Sincere worries about viability of STO

[THORN74]

I have noticed a growing trend of hostillity and exclusionism growing on this forum. It has seemingly permiated every thread topic with increasing levels of hostillity. This game is about Star Trek a much loved and followed television and movie series that was demonstrating an inclusionary society of tollerance and peace. So it both saddens and worries me that the people on this forum are not getting along in increasing numbers. i hope its just a case of the holiday blues, but i fear that "this" will be the population that inhabits the STO game world. Atitudes such as this will destroy this game faster that any gameplay mechanics or design choices that could be attributed to the Dev.


Im not suggesting we need to be the utopia that is star trek or the federation, but i would think fans of this particular show/movies would be more tollerant of others and thier ideas. Instead, every thread i open has been filled with desention, intollerance, personal attacks, rudeness, and eliteism.

I guess my hope is eveyone who reads this will take a deep breath, and THINK before you post next time.


as Spock would say: Live long, and prosper.

THORN

[onesoul1982]

Well on the bright side you can ignore people in game and the like.


Not everyone gets along in other MMOs and some of them are doing just fine

[marscentral]

Thinking is overrated, I just post the first thing that comes to mind and click post. :D

There is a community here and like any active community, we have arguements. That's life. Plus, the people here now are a small fraction of the likely total.

[Dark_MatterTRON]

Possibly one of the issues about this forum is that the game is not very far in development. As such, Cryptic can't really give us very much information about it, so we are stuck getting into arguments.

[UfcFan78]

Well.......here is the problem. We're human. We don't get along 100% with other humans. Humans in Star Trek don't get along 100% with other humans or anyone else for that matter. I wouldn't want to be apart of a group of 100% "yes" mean and women. I don't want to hold anyone here's hand let alone everyone. Competition and disagreements with each other is one of the things that makes us human. The spats on the forums are normal. They happen everywhere from politics, businesses, schools, the military............what would make these forums any different? The whole "Star Trek is a better future" vision? No matter what century we are in ......humans will have opinions and we will bump heads occasionally. It's healthy.

And, yes......thinking is overrated!! :D

[raldar]

. Atitudes such as this will destroy this game faster that any gameplay mechanics or design choices that could be attributed to the Dev.


THORN

Maybe for you. But for those people who don't really care about the "moral message" that ST is supposedly spouting then the game will live or die by the way it plays and is designed over people not singing kumbia(is that how it's spelled?)

[Thibor]

Maybe for you. But for those people who don't really care about the "moral message" that ST is supposedly spouting then the game will live or die by the way it plays and is designed over people not singing kumbia(is that how it's spelled?)

^^ THIS.

Or, a good sc-fi game can certainly take the man out of the 21st century but, you're not going to take the 21st century out of the man.

[Ozymandias]

My own two credits, of course... what I generally see as causes of strife on the forums:

Point 1 - Star Trek is a well-established IP with a large and diverse fanbase. Our love of Trek brings us together, but it doesn't stop us from being opinionated and passionate, and since we come from a wide variety of backgrounds and belief systems, it's bound to cause friction.

Point 2 - Now that these forums have been out for a while, the inevitable "vet vs. newbie" poster conflicts are bound to happen. Folks who have been around for a while who grit their teeth at the upteenth "How can I...?" question that's been answered ad nauseum (and covered in the FAQ). Replies of "Search button FTW!" are going to happen as more and more new folk come to these forums.

Point 3 - Related to point 1, lots of folks come ot this game with previous game experience and yes, we definitely have our opinions on what worked/didn't work in previous games, and interjecting our opinions based on that experience is inevitable (and actually healthy for game development).

Point 4 - It's an internet forum, so the whole "internet anonymous" issue comes to the fore. Face to face argument and forum confrontations are vastly different (obviously) and folks who would normally back down from a fight in RL have much more freedom to 'draw a line in the sand' here.

My own personal solution? "Tolerance. Tolerance is logical," Spock said to Saavik in the novel Dwellers in the Crucible and I do my best to live by that ideal. It doesn't mean that I'm not going to disagree with some of the posters here, but there's no reason why I should be hateful or antagonistic about it - instead, I want our disagreement to further the discussion, where differing points of view can be brought 'to the table' so to speak without fear of antagonism or a "zOMG u dum n3wb!" response.

Disagreement is fine, and even healthy. Tolerance, folks. Tolerance is logical.

[LordDave]

HA!
Welcome to the world of Fan-Atics. We're just as bad as religion or any other highly sensitive subject. It's not going to get better, but it won't kill anything: Just **** people off.

[indigowhale345]

I don't see it. The thing thats been said but has to be reinforced is that arguments are not the same as hostility. Never ever interpret an argument as a sign of hostility! Thats a big mistake to make, and a lot of people make the mistake in real life even. But on the internet its even worse because 80% of our communication is not in the words we speak/write, but in the intonation, stressing of words, context, body language and so on.

Take the sentence, "I ate that taco." Say it a few different ways and apply different contextual situations to it and you can make it say anything from disgust, to enjoyment, to something sexual or just complete nonsense.

But back on topic, even if there is gobs of hostility here, that isn't a predictor of the game's success at all. As I understand it, WOW would be a prime example of a crappy community and a successful game. Tabula Rasa would be the opposite, great community, failed game. So even if it were true, its not necessarily a problem at all.

[Trekkie]

Honestly, I think that part of this stems from the fact that we still know relatively little about the game and there are a lot of dissenting opinions on what people think would be "right" for the game and such. Although I don't really expect for this forum to be completely in unison - which is a good thing - I think that a lot of the dissension will go away as the game gets closer to launch.

[Varrangian]

I blame me.

[LordDave]

I blame me.

I blame you too. :p

[KO_Gilligan]

I blame you too. :p

Don't patronize him, your only making it worse :p

[marscentral]

I blame all of you. You should be sitting in awed silence, waiting to agree with me. :D

[cocoa-jin]

Hey...whats wrong with elitism if you share what you know and try and bring others along with you?

