Colorful trails behind the ship....

[Spaceball06]

Why? What does it serve? Its not cannon. Sure it was in a few other star trek games I'm sure and very prevalent in homeworld if anyone remembers that. I say take them out or make them very short. I'm all for the whole "not photo realistic" look, but i think the big long colorful trail is a bit much. Anyone else feel the same?

[The_Padre]

If it's like their other games I'd say you will be able to switch them off.

[Spaceball06]

If it's like their other games I'd say you will be able to switch them off.

Good point. If that's the case then there really is nothing to worry about...:D

[cavilier210]

u do know that the engines produce plasma exhaust, and ion trails. Also, realistically, when you appraoch the speed of light, you'd start to make a blur

[47Wasps]

u do know that the engines produce plasma exhaust, and ion trails. Also, realistically, when you appraoch the speed of light, you'd start to make a blur

alot of people at this site tend to be annoyed by them,but I actually don't mind the trails.
and they do kind of make sense,as being plasma exhaust or ion trails

[Manta2015]

u do know that the engines produce plasma exhaust, and ion trails. Also, realistically, when you appraoch the speed of light, you'd start to make a blur

For the first time ever in all of Trek, this is now visual in STO, that was the OP point I believe.

It's the cartoony style they're aiming for, like it or hate it.

Long as the ships don't look as god awful as that new Miranda, the leaks/ trails will be the least of our worries.


-Manta-

[Hagon]

Why? What does it serve? Its not cannon. Sure it was in a few other star trek games I'm sure and very prevalent in homeworld if anyone remembers that. I say take them out or make them very short. I'm all for the whole "not photo realistic" look, but i think the big long colorful trail is a bit much. Anyone else feel the same?Actually it is canon for when a ship enters warp speed.

Anyway, I bet there'll be an option to turn that effect off anyway.

I personally like them, and I think they'll do a lot to impart a sense of speed.

[47Wasps]

Actually it is canon for when a ship enters warp speed.

Anyway, I bet there'll be an option to turn that effect off anyway.

I personally like them, and I think they'll do a lot to impart a sense of speed.

Yeah,the trails behind ships back in TMP or TWK were alot more pronounced than these.

[Kinneas]

u do know that the engines produce plasma exhaust,

Thank you for answering.

We need one of those 1950's science films: PLASMA & YOU! Get to know it. Get to love it! :)

[CarlR]

well i personally dont like it, if it were a very short trail maybe... but the one in the miranda picture is just way too long and just makes it look even worse

[STOZone]

I think the trails look cool. I like them.

[Cormoran]

I'm not a huge fan of the trails, but it's forgiveable because the ship looks so awesome.

[zinc]

It's the cartoony style they're aiming for, like it or hate it.


I don't think there's a "cartoony style" at work here. Even if there were - the trails are definitely not there for that reason.

You all know that ship combat is paced and strategic - velocity and positioning for you and your targets matter a great deal. Very early we realized that, in the vastness of space, it was very difficult for us to see or "feel" what direction and velocity your ship was moving. (Not to mention your enemy's!) As soon as we added the trails - being able to see what's going on in combat opened up drastically.

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

[Dahakra]

I don't think there's a "cartoony style" at work here. Even if there were - the trails are definitely not there for that reason.

You all know that ship combat is paced and strategic - velocity and positioning for you and your targets matter a great deal. Very early we realized that, in the vastness of space, it was very difficult for us to see or "feel" what direction and velocity your ship was moving. (Not to mention your enemy's!) As soon as we added the trails - being able to see what's going on in combat opened up drastically.

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

I too had looked at the trails and wondered why they're there. I suppose there is some method behind your madness :p

But to echo an earlier question, can we turn them off? or perhaps "tone" them down somewhat?
Because personally I'd like to.

- Dahakra

[Silverspar]

Without a frame of reference, which the trails provide, you won't be able to guage speed and such for tactical combat, hence why there is trails. I am sure Zincs reference was to the one shot where you saw that big armada of starships. The question that springs to midn immediately were those ships parked or were they moving? I am sure Zinc can say they were moving, but to my perspective the ships looked like they were parked and the scene right after it of that same armada and combat you couldn't even tell if any of the ships were actually moving at all despite all the blowing up and stuff.

When you have something like big black space as your back drop, you tend to lose frame of reference that gives you the ability to guage movement and such, which if combat is indeed tactical and strategic, is very important, especially for PvP.

[zinc]

The question that springs to midn immediately were those ships parked or were they moving? I am sure Zinc can say they were moving, but to my perspective the ships looked like they were parked...

They were all moving. Some of them at different speeds, even! : )

-Zn

[thefreshjedi]

I don't think there's a "cartoony style" at work here. Even if there were - the trails are definitely not there for that reason.

You all know that ship combat is paced and strategic - velocity and positioning for you and your targets matter a great deal. Very early we realized that, in the vastness of space, it was very difficult for us to see or "feel" what direction and velocity your ship was moving. (Not to mention your enemy's!) As soon as we added the trails - being able to see what's going on in combat opened up drastically.

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

Hiya Zinc. Thanks for posting!

Just asking a question, but I'm assuming that there will be a way to turn off the trails? EvE allows trails to be on or off in the graphical options. Will STO be the same?

-avery

[Zyrious]

What makes this game so different form every other space-based game that it needs trails? I dont need them in bridge commander, i dont need them in the X-Wing games, i dont need them in most games. I have a little number on my target information that tells me how fast they are going, and then there's the fact that i have eyes that shows me which direction they are moving and how fast across my screen. And heck, there's even this thing called the "Lead Indicator" that shows which direction they are moving in. But trails?

Sure, have the option there for those who do need it. But i am hoping we will most definetly have the option to turn it off. Right?

[Loekii]

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

Does that mean we will have the option to toggle them ON/OFF?

[cavilier210]

Sure, have the option there for the challenged among us.

Thats not elitist at all is it

[Rebel230]

zinc, can you tell us whats with that miranda pic? I mean not to be disrespectful of all the work your team is doing but delete that pic, its horrible and it makes the game look real low end. Im praying you guys get this game right, as a huge fan of Star Trek, this is like a dream come true, but the staple of trek is the ships, and although a game and not cinema, please give the ships/ and space as much high end models/ textures/ lighting, etc as you possibly can.

It has to look better than eve online does, its Star Trek for christs sake!!!

[thefreshjedi]

zinc, can you tell us whats with that miranda pic? I mean not to be disrespectful of all the work your team is doing but delete that pic, its horrible and it makes the game look real low end. Im praying you guys get this game right, as a huge fan of Star Trek, this is like a dream come true, but the staple of trek is the ships, and although a game and not cinema, please give the ships/ and space as much high end models/ textures/ lighting, etc as you possibly can.

It has to look better than eve online does, its Star Trek for christs sake!!!

Geez, what's all the hostility with the Miranda? She's one of my favorite classes, and honestly it's about time she was ressurected. I mean she WILL be one of my first few ships, if my last. I think out of respect for her and another person on this board I'm going to name her the USS Pheonix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_(mythology)) Buzzard (http://www.upit1.com/forum/upload/1134612210-bm_lights05.jpg).

