approaches. The devs have made it clear which side they favor and are writing, and it isn't trending toward WWII Online. We both adore Star Trek and it's natural to discuss it from different areas, no harm done. I don't advocate anyone not voicing their opinion in a forum. I have no wish for anyone to not stop posting. It does worry me that many fans want it their way or the highway. I'm just trying to prepare people that no matter what is done it will not be the perfect Star Trek version of The Sims. People will have decide for themselves if 99% of what they want is acceptable ... or 90% ... or 80% ... or 50% ... A lot of posters give the impression nothing less than 100% is acceptable.

Stryklone
========

[CaptainQuirk]

Just a friendly Public Server Announcement to all the folks who haven't quite grasped this fact yet:

Star Trek Online is not intended to be a SIM game. It is an MMO which means that FUN TRUMPS REALISM.

Seriously, all these "but I don't wanna be the Captain, I wanna be the Engineer" threads are beginning to seem a little juvenile at this point. Cryptic has told us how its going to be. That's the only flavor we get. I mean seriously, if you want to play a support role, fantastic. Develop your character and ship along that route. I trust that Cryptic is designing missions around the concept of Group Leader and Support for the characters and Flagship/Supoort Ship for the starships.

At this point we're within a year of launch so I severely doubt there will be any opportunity to change the coding for the game at this point in any major way. So please, appreciate the upcoming game for what it is and what it will be at launch. Once its out, let's play it and we can then make our requests known depending on how the game actually works.

I agree with you 100%

Okay, everyone... The only way you can show cryptic that you will accept nothing less than a Star Trek sim, post a farewell message and leave these forums and do not return. After all, since they won't pay attention to your voice, maybe they'll listen to your silence. Do it now.

Everyone else, carry on as usual. No harm done...

[CaptainQuirk]

And in case you guys didn't catch it, my above reply was total sarcasm

At this stage in development, anything and everything is potentially subject to change. Except the player bridge crew issue, which is clearly no longer open for debate.

I for one see plenty of potential for there to be sim elements in the game for those who actually WANT that aspect. We're not dealing with just one demographic here. We have a very wide variety of interests among us.

As long as any sim-type elements are not required for those not interested, what difference does it make if they are included?

[Stryklone]

And in case you guys didn't catch it, my above reply was total sarcasm

At this stage in development, anything and everything is potentially subject to change. Except the player bridge crew issue, which is clearly no longer open for debate.

I for one see plenty of potential for there to be sim elements in the game for those who actually WANT that aspect. We're not dealing with just one demographic here. We have a very wide variety of interests among us.

As long as any sim-type elements are not required for those not interested, what difference does it make if they are included?
Actually, the wide variety of interests to include is the problem which makes the difference. There's only so many programmers and resources to go around. Whatever detail they do in one area means the detail someone else clamors for doesn't get done.

I'm for the option to have as much sim stuff as they can cram into my hard drive, as long as it is an option. There are times I'd love to explore every shipboard inch and times I'd take the shortcut - either way I'm completely for increasing the number of options a player has. But I accept that getting the basics down well for a game will be difficult and lengthy, and getting detail down well will be nigh impossible within the next year. Getting Star Trek detail everyone will agree to will forever be impossible regardless of time spent. And if they could do it perfectly, there will still be times when you'll see someone disable an enemy ship and hear the classic Federation words come over the com channel "Woot! I PWNED UR USELESS ***!"

We're already very lucky to have game makers go to the trouble of carefully looking at every episode, every movie, and every Star Trek novel they can devour.

And now my last words on the subject: Happy New Year!

Stryklone
========