[Kuhr]

What I sense also when someone brings up a logical point or debate about a subject matter all he** breaks lose. Why? Good question. Some have strong convictions about how they are going to play this game and try to force their sometimes warp opinion on others. I for one, try to stay in charecter, why?, because thats how im going to play about 99% of this game. Others a more political view and so on. So what I suggest is stop throwing names around to those wish to share their opinions or decent from the majority. As long as its done in a well played and respectable manner. Sometimes things are said in a heated discussion, thats expected. I dont think that all of this will take away from STO. Justs make it have more drama.

[Varrangian]

I blame you too. :p

Don't patronize him, your only making it worse :p

It is always good to know who you're true forum friends are ;)

[Swizy]

That's the true Christmas spirit! :cool:

[Anichent]

Honestly, I think that part of this stems from the fact that we still know relatively little about the game and there are a lot of dissenting opinions on what people think would be "right" for the game and such. Although I don't really expect for this forum to be completely in unison - which is a good thing - I think that a lot of the dissension will go away as the game gets closer to launch.

I agree, obviously people are going to have different opinions of what the game should be like in the end...but I also agree with the worry that sparked this thread; people seem to be getting into unecissary arguments. These forums are about people being able to say what they think, not about attacking people for what they think or telling them that it is wrong. There is no game yet, and we each have the right to say what we would like to see, without belittling other people. In the end, these petty arguments don't matter because WE are not the ones making the game and the best way to influence those who are is not by criticising each other.

[Duras]

HA!
Welcome to the world of Fan-Atics. We're just as bad as religion or any other highly sensitive subject. It's not going to get better, but it won't kill anything: Just **** people off.

My compliments, I thought about that... made me think.

A worrying factor.
I just wont worship my favourite charactor...

[Koroth]

I have noticed a growing trend of hostillity and exclusionism growing on this forum. It has seemingly permiated every thread topic with increasing levels of hostillity. This game is about Star Trek a much loved and followed television and movie series that was demonstrating an inclusionary society of tollerance and peace. So it both saddens and worries me that the people on this forum are not getting along in increasing numbers. i hope its just a case of the holiday blues, but i fear that "this" will be the population that inhabits the STO game world. Atitudes such as this will destroy this game faster that any gameplay mechanics or design choices that could be attributed to the Dev.


Im not suggesting we need to be the utopia that is star trek or the federation, but i would think fans of this particular show/movies would be more tollerant of others and thier ideas. Instead, every thread i open has been filled with desention, intollerance, personal attacks, rudeness, and eliteism.

I guess my hope is eveyone who reads this will take a deep breath, and THINK before you post next time.


as Spock would say: Live long, and prosper.

THORN

I agree. The tone is very negative, and a few individuals are making an exceptional effort to further that. Why it is allowed is beyond me. Actually, some of it is not allowed, yet rudeness in the guise of "defending the game" seems to run unchecked. Perhaps Awen can root it out.

One thing that does not surprise me is that STO is attracting non Trek fans, general gamers. With the much-vaunted "expansion of the MMO market" bringing so many more and different people into play, the market no longer appeals only to those who are willing to put time and effort into their entertainment, but also enables those who enjoy demeaning and dominating others. So, some of this has nothing to do with Trek.

Yet some of it does have to do with Trek. Trek isn't the boldly idealistic adventure it once was. The Master has gone, the Mistress has gone, and the music has changed. It's about to change even more with the release of a new movie, directed by a man who doesn't even like Star Trek. For this game to be "about Star Trek" doesn't mean what it used to.

- Koroth

[Anichent]

I agree. The tone is very negative, and a few individuals are making an exceptional effort to further that. Why it is allowed is beyond me. Actually, some of it is not allowed, yet rudeness in the guise of "defending the game" seems to run unchecked. Perhaps Awen can root it out.

One thing that does not surprise me is that STO is attracting non Trek fans, general gamers. With the much-vaunted "expansion of the MMO market" bringing so many more and different people into play, the market no longer appeals only to those who are willing to put time and effort into their entertainment, but also enables those who enjoy demeaning and dominating others. So, some of this has nothing to do with Trek.

Yet some of it does have to do with Trek. Trek isn't the boldly idealistic adventure it once was. The Master has gone, the Mistress has gone, and the music has changed. It's about to change even more with the release of a new movie, directed by a man who doesn't even like Star Trek. For this game to be "about Star Trek" doesn't mean what it used to.

- Koroth

:( I don't worry for the game, I worry for the future of Star Trek...perhaps the golden age has passed.

[Duras]

:( I don't worry for the game, I worry for the future of Star Trek...perhaps the golden age has passed.

blastfermy....... :eek:

[Meehile]

I have noticed a growing trend of hostillity and exclusionism growing on this forum. It has seemingly permiated every thread topic with increasing levels of hostillity. This game is about Star Trek a much loved and followed television and movie series that was demonstrating an inclusionary society of tollerance and peace. So it both saddens and worries me that the people on this forum are not getting along in increasing numbers. i hope its just a case of the holiday blues, but i fear that "this" will be the population that inhabits the STO game world. Atitudes such as this will destroy this game faster that any gameplay mechanics or design choices that could be attributed to the Dev.


Im not suggesting we need to be the utopia that is star trek or the federation, but i would think fans of this particular show/movies would be more tollerant of others and thier ideas. Instead, every thread i open has been filled with desention, intollerance, personal attacks, rudeness, and eliteism.

I guess my hope is eveyone who reads this will take a deep breath, and THINK before you post next time.


as Spock would say: Live long, and prosper.

THORN


I don't know what forums you have been reading because this is one of the most well behaved and civilized gaming forums I have ever seen. The Warcraft forums are a hive of scum and villainy (ok, sorry for the SW reference). Most gaming forums are overrun by the epeeners and trolls that chase off any worthwhile discussions.

As for the viability of STO, why not wait and see? This doomsday crap gets tossed at every MMO that is not named "Warcraft", and it gets old. The first thing a large chunk of people do to any new MMO is to invent reasons why it isn't as good as WoW and will fail. Try some optimism sometimes, or maybe forget about WoW and just try something new with an open mind.