*With respects to Ol'Buzzards' model, and the rise of the Pheonix from her ashes of course!

*Credits to wiki for their article on the Pheonix (mythological reference).

-avery

[Tain]

I agree trails look pants, and the reasoning is as well. Neither Klingon Academy or Bridge Commander had trails on any of the ships and nobody had any problems fighting eachother in those games. Also, plasma exhaust is simply ionized gas and it would not be dense enough to be visible at all. This is why ships in star trek do not have trails at all when moving at sublight speeds. Never have.

Also, Its worth noting that the warp "trails" seen in star trek have nothing to do with engines at all. They are the art departments attempt at relativistic effects, IE not exhaust at all, they are the ships reflected light "smearing" as the ship itself approaches the speed of its own reflected luminosity.

[Kinneas]

I don't think there's a "cartoony style" at work here. Even if there were - the trails are definitely not there for that reason.

You all know that ship combat is paced and strategic - velocity and positioning for you and your targets matter a great deal. Very early we realized that, in the vastness of space, it was very difficult for us to see or "feel" what direction and velocity your ship was moving. (Not to mention your enemy's!) As soon as we added the trails - being able to see what's going on in combat opened up drastically.

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

Wow.
That was a nice look into the world of a game designer. Thank you!

As a point of reference, the Star Trek mod for, Nexus: The Jupiter Incident, has really made the plasma exhaust look sublime on Star ships and it would be nice to see you folks top that. You probably already have. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubneOmu_HcE

In toning down the plasma trails in Nexus you have to look somewhat carefully when opponent ships are not gunning their engines.
----

Will the color of the plasma in the core always match what is coming out?

[The_Padre]

What makes this game so different form every other space-based game that it needs trails? I dont need them in bridge commander, i dont need them in the X-Wing games, i dont need them in most games. I have a little number on my target information that tells me how fast they are going, and then there's the fact that i have eyes that shows me which direction they are moving and how fast across my screen. And heck, there's even this thing called the "Lead Indicator" that shows which direction they are moving in. But trails?

Sure, have the option there for those who do need it. But i am hoping we will most definetly have the option to turn it off. Right?

I've got a feeling it may have to do with some of the combat mechanics, I'd say specifically small versus large starships.

[Lord_Xomic]

I don't think there's a "cartoony style" at work here. Even if there were - the trails are definitely not there for that reason.

You all know that ship combat is paced and strategic - velocity and positioning for you and your targets matter a great deal. Very early we realized that, in the vastness of space, it was very difficult for us to see or "feel" what direction and velocity your ship was moving. (Not to mention your enemy's!) As soon as we added the trails - being able to see what's going on in combat opened up drastically.

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

So your solution was to add trails?

I don't mean to grip, but given that Star Trek's ships are designed in such a way that simply doesn't lend itself to 'trails'. At Warp speed, we'll have those streaked stars, but surely you can think of some other way of show speed and heading, without resorting to something so tacky and out-of-place in a Star Trek game?

[Tain]

... Star Trek's ships are designed in such a way that simply doesn't lend itself to 'trails'. At Warp speed, we'll have those streaked stars, but surely you can think of some other way of show speed and heading, without resorting to something so tacky and out-of-place in a Star Trek game?


This. I couldn't put this any better myself.

[Kinneas]

I have a little number on my target information that tells me how fast they are going, and then there's the fact that i have eyes that shows me which direction they are moving and how fast across my screen. And heck, there's even this thing called the "Lead Indicator" that shows which direction they are moving in. But trails?

Sure, have the option there for those who do need it. But i am hoping we will most definetly have the option to turn it off. Right?

Yea, options.

One does also hope there is much more data to use from your tactical sensors, tactical screens,probes, etc and that it does have those feature we have enjoyed in space combat games like X-WIng, SFC, etc.

That advanced, slow paced, tactical combat does not rely on plasma trails. To be able to use plasma trails as 'another' tool in combat for some is fantastic though. 'Seat of your pants', captains.

Plasma trails should be there physically and they should cause damage to shields and hulls if you aren't watching where you are going and get into someones plasma trail (Another great feature from X-Wing that is so overlooked in space games).


So your solution was to add trails?

I don't mean to grip, but given that Star Trek's ships are designed in such a way that simply doesn't lend itself to 'trails'. At Warp speed, we'll have those streaked stars, but surely you can think of some other way of show speed and heading, without resorting to something so tacky and out-of-place in a Star Trek game?

Yeah but none of these ships are moving warp speeds. Those were are all impulse engine speed shots.

The impulse engines exhaust plasma.

As I understand Plasma can also be directed and vented through the coils in the nacelle and pulsed out the back or sides of the nacelle.

[Bamf]

It both is canon, and is not. In the last couple of moves, namely Nemesis, when the Enterprise goes into warp there is a distinct visible trail of exhaust. However, when it comes to sub-light speed, it is not canon. Which really bothers me. At least make it a little more inconspicuous. Its just a long trail of red/blue. Ugly and not what i like to see.

Seriously people, how many space battles have you seen with these trails? Even the banner at the top of the page. It looks great. Now imagine that same picture except all of the ships (the akira, defiant and nova) have colorful trails. Ew.

[Dahakra]

It both is canon, and is not. In the last couple of moves, namely Nemesis, when the Enterprise goes into warp there is a distinct visible trail of exhaust. However, when it comes to sub-light speed, it is not canon. Which really bothers me. At least make it a little more inconspicuous. Its just a long trail of red/blue. Ugly and not what i like to see.

Seriously people, how many space battles have you seen with these trails? Even the banner at the top of the page. It looks great. Now imagine that same picture except all of the ships (the akira, defiant and nova) have colorful trails. Ew.

Mmm, I think you have brought up a valid point, where are these trails when you ship is cloaked?
They are highly conspicuous and external to the ship, hence wouldn't they be visible once your cloaked ship moved away?

- Dahakra

[cavilier210]

thats why a cloaked ship should move slowly, lol

[Bamf]

That's another really good point. Cloaking devices have never covered up ion trails. In fact, in a few scenarios, ships have tracked ion trails coming from cloaked vessels (eventually leading to a dead end, where the cloaked Warbird would de-cloak and fire). Following canon, does this mean that vessels under cloak WILL have ion trails?! That would be retarded. (excuse me for saying, but it is)

I hope cryptic deals with these issues in the smart way. I for one would love to see an MMO which copied the combat from Bridge Commader, one of the best space combat sim's. Its only issue was lack of players.

[Silverspar]

No, Cryptic knows what they are doing. Super Speed would not show up if you were stealthing or hidden in City of Heroes.