[Dragodargento]

Any game going into the MMO community is going to pick up the trolls that got banned from other forums. Also the fear of retribution is gone when it comes to MMo's and forums so you see the worse come out in people. Flip side you also see the best.

With Star Trek being an older show I doubt that most kids have even seen the show and probably think "Wow a space ship game! I cant wait to blow S.....T up!".

That said I have come from a long history of MMO's and have seen the community as a whole degrade, which is very sad. Playground for e-bullies since they can get away with just about anything.

I would not go into this game thinking that its not going to be full of "DEWD" players. However, just try and find groups of like minded people.

I for one am looking forward to the game. My GF brought up a very good point though, as she is a fan of the ST universe also. She is wondering how they will keep with Star Fleet values in an MMO? You dont just see Star Fleet vessel marauding all over the universe making dead anything that steps in their way. WELL ok there was a DS9 episode that I know of...some alternate universe where they did...but in general Star Fleet is about diplomacy! So she was just trying to figure out what they were going to do about the whole, ask questions first and shoot later attitude.

[Kuhr]

I agree. The tone is very negative, and a few individuals are making an exceptional effort to further that. Why it is allowed is beyond me. Actually, some of it is not allowed, yet rudeness in the guise of "defending the game" seems to run unchecked. Perhaps Awen can root it out.

One thing that does not surprise me is that STO is attracting non Trek fans, general gamers. With the much-vaunted "expansion of the MMO market" bringing so many more and different people into play, the market no longer appeals only to those who are willing to put time and effort into their entertainment, but also enables those who enjoy demeaning and dominating others. So, some of this has nothing to do with Trek.

Yet some of it does have to do with Trek. Trek isn't the boldly idealistic adventure it once was. The Master has gone, the Mistress has gone, and the music has changed. It's about to change even more with the release of a new movie, directed by a man who doesn't even like Star Trek. For this game to be "about Star Trek" doesn't mean what it used to.

- Koroth

Well,one thing I will take issue with is the comment about the new Trek movie, which will come out in 09. The Trailer for that movie looks awesome!!!

[callsign11b]

I don't think its all gloom and doom with this form.
yes your going to have people getting there jollies by tring to be overly negative in all aspects of this game to drum up reactions.
as well just to cause grief.
and try to bully and insult anyone they can.
you get these people all over the net, and thinking they will not show up here is just sticking your head in the sand.
But the great thing about this is you can ignor those people. and when the game goes online.
those will be the people not in some clan / guild because they will be well known and not welcomed in.
as for the discutions or friendly banter that goes on that is mmo's and star trek how many times in the star trek movies or shows you have some banter.
kirk did it to the klingons, pacard did it to the romulans and the klingon sisters.
even Q did it to worf " worf eat any good books lately"
it goes on. as long as its friendly who cares.

[helldiver]

One thing that does not surprise me is that STO is attracting non Trek fans, general gamers. With the much-vaunted "expansion of the MMO market" bringing so many more and different people into play, the market no longer appeals only to those who are willing to put time and effort into their entertainment, but also enables those who enjoy demeaning and dominating others. So, some of this has nothing to do with Trek.

That.

Cryptic is developing an MMO. As such it needs to fit the MMO "needs" first and then in that context fit the fans of the IP. If the fans of the IP are MMO fans and like their implementation, then you have a winner. Think Star Wars Galaxies where the two didn't combine well.

That's something that some folks on the forum do not realize. They want the best of both worlds but don't realize that might not be possible. Game would take for ever to finish.

That being said, there's a bit of ego when it comes to game designers and developers. This ego rubs off on players as well. Some players (and developers) have gripes against a particular game. They fail to see what was good about that game and only concentrate on the bad. As a game designer this isn't good. You can learn a lot from what makes a game successful, even if you're not designing something a long the same genre.

And that's where I come in. Some of my posts seem hostile, I'll admit and I apologize. I think a lot of times I fail to interpret what the OP mentions. I have a significant amount of experience playing MMOs. I think I've played every single MMO that's been released with the exception of Anarchy Online and some of the more obscure free-to-play Item store eastern titles.

I also work for a small 3rd party developer as a graphic artist. What has helped the company succeed is aproach all games with a learning point of view. Some of us might not like World of Warcraft but World of Warcraft is a successful game. There are things with it that are fun. Fun is what any game company should strive for. Fun is the ultimate goal. Fun keeps people subscribing. We've been successful because we make sure what we make is Fun. If it isn't Fun we rethink it over and change things, start again, or add-in alternate gameplay forms so that others with a different aspect of "Fun" can be catered to.

That's just it. I see time and time again folks coming to this forum making suggestions they took from other games that specifically weren't Fun. They then turn around and berrate the Fun aspects of other games they have a bias against.

Take "The Grind" for example. We had a bunch of folks that would come on here and say "Well, the high end ships or the End-Game should only be accessible to people who've played a long time or are in a Fleet large enough to tackle the end game".

That's not Fun. It's fun for a them, it's fun for a few people that have the time and willingness to do it. It isn't fun for a huge chunk of the modern Massive Multiplayer demographic. How do I know that? I know it isn't fun because Vanguard did that. Look at Vanguard's release? Look at their subscription numbers. Then take a look at the trend WoW's been having (smaller raid groups, valuable rewards outside of raid zones).

We're beyond 1999, where long hours of grinding yielded little advancement (Everquest classic, or Lineage). We're beyond 2002, where long hours in massive zerg guilds yielded "Key" or "tier" items. And we're far beyond 2003, where 250,000subs was termed "successful". A game company now days in order to succeed needs to cater to a vast majority of play styles and needs. Not just a few people with loads of free time.

At the same time no mater how hardcore we all are about Star Trek and no mater how much we want it to succeed, we'll be in the Minority. That's something some folks who come here might not realize. We'll be the minority throughout the life of ST:O. Who's the majority? The casual player who doesn't really know much about the ST:O lore, I mean he or she might like it, but they may just want a Sci-Fi MMO to get their frills with for a few hours.