[Lord_Xomic]

That's another really good point. Cloaking devices have never covered up ion trails. In fact, in a few scenarios, ships have tracked ion trails coming from cloaked vessels (eventually leading to a dead end, where the cloaked Warbird would de-cloak and fire). Following canon, does this mean that vessels under cloak WILL have ion trails?! That would be retarded. (excuse me for saying, but it is)

I hope cryptic deals with these issues in the smart way. I for one would love to see an MMO which copied the combat from Bridge Commader, one of the best space combat sim's. Its only issue was lack of players.

Ion trail = warp trail.

Wouldn't apply at sublight speeds.

However, it would be good for tracking, with the right sensor filter activated.

Personally, I hope Cryptic isn't trying to do a HUB-less interface, that doesn't make any sense given that it's Star Trek, but I fear that's the only reason I can think of for these trails.

[Silverspar]

Ion trail = warp trail.

Wouldn't apply at sublight speeds.

However, it would be good for tracking, with the right sensor filter activated.

Personally, I hope Cryptic isn't trying to do a HUB-less interface, that doesn't make any sense given that it's Star Trek, but I fear that's the only reason I can think of for these trails.

Uhh, ships at impulse leave an ion trail to.

[Bamf]

Ion trail = warp trail.

Wouldn't apply at sublight speeds.

However, it would be good for tracking, with the right sensor filter activated.

Personally, I hope Cryptic isn't trying to do a HUB-less interface, that doesn't make any sense given that it's Star Trek, but I fear that's the only reason I can think of for these trails.

I know for a fact even ships at sublight leave an ion trail.

It probably has something to with the fact that the warp drive is constantly reacting, to provide power to the ship. Just because the ship isn't at warp does not mean the drive isn't in use.

[Lord_Xomic]

I know for a fact even ships at sublight leave an ion trail.

It probably has something to with the fact that the warp drive is constantly reacting, to provide power to the ship. Just because the ship isn't at warp does not mean the drive isn't in use.

I'm not so sure about that.

I know a great many cloaking devices can be broken, by tracking plasma exhaust for example, but that's not the same as a warp trail.

[Dahakra]

Irrespective of where the trails come from or what generates them, I still want to know if I can turn them off and if they will have any bearing on cloaked ships.

And one more thing, obviously these trails are composed of "particles" that will need to be generated by your computer. I think even those with a layman understanding of graphic processing ( like me ) will know that generating long trails of dynamic particles is going to place some load on their graphics cards. Has Cryptic considered that many of their potential customers won't have top of the line PC's? And that if given the choice between a contrail and a better looking Photon Torps, that we will choose the Torps?

Just some thoughts.

- Dahakra

[LordDave]

Irrespective of where the trails come from or what generates them, I still want to know if I can turn them off and if they will have any bearing on cloaked ships.

And one more thing, obviously these trails are composed of "particles" that will need to be generated by your computer. I think even those with a layman understanding of graphic processing ( like me ) will know that generating long trails of dynamic particles is going to place some load on their graphics cards. Has Cryptic considered that many of their potential customers won't have top of the line PC's? And that if given the choice between a contrail and a better looking Photon Torps, that we will choose the Torps?

Just some thoughts.

- Dahakra

Unless it's just a single 2D sprite that's stretched or squashed based on the ship speed.


Ok, you guys are all arguing and debating about if it's canon or not without realizing that we're looking at a ship from a 3rd person camera angle. As Zinc said, the idea was to make you, the user, be able to follow the ship's movement. So that ion trail is visible ONLY TO THE PLAYER and not to the trek universe. Kinda like how you can see a health bar in WoW. It's just for the player, everything else ignores it.

[Zyrious]

Unless it's just a single 2D sprite that's stretched or squashed based on the ship speed.


Ok, you guys are all arguing and debating about if it's canon or not without realizing that we're looking at a ship from a 3rd person camera angle. As Zinc said, the idea was to make you, the user, be able to follow the ship's movement. So that ion trail is visible ONLY TO THE PLAYER and not to the trek universe. Kinda like how you can see a health bar in WoW. It's just for the player, everything else ignores it.

Regardless, my brain is capable of calculating movement without lines behind the object. I have no problems in games like Bridge Commander, Klingon Academy, and pretty much most Space Flight games.

So, the real meat here is - Can we turn it off! I hope we can get a dev response on this most important question. If we can turn it off, then the argument is over. Those of us who hate it and dont need it will just flip the switch and turn it off.

[Dahakra]

Unless it's just a single 2D sprite that's stretched or squashed based on the ship speed.

As I said, I have a layman's understanding of these things. I just worry that the more of this kind of thing is going to put this game out of the reach of ordinary players with ordinary computers. I think of the possible lag generated when there are 10 / 20 / 50 / 100? ships all moving around battling one another generating such trails.


Ok, you guys are all arguing and debating about if it's canon or not without realizing that we're looking at a ship from a 3rd person camera angle. As Zinc said, the idea was to make you, the user, be able to follow the ship's movement. So that ion trail is visible ONLY TO THE PLAYER and not to the trek universe. Kinda like how you can see a health bar in WoW. It's just for the player, everything else ignores it.

Personally, I care little whether its "canon" or not. But others do, and if its important to them, we should all respect that.

- Dahakra

[Lord_Xomic]

Personally, I care little whether its "canon" or not. But others do, and if its important to them, we should all respect that.

- Dahakra

This canon discussion is my fault, I think, but my point was more along the lines of "Why trails, when you know it doesn't work with the IP?"

[Manx]

This canon discussion is my fault, I think, but my point was more along the lines of "Why trails, when you know it doesn't work with the IP?"

Just think of them as speed lines rather than exhaust trails. I mean, if I let my eyes go out of focus I see trails just off of car head lights; a ship moving at impulse speeds should certainly be going fast enough.

[Sloan_S31]

If the trails can be switched off, then it's all good.

Even at full impulse, you're only going 1/4 the speed of light so I don't think you should see much of a light trail.

Where I think trails might look OK is when you're entering/exiting Warp or if you are able to fly at high sublight, near FTL speeds.

[vp21ct]

I think about It like I think about engine trails for fighters in SoaSE.

When I wan't to zoom in and look at the individual fighters, I turn in down or off.

When I zoom out, I turn it on so I can see what my fighters are doing.

[Swordopolis]

Yeah,the trails behind ships back in TMP or TWK were alot more pronounced than these.

I've never quite understood why, but I've always loved the warp effect from TMP. It was so awesome.

[AaronH]

I've never quite understood why, but I've always loved the warp effect from TMP. It was so awesome.

Here here, TMP was a very visually pleasing film, and I don't think it ever gets the props it deserves. Not to mention I loved the storyline.

Could have done without the whole Phooooootoooon Toooorpedoooo scene. But you know, life isn't always rainbows and butterflies.

[Silverspar]

Here here, TMP was a very visually pleasing film, and I don't think it ever gets the props it deserves. Not to mention I loved the storyline.

Could have done without the whole Phooooootoooon Toooorpedoooo scene. But you know, life isn't always rainbows and butterflies.

The reason for that is you spent 20 minutes on ship flybies and five minutes on actual story. Yea, TMP is a visually pleasing movie, otherwise it really wasn't Star Trek.

[Interdictor]

I don't mind the trails at all - and to learn that they actually have a function in the game - even BETTER!

[AaronH]

The reason for that is you spent 20 minutes on ship flybies and five minutes on actual story. Yea, TMP is a visually pleasing movie, otherwise it really wasn't Star Trek.

On the contrary, I think TMP at its core was a facet of star trek. Like you said though, they spent too much time on ship flybies rather than story elements.

The idea of confronting the unknown and meeting a seemingly overwhelming challenge with style and grace. The problem is, like I said, too many flybies not enough story.

[DragonShark]

On the contrary, I think TMP at its core was a facet of star trek. Like you said though, they spent too much time on ship flybies rather than story elements.

The idea of confronting the unknown and meeting a seemingly overwhelming challenge with style and grace. The problem is, like I said, too many flybies not enough story.

Agreed. In fact, I think that TMP was really the only movie that actually was TOS Trek at its core.

As to the trails behind the ships, I'd point out that for myself, I've always found those to be distracting in other space games I've played.

[Duckdee]

<good reasoning>
-Zn

Dev Tracker - Making me see useful posts I otherwise would have missed.

[willriker09]

Why? What does it serve? Its not cannon. Sure it was in a few other star trek games I'm sure and very prevalent in homeworld if anyone remembers that. I say take them out or make them very short. I'm all for the whole "not photo realistic" look, but i think the big long colorful trail is a bit much. Anyone else feel the same?

I love the posts by people who clearly don't watch that much Trek. In several of the films there ARE trails of color behind the ships when they go to warp. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it is technically canon if the devs want to put them in there.

[Spaceball06]

I love the posts by people who clearly don't watch that much Trek. In several of the films there ARE trails of color behind the ships when they go to warp. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it is technically canon if the devs want to put them in there.

Ugh...I wasn't talking about "when the ship goes to warp." Of course it would make sense that the image would be stretched and light would trail behind the ship as it goes faster than the speed of light.
Anyways... The Devs already made it clear why they added the trails as a component of the game, which is to enhance the ability to judge and determine a ships course and speed. After thinking about it I can see why it may be required. Thanks for the post though.

[Flatfingers]

For what it's worth, the developers of the "Jump to Lightspeed" space-based subgame of Star Wars Galaxies came to the same conclusion: having ships leave behind "trails" might not be perfectly canonical to the IP, but it's a necessary concession to fun gameplay for a wide audience.

Trails provide a crucial hint about the direction an enemy vessel is turning, whether we're talking wet navy ships or starships. They aren't absolutely required -- the original Wing Commander didn't have 'em -- but for a less hardcore audience trails may be very helpful.

One thing that occurs to me is that I would think that trails provide the most value in fast-paced dogfighting, where the value of real-time reaction speed is very high. How much value do they add to the less dogfighty and more deliberate (not "strategic (http://flatfingers-theory.blogspot.com/2006/01/strategy-vs-tactics.html)"! aauuugghh! :D ) pacing of capital ship combat so typical in Star Trek?

--Flatfingers

[fatesoasis]

I understand the reasoning for the trails but they do need to have the transparency on them turned up. They should appear to be more of a hint of color than a full on stripe. Right now it appears as though the ships are taking part in the high school flag core. Or one of those airplanes that that advertise for companies in Florida by dragging a large banner behind them.

[Varien]

Seriously people, how many space battles have you seen with these trails? Even the banner at the top of the page. It looks great. Now imagine that same picture except all of the ships (the akira, defiant and nova) have colorful trails. Ew.

I cant argue with that =)

Eve (great game) has trails and on that note I can agree with the Dev Post. Lots of things in Eve happen fast, PvP being the biggest. Looking at the trail on a Frigate/Cruiser can help you choose targets. (Like when they have a ships mass reduced by like 90% and a Battleship going 4X the speed of an interceptor Frigate. Good times....)

[JeanNYGUARD]

I don't think there's a "cartoony style" at work here. Even if there were - the trails are definitely not there for that reason.

You all know that ship combat is paced and strategic - velocity and positioning for you and your targets matter a great deal. Very early we realized that, in the vastness of space, it was very difficult for us to see or "feel" what direction and velocity your ship was moving. (Not to mention your enemy's!) As soon as we added the trails - being able to see what's going on in combat opened up drastically.

You can see in the first trailer we did - some of the scenes have trails, some don't. The one's without, it's more difficult to see what's going on. How fast and what direction things are really moving.

We added the trails for functionality - I really don't "see" them anymore when I play, but I know I need them.

-Zn

Zinc

Everything looks amazing... The trails (Which I consider as eye candy), Shield impacts, and especially The Bridge of The Galaxy Class Starship ;) .... Keep up the great work.

Everyone in The Star Trek Gaming Community is behind you guys.... www.startrek-games.com (Currently going through a website revamp)

[djnattyd]

What's with the "OMG!!! TRAILS BEHIND THE SHIP!!!! WTF??!!" posts? If I recall correctly, the ships in STBC also had trails behind them only it was called "motion blur"

[Kirky]

I have no major problem with the trails, but I really don't see how they are necessary for gameplay.
This isn't going to be the kind of fast paced space combat found in games like SWG, it's going to be slow paced, tactical, so why would we need trails?

The combat in BC works perfectly fine without any kind of trail coming off the ship-you have a speed indicator for your own ship, a speed indicator for your target, and a reading of the distance between you. Surely anything else you need to know could be figured out visually.

[fireraven]

What's with the "OMG!!! TRAILS BEHIND THE SHIP!!!! WTF??!!" posts? If I recall correctly, the ships in STBC also had trails behind them only it was called "motion blur"

easy... there are alot of people that only care for their personal interpretation of what STO should be and don't seem to get that Cryptic is a business that is attempting to make a product that appeals to a wide audience. Personally I especially find the "cartoony" graphics arguments hilarious.... since it all looks "cartoony" to me being it's a computer game

[Braunbaer]

Everyone is arguing whether the trails are useful (and canon) or not.
But nobody actually played the game. You don't know if these trails are a helpful feature or not.

No trails maybe worked in other games.....but that doesn't say much about STO. Just wait and see. And if you can't turn the trails off at release.....but a lot of players think they are useless or annoying...changes can be made! Just wait, please.

And, yeah, in Eve trails are really useful - you are much faster in deciding which ship you are going to attack. And it's much easier to recognize where and how fast all these ships fly.

[BreachAndClear]

I have no problem with the inclusion of trails behind ships for the sake of gameplay, but I think they can be made less opaque and done with fainter colors to be more aesthetically pleasing.

[Bamf]

easy... there are alot of people that only care for their personal interpretation of what STO should be and don't seem to get that Cryptic is a business that is attempting to make a product that appeals to a wide audience. Personally I especially find the "cartoony" graphics arguments hilarious.... since it all looks "cartoony" to me being it's a computer game

I wholeheartedly understand it is meant to appeal to a wide variety of users.