The developer needs to think about who fills his paycheck at the end of the month. Us? the few hardcore ST:O fans that might put up with long collection quests, faction quests, progression lockouts, multi-player crews. Or the casual gamer that want's satisfaction within an hour of play, wants meaningful rewards with less amount of time, wants to have a chance at the ships of renown without having to spend a significant amount of game time getting there, or have to juggle his real life schedule with his "guild schedule" in order to meet farming, raiding, or grinding demands.

[JamesDBurke]

*applause* to helldiver for a well spoken (written?) post.

On the main note of this thread: I really don't see this forum as a source for negativity and conflict. From day one everyone has been respectful. Opinionated to hell and back, but respectful nonetheless. The arguments might get heated, a little touchy sometimes but for the most part it is kept fairly civil.

I'm sure some of us remember the rather harsh flame wars that occurred on the official StarTrek.com website a few years back. Now those were mean. It caused me to stop going to that forum and encouraged me not post or comment on threads for fear that if I commented on something that an old school forum member with 10000+ posts disagreed with, I'd receive a flaming from him and a dozen others like him. It was a fairly harsh environment and nowhere near as civilized and jovial as these forums have been.

I actually find it refreshing to be a part of a forum where people (occasionally, at least) agree to disagree or humor each other by (temporarily) accepting each others perspectives for the opportunity to discuss a given topic.

That being said, bickering in the forums will not make people not play the game. STO will hopefully be a very successful MMO by pulling in non ST fans as well as the dedicated bunch.

Meh, call me crazy. Merry Christmas everybody. Eggnog all around.

[Freejack]

I ate that taco.

[_Pax_]

I don't see it. The thing thats been said but has to be reinforced is that arguments are not the same as hostility. Never ever interpret an argument as a sign of hostility!
Indeed, not!

For example ... Hagon, and myself. We've been at loggerheads more than once - in the big PvP thread mostly. Completely irreconcilable opposing viewpoints on some issues. Nonetheless, I feel no hostility towards him (?); instead, I respect Hagon quite a lot, because our arguments AREN'T symptomatic of a general hostility. I'm usually glad to see Hagon's name in a thread, really.

And there are others, as well, who I recognise ... people I've agreed unreservedly with in thread A, and disagreed vehemently with in thread B. If I ran into any of them, my first response would be "oh hey, I know you! How's gaming?"

Arguments and debates on a forum are precisely that - STUFF ON A FORUM. It ends not far from where it began, really.

[_Pax_]

One thing that does not surprise me is that STO is attracting non Trek fans, general gamers. With the much-vaunted "expansion of the MMO market" bringing so many more and different people into play, the market no longer appeals only to those who are willing to put time and effort into their entertainment, but also enables those who enjoy demeaning and dominating others. So, some of this has nothing to do with Trek.
...

That's remarkably insulting. You might not have intended it - I sincerelyhope you didn't, anyway - but that paragraph just painted everyone who isn't "a Trek fan" by your personal standards as people "who enjoy demeaning and dominating others", and who are "[not] willing to put time and effort into their entertainment".

You don't have to be a fan of Trek (and certainly, not your own specific variety of Trek fan), to be someoen who takes no pleasure in being mean and spiteful ... nor to be someone who enjoys putting great amounts of time into their entertainment.

Your post, in other words, displays a remarkable lack of tolerance for people with, simply enough, different tastes in entertainment than you hold.

The Master has gone, the Mistress has gone, and the music has changed.
Gene was not the Messiah. Please stop worshipping the ground he walked on. :( He was "merely" a very creative man - and I put "merely" in quotes becuase being creative, to the extent that Gene was, is nothing to discount; it is indeed a great virtue. But he certainly was not a prophet nor seer; he had no greater ability to be the architect of a brighter tomorrow than anyone with the motivation to try.

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

You made a good point tho,

There is a lot of people that just put down and slander other peoples views/statements/plans fo rthe game and in a way its not down to them how the game is played.

Everyone should have there own opinions and wishes and views and just pull together.

A Captains badge is the pinnacle of starfleet trainning and is not just handed out idaly to anyone.

If your going to be a captain then represent your people and the greater good.

There will also be members that are just here for fun and games and to see peoples reactions and get joy from it but if you dont involve with them then theres no harm

:)

I didnt make an Admiral for nothing Its advice worth taking

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

blastfermy....... :eek:

Here Here Duras lol

It sure is and Star Trek has managed to find fans all over the plantet and im sure theres a lot more to come

And if they give up on the Franchise (that wont ever happen) then the hard core fans including me will just get together and get the license and make it our selfs so no the Star Trek era will not be over at least while i have Breath in me yet

Admirals Log Ends

[smorris]

Sounds like this is the first MMO or general gaming forum the OP has ever frequented.

Trust me, it gets alot worse than it is currently. But I give you a few months, you'll be past the unease and be flaming and trolling as well as the rest of them :D

[DeaconX]

I have noticed a growing trend of hostillity and exclusionism growing on this forum. It has seemingly permiated every thread topic with increasing levels of hostillity. This game is about Star Trek a much loved and followed television and movie series that was demonstrating an inclusionary society of tollerance and peace. So it both saddens and worries me that the people on this forum are not getting along in increasing numbers. i hope its just a case of the holiday blues, but i fear that "this" will be the population that inhabits the STO game world. Atitudes such as this will destroy this game faster that any gameplay mechanics or design choices that could be attributed to the Dev.


Im not suggesting we need to be the utopia that is star trek or the federation, but i would think fans of this particular show/movies would be more tollerant of others and thier ideas. Instead, every thread i open has been filled with desention, intollerance, personal attacks, rudeness, and eliteism.

I guess my hope is eveyone who reads this will take a deep breath, and THINK before you post next time.


as Spock would say: Live long, and prosper.


THORN



I share your views, concerns and hopes.

[_Pax_]

If your going to be a captain [...]
Except, noone here will be a Starfleet captain. Our charcters might ... or they might be Klingon captains. But the players? The people who actually frequent the forums? Nope.

[Koroth]

...