However, pointing out that its a computer game and therefor 'cartoony' arguments aren't valid is not only annoying, but also completely incorrect.

When we refer to something Cartoony, think of the cartoon Star Wars: Clone Wars series, compared to the Star Wars movies. Think of the realism that these producers try to create compared to the simplistic cartoon style of the TV show. I can get obsorbed in the realism of the movies, and WISH i was a jedi- because everything looks like it COULD be possible. There is something to be said for realism over cartoon. You can really put yourself in the game, which is what most really want, which can't be done with cartoon graphics.

What we want is something we can sink our teeth into- things that are obviously impossible in our generation and believe it WILL be possible. Cartoon style graphics simply aren't as enjoyable.

When you command a vessel that does not look real, there is a sense of carelessness. When you command a vessel that DOES look real, you want to BE careful. Responsibility plays a much larger role.

This is what we mean. And obviously its a computer game. Obviously it's all fake. But enough with those arguments. They are meaningless and ignorant.

I have no problem with the inclusion of trails behind ships for the sake of gameplay, but I think they can be made less opaque and done with fainter colors to be more aesthetically pleasing.

That is exactly the what should be done.

[jagerbolt]

Everyone is arguing whether the trails are useful (and canon) or not.
But nobody actually played the game. You don't know if these trails are a helpful feature or not.

No trails maybe worked in other games.....but that doesn't say much about STO. Just wait and see. And if you can't turn the trails off at release.....but a lot of players think they are useless or annoying...changes can be made! Just wait, please.

And, yeah, in Eve trails are really useful - you are much faster in deciding which ship you are going to attack. And it's much easier to recognize where and how fast all these ships fly.

Came here to say this. Nobody has played STO so we can't say if we need it or not, regardless of if they weren't needed in other space games. Once a beta begins and people start playing can we make calls on this stuff. :D

I am okay with the trails and I realize it's a game. We have many fans here who want a very realistic look and approach to the game which is cool. But there is a fine line between realism/canon and enjoyable game play. If the trails help with ship combat then I'm all for it.

I agree with the others in that it should be customizable and be able to be shut off if so desired.

[fireraven]

I wholeheartedly understand it is meant to appeal to a wide variety of users.

However, pointing out that its a computer game and therefor 'cartoony' arguments aren't valid is not only annoying, but also completely incorrect.

When we refer to something Cartoony, think of the cartoon Star Wars: Clone Wars series, compared to the Star Wars movies. Think of the realism that these producers try to create compared to the simplistic cartoon style of the TV show. I can get obsorbed in the realism of the movies, and WISH i was a jedi- because everything looks like it COULD be possible. There is something to be said for realism over cartoon. You can really put yourself in the game, which is what most really want, which can't be done with cartoon graphics.

What we want is something we can sink our teeth into- things that are obviously impossible in our generation and believe it WILL be possible. Cartoon style graphics simply aren't as enjoyable.

When you command a vessel that does not look real, there is a sense of carelessness. When you command a vessel that DOES look real, you want to BE careful. Responsibility plays a much larger role.

This is what we mean. And obviously its a computer game. Obviously it's all fake. But enough with those arguments. They are meaningless and ignorant.



That is exactly the what should be done.

my apologies if you take offense but whatever.... I'll never get many of the people on here same as they won't get me.... but not sure how Cryptic is supposed to make up for lack of imagination if someone can't picture their self in the game how they wish to because of the graphics.... however did anyone ever pull that off prior to someone "showing" them what to think.....

[Bamf]

No i take no offense to what you said. It is just that the "Its a computer game so it is cartoony!" makes little sense, if any.

I can put myself into a cartoon style game. However you cannot deny that you can get much more immersed in a game which looks real rather than cartoony. It is a much more rewarding, fun experience if it feels and looks real.

The fact is undeniable.

[Cormoran]

No i take no offense to what you said. It is just that the "Its a computer game so it is cartoony!" makes little sense, if any.

I can put myself into a cartoon style game. However you cannot deny that you can get much more immersed in a game which looks real rather than cartoony. It is a much more rewarding, fun experience if it feels and looks real.

The fact is undeniable.

Then you should be able to back it up with something more substantial than anecdotal evidence.

Me, i get immersed in the world, not the graphics engine. if the world works how i expect it to, if the characters in that world act like i'd expect, if the stories are interesting and fit within the world then i get very immersed. without these all the pretty graphics in the world won't immerse me.

Granted, this is only anecdotal evidence, but then i'm not trying to state my preference as fact.

[Flatfingers]

When you command a vessel that does not look real, there is a sense of carelessness. When you command a vessel that DOES look real, you want to BE careful. Responsibility plays a much larger role.

Very nicely put!

Having a "trail" behind ships isn't by itself (or automatically) going to force everyone to play Star Trek Online like just another shoot-'n'-loot MMOG. But it's one small thing that contributes, along with lots of other small things, to the message that STO's developers send to players about what kind of game this is meant to be.

On that basis, no, of course no one needs to go ballistic about a little thing like whether there are trails behind ships or not. But to comment positively or negatively on that feature isn't wrong, because all the little features add up. Taken all together, they communicate to players the norms of that world. And players behave accordingly.

Personally, I think the recent suggestion to tone the trails down a bit is reasonable. I myself don't think the capital ships need trails at all; I'm hoping their movment and turn rates are too slow to be capable of the kind of twitch-mode, dogfighting gameplay that benefits from the visual clue of a trail. But if trails are "in," then at least I'd like them to be minimalistic: bright enough to be useful to those who feel a need to focus on them, but dim enough to be ignorable by everyone else.

Actually, I feel the same way (and for similar reasons) about in-game user interface elements; I believe we need to be able to turn off the "words floating above heads" stuff if we prefer a less game-y look to the gameworld. But while that's related to this thread, it's definitely a different thread. :)

--Flatfingers

[Silverspar]

On the contrary, I think TMP at its core was a facet of star trek. Like you said though, they spent too much time on ship flybies rather than story elements.

The idea of confronting the unknown and meeting a seemingly overwhelming challenge with style and grace. The problem is, like I said, too many flybies not enough story.

Star Trek isn't about encountering unknown, insurmountable odds. Star Trek, at it's core, was always about the human condition. Why do you think the Star Trek crew from TOS was such a diverse cast of contraversial races of the time? Why do you think Star Trek tackles issues and commentary based on the time period? In fact, I am sure if it was on now, Star Trek will probably be having things that would be discussing same sex marriages and the like going on now, just like a white man kissing a black woman was a major issue at the time back during the TOS era.

[Bamf]

Then you should be able to back it up with something more substantial than anecdotal evidence.

Me, i get immersed in the world, not the graphics engine. if the world works how i expect it to, if the characters in that world act like i'd expect, if the stories are interesting and fit within the world then i get very immersed. without these all the pretty graphics in the world won't immerse me.

Granted, this is only anecdotal evidence, but then i'm not trying to state my preference as fact.

The graphics is very much part of the world. Granted, without appealing characters/storyline, good graphics would make no difference. However, try to imagine a game with a strong level of realism, let's say:

Assassin's Creed. While the story was rather repetitive and the characters bland, I was able to keep playing because of the amazing graphics. Landscapes looked real and cities had realistic color.

On to a more important aspect of the game: the Parcour. It was genious. The movement was purely connected and easily executable. Coupled with the detailed and highly defined character model of Altair, I felt like i was really in the medieval Jerusalem performing Parcour.

Now imagine the same game, with not so realistic graphics. Imagine Altair looking a little more like a 3d South Park character.

If you have never played Assassin's Creed, or ever seen it for that matter, take this opportunity to do a quick youtube search- and if you are really interesed, rent the game.

[Xidane]

The game is too cartoon like in general, I don't like the trails or the ships, they really should have made it more like First Contact and Insurrection. (Nemesis' colors were too dull)

I just hope the Gorn don't look like silly droopy cartoons...

[Bamf]

Please don't forget the story of nemesis. Those dark colors parallel the mood of the story altogether.

Dark colors:

Remans struggle for freedom from slavery
Doomsday if Picard and the enterprise don't stop Shinzon from destroying earth and the federation
The corruption within the Romulan government
Picards own struggle to deal with the ever more threatening Shinzon wanting his life and blood so he may live


the story with vibrant colors wouldn't suit the mood at all.

[Cormoran]

The graphics is very much part of the world. Granted, without appealing characters/storyline, good graphics would make no difference. However, try to imagine a game with a strong level of realism, let's say:

Assassin's Creed. While the story was rather repetitive and the characters bland, I was able to keep playing because of the amazing graphics. Landscapes looked real and cities had realistic color.

On to a more important aspect of the game: the Parcour. It was genious. The movement was purely connected and easily executable. Coupled with the detailed and highly defined character model of Altair, I felt like i was really in the medieval Jerusalem performing Parcour.

Now imagine the same game, with not so realistic graphics. Imagine Altair looking a little more like a 3d South Park character.

If you have never played Assassin's Creed, or ever seen it for that matter, take this opportunity to do a quick youtube search- and if you are really interesed, rent the game.

yeah i played it, i was bored to tears by it, i could barely finish the second assasination. I thought someone spidermanning their way through historic middle east was very unrealistic and didn't feel very immersed at all. Graphics wouldn't have changed that, it was partly the whole genetic memory story and partly gameplay not mixing with the historical context of the world that was being portrayed.

In contrast there's GTA4, which i do get more immersed in than previous GTA's. This is because of the story mixing well with the world that was created, it's not as out there as previous GTA's. Niko doesn't go around stealing military tanks and jets, the world feels more real because the story and the actions the character does feels more real within the context of that world, i'd be equally immersed if i played gta4 with gta3 graphics. actually if it was reversed, id be more happy with gta4 in gta3 graphics than gta3 in gta4 graphics.

In the end it's simple preference, graphics don't effect me that much, i've been playing games since they were just text, and as such the story is what matters to me, the rest i can use my imagination on. About the only time graphics upgrades excite me is when i see potential gameplay that can be added because of them, and even that gameplay has to fit into the context of the games story.

[Xidane]

Please don't forget the story of nemesis. Those dark colors parallel the mood of the story altogether.

Dark colors:

Remans struggle for freedom from slavery
Doomsday if Picard and the enterprise don't stop Shinzon from destroying earth and the federation
The corruption within the Romulan government
Picards own struggle to deal with the ever more threatening Shinzon wanting his life and blood so he may live


the story with vibrant colors wouldn't suit the mood at all.

The dark mood wasn't my issue, it was more the dull look of the Enterprise, it didn't have the sleekness of the other two movies, it looked almost like it was 30 year older, and had a layer of dust on it. It was just...dull looking. I loved the Valdor class though, and the Scimitar didn't look dull.

In any case, Cryptic's graphics are far too cartoony... they need to make it more like an improved version of Bride Commander.

[Xidane]

The graphics is very much part of the world. Granted, without appealing characters/storyline, good graphics would make no difference. However, try to imagine a game with a strong level of realism, let's say:

Assassin's Creed. While the story was rather repetitive and the characters bland, I was able to keep playing because of the amazing graphics. Landscapes looked real and cities had realistic color.

On to a more important aspect of the game: the Parcour. It was genious. The movement was purely connected and easily executable. Coupled with the detailed and highly defined character model of Altair, I felt like i was really in the medieval Jerusalem performing Parcour.

Now imagine the same game, with not so realistic graphics. Imagine Altair looking a little more like a 3d South Park character.

If you have never played Assassin's Creed, or ever seen it for that matter, take this opportunity to do a quick youtube search- and if you are really interesed, rent the game.

I've often posted that character movement and interaction with the game environment should take from Tomb Raider's example, but after watching a video of Assassin's Creed's gameplay, I agree with you that it's another great example.

Characters, weather they be playing out PvE puzzles or engaging in PvP battles, should be able to move and fight with those mechanics. Naturally each race would differ in how they function based on their biology and profession. I'd love to see a Tal Shiar agent move like this.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=DCLYajbiNoc

[Flatfingers]

Since the question of trails has got us thinking about the visual style of ships in this game (again), I thought I'd mention something I just remembered.

Namely, this: http://www.thelightworks.com/images/pics/ref_illustration/starfleet1_wall.jpg (http://www.thelightworks.com/images/pics/ref_illustration/starfleet1_wall.jpg) .

The Light Works does commercial rendering for all kinds of products, but one of the things they did was a selection of ships for the official Star Trek Magazine.

You can see the full selection of images by scrolling down to the bottom of their main (English) site at http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm (http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm) .

THAT. That looks like Star Trek to me. That is what I'd love to see as the visual style in Star Trek Online, for ships in particular but for space as well.

And it's absolutely not going to happen. The people with Crysis-level gaming PCs could maybe handle it, but targeting that level of beauty would be commercial suicide for an online game. And I don't think that's what Cryptic have in mind.

That fact acknowledged, these Light Works images do serve as a reference guide for one end of a spectrum of visual styles, where a "cartoonish" look would be the other end.

So: how far along this spectrum should Star Trek Online aim? To put it another way, consider the PCs (and perhaps some console) that are expected to be in use when STO is targeted to launch. If we agree that a lot of the special effects in the Light Works images would have to be, if not eliminated or scaled back, then at least optional in a game that can run acceptably well on those platforms, then I wonder how many likely players of a Star Trek MMORPG would prefer that look to the "stylized" look we've seen so far...

...including "colorful trails behind the ship?" ;)

they need to make it more like an improved version of Bride Commander.

Bride Commander -- I'd play that, but not where my wife could see. :D

(Sorry -- couldn't resist!)

--Flatfingers

[Bamf]

yeah i played it, i was bored to tears by it, i could barely finish the second assasination. I thought someone spidermanning their way through historic middle east was very unrealistic and didn't feel very immersed at all. Graphics wouldn't have changed that, it was partly the whole genetic memory story and partly gameplay not mixing with the historical context of the world that was being portrayed.