That's remarkably insulting. You might not have intended it - I sincerelyhope you didn't, anyway - but that paragraph just painted everyone who isn't "a Trek fan" by your personal standards as people "who enjoy demeaning and dominating others", and who are "[not] willing to put time and effort into their entertainment".

You don't have to be a fan of Trek (and certainly, not your own specific variety of Trek fan), to be someoen who takes no pleasure in being mean and spiteful ... nor to be someone who enjoys putting great amounts of time into their entertainment.

Your post, in other words, displays a remarkable lack of tolerance for people with, simply enough, different tastes in entertainment than you hold.

You are correct, I did not intend what you suggest. Thorn74 was commenting on the tone of these forums in the context of the Star Trek mindset. I noted that not all players have any reason to hold such ideals, since not all of them are even Trek fans. Then I commented on negativity in the gaming audience as a whole as a reason for so much negativity on these forums. If you drew that I believe Trek fans to be more positive than the general population, you are correct. I expect Tolkien fans to be so as well, given the tone of his work. Is that an insult to anyone, or just an observation?

I've seen your words elsewhere here Pax, and you're quite belligerent. You have admonished me not to tar whole groups of people with the same brush, but I suggest the same to you. Not everyone who disagrees with you has nefarious motivations or warped thinking. If you treat them as if they do, you're guilty of the very thing you railed against here.

Gene was not the Messiah. Please stop worshipping the ground he walked on. :( He was "merely" a very creative man - and I put "merely" in quotes becuase being creative, to the extent that Gene was, is nothing to discount; it is indeed a great virtue. But he certainly was not a prophet nor seer; he had no greater ability to be the architect of a brighter tomorrow than anyone with the motivation to try.

Gene Roddenberry was simply one of many foreward thinkers and visionaries of the period. You won't find any altar here, sorry. Yet Star Trek was his creation and would never have existed without him. And later directors and producers naturally had other ideas, different enough to cause arguments with Gene while he was still alive, and with Majel who was there from the beginning. So Trek has been changing, and will continue to do so.

I do not agree that Gene had "no greater ability to be the architect of a brighter tomorrow than anyone with the motivation to try." He had greater ability than most people, in my view. He did however have no greater right to be the architect of a brighter tomorrow. And if any do follow him as some kind of guru, they would be rewarded by broadening their view.

- Koroth

[marscentral]

Wow you guys need to lighten up. It's Christmas and we're all friends here. We all love Star Trek, we all love games. So pour yourself a glass of Captain Marscentral's brandy and relax.

[_Pax_]

I noted that not all players have any reason to hold such ideals, since not all of them are even Trek fans.
You intended such, perhaps. But a literal reading of yoru words goes more than a little bit further.

If you drew that I believe Trek fans to be more positive than the general population, you are correct. I expect Tolkien fans to be so as well, given the tone of his work. Is that an insult to anyone, or just an observation?
It depends how that view is expressed, actually. My favorite colors are blue and grey; now, I can express that neutrally (as I just did), or I can do so negatively ("colors other than blue and grey suck, they're so hideous), or even especially-positively (blue and grey are the best colors, ever"). The negative path, however, stands a good chance of giving offense to someone who does not also hold blue and/or grey to be among their favorites.

Whereas just now, you instead took a more positive stance ("I believe Trek fans to be more positive than the general population"), in the first statement you were strongly negative to non-Trek fans (implicitly calling them people who were too lazy to "put time and effort into their entertainment", and then grouping all non-Trek fans together with those hopefully-few wo take "enjoy demeaning and dominating others".

Ergo, I said what I said, and I stand by it still. While your intent may not have been to give offense ... in actuality, you did.

I've seen your words elsewhere here Pax, and you're quite belligerent.
Belligerent? Universally? No, I do not believe so - beyond being assertive, which I do not count as a negative trait. OTOH, when insulted ... yes, I'm sure the natural reaction of feeling hostility towards the source of that insult does show in my words.

Gene Roddenberry was simply one of many foreward thinkers and visionaries of the period. You won't find any altar here, sorry.
When you start calling them "Master" and "Mistress", then the altar is somewhere.

I do not agree that Gene had "no greater ability to be the architect of a brighter tomorrow than anyone with the motivation to try." He had greater ability than most people, in my view.
The man honestly thought that humanity could do entirely without money, within 100 or 200 years. To me, that's not a sign of someone with an especially-firm grasp on the real, today nature of human beings. :rolleyes:

[smorris]

The man honestly thought that humanity could do entirely without money, within 100 or 200 years. To me, that's not a sign of someone with an especially-firm grasp on the real, today nature of human beings. :rolleyes:

Zeitgeist: Addendum (Linky) (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912&ei=nOpUSfbtF5GojQK5p6HMCw&q=zeitgeist+addendum)

[_Pax_]

Zeitgeist: Addendum (Linky) (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912&ei=nOpUSfbtF5GojQK5p6HMCw&q=zeitgeist+addendum)
Written by a crackpot conspiracy theorist with even LESS of a grip on reality than I want to believe Gene had.

Seriously.

I stopped it rather early, I'll admit - when the narrator/director/whoever made a collossal - and grossly misleading - mistake in terms of how a bank's Reserves work.

The example discussed a $10B deposit by the federal government into an account with a bank - and described how a bank must retain reserves equal to, in most cases, only 10% of the actual "money on desposit" of it's transacting accounts.

Okay, that means the bank only has to sit on $1B of that $10B. It can use the other $9B. Doing so does not take money away from the account itself, of course.

...

This is where the mistake is made. The narrator suggests that, in essence, another $9B has been created out of thin air. He misses the fact that the Bank is simply allowed, at no additional interest, to BORROW up to $9B of that $10B deposit.

BORROW, not CREATE.

...

Any conclusions which derive, even in the most minimal part, from that gross and inexcusable mistake (and I'm trying to be generous calling it a mistake; I honestly think it was an intentional LIE, but ... trying to be nice, yeah ...) *ahem*, as Iw as saying, any conclusions which derive in any way from that "error", must perforce be imperfect and, in some degree, FALSE themselves.

...

"Money" itself is a means of conducting indirect exchange. Without money, then all exchanges must be DIRECT ... an impossibility in a culture where many manufacturing processes consist of six, ten, or even fifty intermediate steps.

Let's take ... your computer. Yes, the computer right in front of you. No, wait ... let's get MORE SPECIFIC than that ... and go with just the MONITOR. For the sake of simplicity, I'll assume it's an LCD flatscreen, just like my own.

Now ... do you honestly think that the same people made the LCD film, the circuitry, AND the case?

Do you think these same people manufactured all the COMPONENTS these were made from?

And do you think these same people, in turn, also produced all the MATERIALS these components were fashioned from? Remember, in the case of hte metals, that alone is at least a three-step process: Mining, Smelting, and Refining.

Finally, do you think that those very same people also provided, themselves and not through anyone else, all the various stages of transporation involved? Mine to smelter, smelter to resmelter, resmelter to chip and/or wire and/or solder manufacturers, chip/wire/solder manufacturers to circuit-board assemblers, circuit-board assemblers to Finished Product Assembly Plant, and assembly plant to store ...? (Note, that's just for the METAL resource stream; the PLASTICS are entirely different. Not to mention, the liquid-crystal element ...)

...

No, of course not. The same corporation may have done it - but not the same ten or fifteen people, most certainly not.

And without Money in some form or other, YOU DON'T HAVE CORPORATIONS. Period.

And, I'm serious about that.

What are a person's basic needs? Food, shelter, clothing, medicine, and some modicum of entertainment. Yes?

Without money, if you're a .... SALT miner, let us say ... you go out and spend your day mining salt. Let's ignore the absence of corporations in terms of mining equipment; you work with your crew of 10 or whatever people, mine a LOT of salt, and at the end of the day your share of the produced salt comes to ... I don't know, let's just peg it at five tons.

What good is five tons of salt, to you? You can't eat it (well you could, but, not as your SOLE food item). I suppose you could build a house out of it - but, god help you if it EVER rains. Or if you spill something, for that matter. You can't wear it, and while it may be very useful in fighting infections it hasn't much medicinal use beyond that. And really, five tons of salt is pretty damned boring.

So you have to trade it, right? NO ... what YOU have, sir, is unrefined salt. Not table salt yet! You have to REFINE it.

What's that, you say? You're not trained at that job? Well, I guess it SUCKS TO BE YOU, and you starve ... right?

...

Or, I suppse the Salt Refiner - who CAN trade his refined salt on for clothes, medicine, food, and evne shelter - might act as a middle-man. So you can trade your UNrefined salt to him, for his "extra" food, etc, etc. Right?

Expect him to trade each such item to you, for enough unrefined salt to produce MORE refined salt than it cost him to get that item.

Plus, here's a question: how much table salt is a pair of pants, size 2X and in a nice shade of green, WORTH? And, importantly to you, how much UNrefined salt does this middle-man - whose generousity you are entirely and INEXTRICABLY reliant upon - going to demand of you, in exchange for them? I mean, the person who made that pair of pants can't want allTHAT much table salt ... can they? How are THEY going to trade the salt on for other things, when there's already the Salt Refinery guy doing that very thing?

...

All of a sudden, having an objective - if abstract and arbitrary - value placed on all goods, and using an intermediate medium of exchange, a.k.a. Money, is startign to look a lot LESS complicated, isn't it?




...




Most people who want to do away with money, have never truly THOUGHT about how goods and services could or would be exchanged. Especially, complex goods and services. Because direct barter only goes so far ... and to go further, you must have money.

Now, in Star Trek terms? Think about this question: How complex do you think a STARSHIP is ...?

[UfcFan78]

I watched it before, lol, it is almost believable..........late at night..........without a lot of sleep......after a few beers.

One of my favs is that some of the quotes that have a name and the birth and death year of the person who supposedly said the quote not a date when the quote was said. Also, taking a quote and, literally, butchering it then lying about what the quote means.

After minimal research you can find that it is highly inaccurate in almost every way, from start to finish.




PAX, get an avatar!!!

[Nimisis]

My favorite color is "clear"...

Most people here obviously have too much time to on their hands, and STO is too far far away from release.

These are all just results of opinionated nerds piling up trying to out do some other opinionated nerds thoughts.

[UfcFan78]

My favorite color is "clear"...

Most people here obviously have too much time to on their hands, and STO is too far far away from release.

These are all just results of opinionated nerds piling up trying to out do some other opinionated nerds thoughts.

The new movie will sux!


















































j/k, lol



I remember from earlier posts, lol, you are correct, though.

[smorris]

Written by a crackpot conspiracy theorist with even LESS of a grip on reality than I want to believe Gene had.

Seriously.

I stopped it rather early, I'll admit - when the narrator/director/whoever made a collossal - and grossly misleading - mistake in terms of how a bank's Reserves work.

The example discussed a $10B deposit by the federal government into an account with a bank - and described how a bank must retain reserves equal to, in most cases, only 10% of the actual "money on desposit" of it's transacting accounts.

Okay, that means the bank only has to sit on $1B of that $10B. It can use the other $9B. Doing so does not take money away from the account itself, of course.

...

This is where the mistake is made. The narrator suggests that, in essence, another $9B has been created out of thin air. He misses the fact that the Bank is simply allowed, at no additional interest, to BORROW up to $9B of that $10B deposit.

BORROW, not CREATE.

...

Any conclusions which derive, even in the most minimal part, from that gross and inexcusable mistake (and I'm trying to be generous calling it a mistake; I honestly think it was an intentional LIE, but ... trying to be nice, yeah ...) *ahem*, as Iw as saying, any conclusions which derive in any way from that "error", must perforce be imperfect and, in some degree, FALSE themselves.

...

"Money" itself is a means of conducting indirect exchange. Without money, then all exchanges must be DIRECT ... an impossibility in a culture where many manufacturing processes consist of six, ten, or even fifty intermediate steps.

Let's take ... your computer. Yes, the computer right in front of you. No, wait ... let's get MORE SPECIFIC than that ... and go with just the MONITOR. For the sake of simplicity, I'll assume it's an LCD flatscreen, just like my own.