In contrast there's GTA4, which i do get more immersed in than previous GTA's. This is because of the story mixing well with the world that was created, it's not as out there as previous GTA's. Niko doesn't go around stealing military tanks and jets, the world feels more real because the story and the actions the character does feels more real within the context of that world, i'd be equally immersed if i played gta4 with gta3 graphics. actually if it was reversed, id be more happy with gta4 in gta3 graphics than gta3 in gta4 graphics.

In the end it's simple preference, graphics don't effect me that much, i've been playing games since they were just text, and as such the story is what matters to me, the rest i can use my imagination on. About the only time graphics upgrades excite me is when i see potential gameplay that can be added because of them, and even that gameplay has to fit into the context of the games story.

we aren't talking about definition of the graphics, though. You've mentioned here that GTA 4 would look better with less detailed graphics from GTA 3, but that is not what is in question.

We are discussing the difference in cartoon graphics compared to realistic graphics. Imagine GTA with cartoons, vibrant, bright, and luminous colors.

Since the question of trails has got us thinking about the visual style of ships in this game (again), I thought I'd mention something I just remembered.

Namely, this: http://www.thelightworks.com/images/pics/ref_illustration/starfleet1_wall.jpg (http://www.thelightworks.com/images/...leet1_wall.jpg) .

The Light Works does commercial rendering for all kinds of products, but one of the things they did was a selection of ships for the official Star Trek Magazine.

You can see the full selection of images by scrolling down to the bottom of their main (English) site at http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm (http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm) .

THAT. That looks like Star Trek to me. That is what I'd love to see as the visual style in Star Trek Online, for ships in particular but for space as well.

--Flatfingers

THAT is AWESOME. that is exactly what this should look like!

[Dahakra]

Namely, this: http://www.thelightworks.com/images/pics/ref_illustration/starfleet1_wall.jpg (http://www.thelightworks.com/images/...leet1_wall.jpg) .


You can see the full selection of images by scrolling down to the bottom of their main (English) site at http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm (http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm) .

--Flatfingers

The first link gave meh a "404 error" :P
Pretty nice all the same.

And I'll toss out some other pics from another space bases MMO currently underdevelopment.

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_001.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_002.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_003.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_004.jpg

A bit dark for STO maybe, but I like that myself :D

- Dahakra

[Xidane]

Here's a better clip

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=iEdkDOIe8YM

I'd love to see players being able to interact with the environment based on their race and the abilities of that race. This vid is a great example of agility as well as being able to break portions of the environment, I figure stronger races can break and life larger objects, while smaller more agile races and perform maneuvers. Maybe not climbing walls, but many other cool functions could be made available.

[Xidane]

Since the question of trails has got us thinking about the visual style of ships in this game (again), I thought I'd mention something I just remembered.

Namely, this: http://www.thelightworks.com/images/pics/ref_illustration/starfleet1_wall.jpg (http://www.thelightworks.com/images/...leet1_wall.jpg) .

The Light Works does commercial rendering for all kinds of products, but one of the things they did was a selection of ships for the official Star Trek Magazine.

You can see the full selection of images by scrolling down to the bottom of their main (English) site at http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm (http://www.thelightworks.com/index_e.htm) .

THAT. That looks like Star Trek to me. That is what I'd love to see as the visual style in Star Trek Online, for ships in particular but for space as well.

And it's absolutely not going to happen. The people with Crysis-level gaming PCs could maybe handle it, but targeting that level of beauty would be commercial suicide for an online game. And I don't think that's what Cryptic have in mind.

That fact acknowledged, these Light Works images do serve as a reference guide for one end of a spectrum of visual styles, where a "cartoonish" look would be the other end.

So: how far along this spectrum should Star Trek Online aim? To put it another way, consider the PCs (and perhaps some console) that are expected to be in use when STO is targeted to launch. If we agree that a lot of the special effects in the Light Works images would have to be, if not eliminated or scaled back, then at least optional in a game that can run acceptably well on those platforms, then I wonder how many likely players of a Star Trek MMORPG would prefer that look to the "stylized" look we've seen so far...

...including "colorful trails behind the ship?" ;)



Bride Commander -- I'd play that, but not where my wife could see. :D

(Sorry -- couldn't resist!)

--Flatfingers

Your first link didn't work, but the second one blew me away, you're absolutely right, those colors and effects are perfect for Star Trek, I'd make better looking characters lol, but it beats the hell out of these silly cartoons we've been seeing so far.

All players with lesser computers would have to do, is lower the graphics settings, make into something for playable. Great suggestion though, it's exactly what I had in mind, and Bamf's reference to Assassin's Creed is also very perfect.

[Flatfingers]

The first link gave meh a "404 error" :P

Ack. My mistake -- corrected, and thanks for the heads-up!

--Flatfingers

[Xidane]

The first link gave meh a "404 error" :P
Pretty nice all the same.

And I'll toss out some other pics from another space bases MMO currently underdevelopment.

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_001.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_002.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_003.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_004.jpg

A bit dark for STO maybe, but I like that myself :D

- Dahakra

Holy hell, those were amazing, wtf is Cryptic doing making STO into a cartoon fest with graphics like THAT being available!!! Totally agree with you.

[Bamf]

The first link gave meh a "404 error" :P
Pretty nice all the same.

And I'll toss out some other pics from another space bases MMO currently underdevelopment.

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_001.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_002.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_003.jpg

http://bp.kkweb8.de/screens/debut_screen_004.jpg

A bit dark for STO maybe, but I like that myself :D

- Dahakra

Those look great! I don't like where STO is heading with these cartoon graphics at all. I hope they will reassess what they've created so far and come up with more realism. Hopefully it isn't too late...

[Dahakra]

Ack. My mistake -- corrected, and thanks for the heads-up!

--Flatfingers
No worries mate, glad to help :)
And yes, thanks to your fix, thats a very nice indeed :D


Holy hell, those were amazing, wtf is Cryptic doing making STO into a cartoon fest with graphics like THAT being available!!! Totally agree with you.

Yup, I have no problem with "stylized" graphics in general, but I would much prefer Cryptic go that route with STO. But of course that just my personal preference.

- Dahakra

[Cormoran]

we aren't talking about definition of the graphics, though. You've mentioned here that GTA 4 would look better with less detailed graphics from GTA 3, but that is not what is in question.

We are discussing the difference in cartoon graphics compared to realistic graphics. Imagine GTA with cartoons, vibrant, bright, and luminous colors, then come back and post your opinion.

I never mentioned anything about GTA4 looking better with GTA3 graphics. I was talking about how graphics didn't enter into my enjoyment of the game. I was responding to you're 'undeniable fact' that realistic graphics equals a more immersive experience.

I also don't have to imagine GTA with cartoony, vibrant, luminous colours either, because it already exists as Vice City. My preference stands.

[Candymancan]

I never liked company's who put trails on the ships on star trek games. I really hope this game doesnt have that or has an option to turn it off i think its tacky as hell.