Now ... do you honestly think that the same people made the LCD film, the circuitry, AND the case?

Do you think these same people manufactured all the COMPONENTS these were made from?

And do you think these same people, in turn, also produced all the MATERIALS these components were fashioned from? Remember, in the case of hte metals, that alone is at least a three-step process: Mining, Smelting, and Refining.

Finally, do you think that those very same people also provided, themselves and not through anyone else, all the various stages of transporation involved? Mine to smelter, smelter to resmelter, resmelter to chip and/or wire and/or solder manufacturers, chip/wire/solder manufacturers to circuit-board assemblers, circuit-board assemblers to Finished Product Assembly Plant, and assembly plant to store ...? (Note, that's just for the METAL resource stream; the PLASTICS are entirely different. Not to mention, the liquid-crystal element ...)

...

No, of course not. The same corporation may have done it - but not the same ten or fifteen people, most certainly not.

And without Money in some form or other, YOU DON'T HAVE CORPORATIONS. Period.

And, I'm serious about that.

What are a person's basic needs? Food, shelter, clothing, medicine, and some modicum of entertainment. Yes?

Without money, if you're a .... SALT miner, let us say ... you go out and spend your day mining salt. Let's ignore the absence of corporations in terms of mining equipment; you work with your crew of 10 or whatever people, mine a LOT of salt, and at the end of the day your share of the produced salt comes to ... I don't know, let's just peg it at five tons.

What good is five tons of salt, to you? You can't eat it (well you could, but, not as your SOLE food item). I suppose you could build a house out of it - but, god help you if it EVER rains. Or if you spill something, for that matter. You can't wear it, and while it may be very useful in fighting infections it hasn't much medicinal use beyond that. And really, five tons of salt is pretty damned boring.

So you have to trade it, right? NO ... what YOU have, sir, is unrefined salt. Not table salt yet! You have to REFINE it.

What's that, you say? You're not trained at that job? Well, I guess it SUCKS TO BE YOU, and you starve ... right?

...

Or, I suppse the Salt Refiner - who CAN trade his refined salt on for clothes, medicine, food, and evne shelter - might act as a middle-man. So you can trade your UNrefined salt to him, for his "extra" food, etc, etc. Right?

Expect him to trade each such item to you, for enough unrefined salt to produce MORE refined salt than it cost him to get that item.

Plus, here's a question: how much table salt is a pair of pants, size 2X and in a nice shade of green, WORTH? And, importantly to you, how much UNrefined salt does this middle-man - whose generousity you are entirely and INEXTRICABLY reliant upon - going to demand of you, in exchange for them? I mean, the person who made that pair of pants can't want allTHAT much table salt ... can they? How are THEY going to trade the salt on for other things, when there's already the Salt Refinery guy doing that very thing?

...

All of a sudden, having an objective - if abstract and arbitrary - value placed on all goods, and using an intermediate medium of exchange, a.k.a. Money, is startign to look a lot LESS complicated, isn't it?




...




Most people who want to do away with money, have never truly THOUGHT about how goods and services could or would be exchanged. Especially, complex goods and services. Because direct barter only goes so far ... and to go further, you must have money.

Now, in Star Trek terms? Think about this question: How complex do you think a STARSHIP is ...?

You sir, are a troll's dream. :D

Second half of the film is more relevant to how the Star Trek universe works, they start talking about resource-based economies.

[RandomRedshirt]

The viability of STO will be determined not on the "feelings" or "opinions" of this forum board, but rather on how this game stacks up against a variety of criteria, some of which will be:

1. How this game compares to World of Warcraft. Like it or not, WoW is the measuring stick by which all MMO's after it are judged. And whether you like WoW or not, no one on Earth can debate the success of WoW or it's overall appeal to MMO gamers from the most hardcore to the play once a week casuals.

2. How well did Cryptic learn from the mistakes of other games that recently came out. Games such as Age of Conan, that for all it's potential, has fallen flat on it's face because of the rush to production. 6 additional months of polishing might have given the game just what it needed to shoot for WoW-killer status. Also, pay close attention to Warhammer Online, as that game ran into similar issues as AoC, but the response from Mythic developers was quicker and more proactive than the Funcom developers behind Age of Conan. But both games offer major lessons to be learned about the launch of MMO's in the time of post-WoW.

3. How does STO stack up against the original IP that inspired it. More than anything, this measure of viability will be the most important. If the players don't feel they are getting a true Trek experience, then the game simply won't be viable. If STO doesn't have the true Trek feel, then why wouldn't we go play some no-name Sci-Fi MMO that gives us the exact same gaming experience?

4. How does STO stack up against other upcoming Sci-Fi MMO standouts like Stargate Worlds and SW:TOR? This will be the final crucial component to judging the viability of STO, and probably the toughest one of all. Stargate for fans of the series, is one of the strongest, most canonical IPs in all of Sci-Fi. expect that SGW will be the same, since the same writers who did so well in establishing and maintaining canon in SG-1 and SG Atlantis are working on SGW. Without a doubt, fan appreciation for Stargate is as strong as ever, while fan appreciation for Trek seems to be waning with Trek having gone out on some sour notes (Nemesis, Enterprise) and about to suffer a possible IP killing reboot (Star Trek XI). On top of all that, there is SW:TOR, based on the best selling Sci-Fi games of all time, Knights of the Old Republic and Knights of the Old Republic II. Especially given the fact that SWG has done poorly, Sci-Fi fans are eagerly awaiting a Star Wars MMO that can truly live up to the SW name. both these games (SGW & SW:TOR) will play a major role in determing just how viable STO will be since Trek shares a great many fans with both the Stargate and Star Wars franchises.

[THORN74]

i just want to address a few things.

Im 34, and have been watching Trek starting with TOS in reruns since i was a kid. My dad was a huge trek fan and we would watch it together as mom cooked dinner every night. I have enjoyed ALL forms of Trek (DS9 was my least fav) and found the overall message that permiates the IP as a whole is peace and inclusionism. That we are all stronger and better together then we are seprately.