Legacy was one before that game came out it had trails on there ships people hated it and eventually they took it out.

The only trail you should see from a ship is when there leaking plasma or something.


I got an idea for you guys who are complaining about graphics. Go to eve online's website, download the client and play on the 14 days free thing they offer, turn the graphics all the way up and go into a populated area like Jita.

Unless your computer is better then mine you will be lagging your ass off i 100% garuntee it. While graphics like these look good in those picture's it isnt realistic for multi ship combat. Trust me in eve online you have to turn the graphics down if you ever want to have fleet battles otherwise you will lagg into oblivion and the only thing DX9 on eve online is the ships and stations, the rest is still from the original engine like 5 years ago.

While i agree those screen shots look amazing and i do kinda wish STO looked like that, you have to be realistic. I bet you a million dollers all those screen shots were takin on a $3,000 computer.

My computer is this, and even i cant play EVE maxed out in populated area's anymore then oh 15-20 ships together with HDR turned on and my fps starts dropping.

E8400 Wolfdale @ 4.4ghz
4GB 1066 ram
4870x2

[Bamf]

I never mentioned anything about GTA4 looking better with GTA3 graphics. I was talking about how graphics didn't enter into my enjoyment of the game. I was responding to you're 'undeniable fact' that realistic graphics equals a more immersive experience.

I also don't have to imagine GTA with cartoony, vibrant, luminous colours either, because it already exists as Vice City. My preference stands.

Right, and would you prefer GTA 4 with Vice City graphics? I doubt it.

[Bamf]

My computer is this, and even i cant play EVE maxed out in populated area's anymore then oh 15-20 ships together with HDR turned on and my fps starts dropping.

E8400 Wolfdale @ 4.4ghz
4GB 1066 ram
4870x2

What do you mean by "My FPS start's dropping"?

[Candymancan]

What do you mean by "My FPS start's dropping"?

I mean it gets below 30, try eve online with the new client. You will see what im talking about, normally when your with friends maybe 5 people its ok i get 60fps, but if you are with a group of people 15-20 and your in a battle the fps will start going below 30. I dont want this game to have insaine graphics because i know its going to be bad for fps, and people will quit and leave the game just like they did with warhammer online.

People complain about wow's cartoony graphics but that game doesnt have FPS issues in large groups, warhammer online has much better graphics and when you pvp'ing with 20 or more people the game laggs so many people left they are merging server's now and its only been out for 5 months.

[Bamf]

If the spec's for your system are really as listed, i do not think it would be as bad as you say it is. Are you running the game in a window with multiple displays, or have anything else running which could be interfering?

Your system should not be suffering so badly. I remember running eve flawlessly with a system populated with 20-30 people without suffering FPS drops or internet lag, on a much less sophisticated system than yours.

[Flatfingers]

NOTE: I got a little enthusiastic in my response to Candymancan. Those not interested in some dude yapping about client/server architectural issues should feel free to completely skip reading this post. :D

People complain about wow's cartoony graphics but that game doesnt have FPS issues in large groups, warhammer online has much better graphics and when you pvp'ing with 20 or more people the game laggs so many people left they are merging server's now and its only been out for 5 months.

As I understand it (and someone with practical knowledge on this subject is welcome to jump in here), there are at least three different ways you can experience a slowdown:

1. Latency (delay in transmitting data).
2. Framerate as a function of GPU speed and capabilities.
3. Many objects in one game location.

Your problem is probably not latency, as defined above, since that tends to remain at a constant value over a session regardless of what's happening on the server or client. Using satellite broadband, for example, tends to introduce a half-second delay to everything (because the data's going up to and down from a satellite roughly 22,300 miles above the Earth), which is why it's not recommended for people who want to do online gaming.

And framerate, if we're just talking graphics processing power, would only be affected by having a lot of mobs on the screen at once if the artists put too many polygons on every object or if every object demanded massive amounts of post-processing. Neither of those is typical of today's AAA-quality MMORPGs, which apply pretty efficient level-of-detail algorithms to objects before displaying them.

Which leaves the most likely culprit as the game server being unable to keep up with the enormous amount of position/facing/status information generated by every active mobile object ("mob") in the same location as the player. (It should be noted, however, that your PC can still impose limiting factors on how quickly large amounts of mob data can be processed and displayed. A 4.4MHz [are you overclocked?] E8400 and 4GB of RAM are probably OK even for Jita -- how fast is your hard drive, how full is it, and how fragmented is it?)

I remember all too well Jita being slow when there were lots of people there, despite my ping being good and my graphics system pretty burly. Worse yet, I recall going to the Bazaar on Luclin in EverQuest and having my game turn into a slideshow. Having hundreds of player characters in one location bogged down the server to the point that my client display was only getting updated something like every five seconds -- that's 0.2 FPS. It was hysterically funny... as long as you weren't in a hurry for anything.

Today's MMORPGs usually employ predictive location processing (sometimes called "dead reckoning"). Rather than always transmitting every single location change of every mob in a location to all players in that location, predictive processing has the server do a lot of checks of a mob's location while the client does only a few checks within the same time period. Every now and then -- less frequently than games without location-prediction code -- the server sends actual location information to the client. The client code compares its predicted (and displayed) location of a mob with the location reported by the server; if they're different by too much (as when the mob changes directions rapidly), the client updates its location data and redisplays the mob in its more correct location. It then bases future predictions off of the new location, and the process continues.

Using this high-level optimization helps cut down on how much mob location traffic has to passed to a client. So a game with good location-prediction code can have more mobs in one area at a time before being overloaded. The downside is that mobs (usually players) making frequent direction changes as they move will appear to other players to blink from one location to another as the client fails to accurately predict the player's actual movements and the mob's on-screen location gets shifted to resynchronize it with the server data. (This is why highly twitch-mode games, where rapid position changes are a requirement, tend to reduce lag more by limiting the number of players than by a big use of location-prediction code.)

So, with all that said, what appears to be a framerate problem in EVE is probably due more to EVE's server architecture and limits to motion prediction than to the CPU or GPU capability of your PC, given its specs. (Although, again, if your hard drive is slower than 7200 RPM or is nearly full and badly fragmented, that could be slowing you down, too.) The bottom line is that in pretty much any online game, if you get too many players clustered in one place then either the server or your PC or both won't be able to keep up. At that point you'll either get the slideshow effect or mobs will appear to start jumping instantaneously from one location to another.

I suspect the technical folks working on the Champions Online/Star Trek Online engine will do everything they can, and will take advantage of everything that's been learned about optimizing client/server architectures for massively multiplayer online games to try to keep the evil Lag Monster from making an appearance too often.

Too much information? ;)

--Flatfingers

[Bamf]

No, i found it very informative. Thank you for such a detailed post.

[TheMasterpiece]

It might actually help out in game, show pathways for groups of ships, let everyone know where youre going. etc. I dont know if ill wanna see a bunch of lines but it might not be all bad.