That being said, I do/did belive that Trek fans should behave with a little more sence of acceptance than most. Im not trying to say we cant have disagreements or varing opnions. Quite the contrary, i rellish open debate and differing points of view. What i do not like is personal attacks and undocumented non-sense explinations. I see a lot of people throwing out answers w/o evidance/ siting thier source while they belittle the member with the opposing view.

i was in a thread about requesting a linux version where i made the third post in support of the idea and before the end of the first page the topic had already derailed and the derailing poster was posting how horrible linux is and how much better windows is. That wasnt the point of the thread. It doesnt matter how fruitless or pointless the thread topic is why did that poster feel it was nessicary to attack those who were supporting the the OP in that instance? The OPs thread doesnt hurt anyone, it doesnt slowanything down, cryptic already said NOT at launch (which by the way doesnt mean the same thing as NEVER). If you didnt agree why not just ignore the thread altogether instaed of posting in an insulting and derogatory manner ?

thats just one example of the ****-poor attitude i am talking about. I didnt really want to single anyone out but after reading so many different posts in this thread i wanted to clearify some. In general, there seems to be alot of "my opinion is the only opinion" or "your stupid and wrong" posts. I know it sounds like im trying to be the forum police, im not. I would be the last guy to try and tell anyone what to/not to say. I guess im more dissapointed (the parent in me talking now), i expected more from my fellow trek fans.

[UfcFan78]

About the Zeitgeist.......the whole film is great to debate when drunk. In reality, it doesn't add up. To use it in ANY argument as ANY reference is ridiculous to say the least. :rolleyes:

[onesoul1982]

About the Zeitgeist.......the whole film is great to debate when drunk. In reality, it doesn't add up. To use it in ANY argument as ANY reference is ridiculous to say the least. :rolleyes:



:D I have to agree there, when sober it's not the clean family film it's meant to be :cool:

[UfcFan78]

I have to agree there, when sober it's not the clean family film it's meant to be

What's really sad is the fact that grown adults believe anything that is put into a format that allows them to be as lazy as possible while being spoon fed bogus info on the subject at hand............ they watch it and assume it is all 100% accurate and are too lazy to Google Search anything other than trying to find free porn sites.:confused: Not that porn is bad...........;)

And, tbh, I am not sure what the goof balls intention was or what he meant to accomplish with this crap-tastic movie. The whole thing is totally inaccurate from start to finish.:cool:

[_Pax_]

It's simple, UFC: the "goofball" as you call him, is a crackpot conspiracy theorist, in the truly most classic sense of the term imaginable.

[Duras]

crackpot conspiracy theorist.

Ow, that hurt dude.!!!

Now, I'm asking WHY. :rolleyes:

[_Pax_]

You're kidding, right, Duras?

Are you the guy that made that "Zeitgeist: Addendum" movie??

Anyway, my answer is simple: the guy obviously and clearly thinks that sweeping away the very existance of Money owuld somehow MAKE US ALL FREE, that money is being USED to keep us all enslaved.

Nevermind the tens of millions who would starve to death within the first year. Nevermind the tens of millions who would die for wont of medical care within the first six months. Nevermind the millions who would FREEZE to death for wont of heating fuel during the first winter.

Watch five minutes of that movie. Keep in mind the gross, inexcusable "mistake" I've already pointed out. And, if your eyes are open, you'll see it too: the maker of that video was and is A CRACKPOT CONSPIRACY THEORIST.

[Duras]

Yes, I was Kidding.

If I was able to make a movie, It would be a series involving Klingons and genicide... :D

[Stryklone]

Okay, there's only one solution to arguing and disagreements in the STO forum.

I selflessly volunteer for ME to be the one that everyone will agree with on every issue from this point forward. No need to thank me for that sacrifice. It's for the greater good. You know - peace, love and all that type of thing.

Stryklone
========

[Koroth]

I guess im more dissapointed (the parent in me talking now), i expected more from my fellow trek fans.

*Shakes his head*

It's not the Trek fans, Thorn. If you look closely, you will see the people in question insult Trek, its ideals, and even its creators, not just people who offer views opposing theirs. These people are not Trek fans, and one has to wonder what they are doing here if they hold such vitriol against the source material for this game.

Hopefully moderation will limit the deliberate poison put onto these boards. If nothing else, Cryptic should act to prevent the negative word of mouth that follows from such a tone on their forums. I don't expect it to be easy on such an active forum, but they've already shown a willingness to ban users and delete threads, so the ability is there.

- Koroth

[LordDave]

Okay, there's only one solution to arguing and disagreements in the STO forum.

I selflessly volunteer for ME to be the one that everyone will agree with on every issue from this point forward. No need to thank me for that sacrifice. It's for the greater good. You know - peace, love and all that type of thing.

Stryklone
========

I'm sorry but that's not a good solution. The only real solution is for everyone to hate one person, thus unifying the forum under one banner. Kinda like how Batman must be hated rather then loved for him to function effectively.

I volunteer you. :p

[dinendae]

I'm sorry but that's not a good solution. The only real solution is for everyone to hate one person, thus unifying the forum under one banner. Kinda like how Batman must be hated rather then loved for him to function effectively.

I volunteer you. :p

I second that motion! All in favor?

[Stryklone]

How clever of LordDave to engender hate for himself by fostering hate against me. I cannot let such a heroic act go unheralded. I hereby yield my position to LordDave. After all, hating him comes so easy for so many. But don't take my word for it: just read his posts.

"It might be dangerous ... you go first." - Igor in Young Frankenstein by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks

Stryklone
========

[LordDave]

How clever of LordDave to engender hate for himself by fostering hate against me. I cannot let such a heroic act go unheralded. I hereby yield my position to LordDave. After all, hating him comes so easy for so many. But don't take my word for it: just read his posts.

"It might be dangerous ... you go first." - Igor in Young Frankenstein by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks

Stryklone
========

I can't be the one universally hated. I interject too much logic, reason, and sensibility into discussions. I might make people actually cooperate without hatred and where would THAT leave us?