create an exploitable trek-babble physics

[jermungand]

In every star trek episode ever, it was quickly made obvious that the crew would not have stood a chance if they weren't good at applying their bizarre trek science. Applying this systemic knowledge to come up with the right idea at the right time is really the name of the game isn't it? What sort of Star Fleet officer would I be if I just picked entirely pre-explained courses of action spoon-fed to me by the mission itself? The game will be incredibly disappointing and dull if so. It wouldn't make any difference if it were my "science officer" spoon feeding me with possibilities. These possibilities, as they are described, should have some actual basis within the gameplay itself for working. Anything less, and the game may just as well be a generic MMO with a Trek skin. If I can't make decisions with my personal intuition (which is what the characters are doing ALL the time in EVERY episode) and am just handed a menu of prescribed options, scripted into parts of missions as they unfold, then I am not getting what I paid for. I want to think intuitively and on my feet, and show my mettle as a starship captain with my own cunning solutions. That's what being a Star Fleet officer is all about. If people who buy the game cannot do this on any level, as seems most likely, they will stop playing because they are clearly not assuming the role the game claims to provide and got them all excited over in the first place. It will be bland MMO stuff in a Star Trek skin.

A way to make sure this does not happen would be to have a Trek pseudoscience system built into the workings of the game. Make some fake interactive science. Make some tail of all the techno-babble (it doesn't have to fit with modern physics, it only has to make sense within itself). Alchemy has been done in games before. This would certainly be more far reaching and fantastic of course than the simple interactions created for the parameters of mixing potions, but that may not be so hard to do. The rules governing potion mixing systems in games is hardly more complicated than rock paper scissors. In another game like, maybe Magic the Gathering, the system of rules is simple and concrete yet exploitable in myriad ways. Beautifully simple, but with so much potential for complication. A pseudoscience system may sound like a difficult thing to create, but it really wouldn't be at all. Just make a simple set of interactive rules (utterly removed from real science), and if you have the right arrangement in the setup, complications will come to happen within the game --- every time a phenomenon or "state" of something is exposed to an influence (from your ship or otherwise).

[Messer_Macheath]

I know what you're talking about. Usually it comes right after a commercial break (the last break in the episode) which was precluded by a close-up of one of the main character's faces looking like there's no hope left. Star Trek is, and forever will be, the king of Deus Ex Machina.

Usually the chief engineer reroutes power from somewhere to the "forward nacelles," then reconfigures the photon torpedoes to launch in a reverse-diagonal spread (whatever that means) while rotating the frequency of the deflector shield, followed by some mention of tachyon particles and a parallax wave. Tada! You just saved your ship from destruction. "Well done, Mr. Laforge."

It's standard "MacGyver" physics. You combine some string, a wire, a bit of styrofoam, a sewing needle, and a toothpick to make a compass. Except, related to ship combat somehow.

How do you propose they do this? I think this would be harder to do than you think, and so I'm wondering how you think this could be implemented. I think there are simply too many variables, and that, implementing this type of system in an MMO that includes both ship and ground combat, as well as diplomacy in some form, may be too much for one dev team to handle. Although, I agree it would be cool to be able to solve missions by truly thinking outside the box.

-Macheath.

[LordDave]

It's a nice idea, but it adds a level of complexity that's not needed. It would be like putting a multiple choice test on a mission that requires you to restart the thing if you get the answer wrong.
Better to have your officers know the technobabble and they tell you what it is.

[Beaver8]

Usually the chief engineer reroutes power from somewhere to the "forward nacelles," then reconfigures the photon torpedoes to launch in a reverse-diagonal spread (whatever that means) while rotating the frequency of the deflector shield, followed by some mention of tachyon particles and a parallax wave. Tada! You just saved your ship from destruction. "Well done, Mr. Laforge."

-Macheath.

LoL.

I am thinking that the science vessels would possibly have some crazy thing they could do to pull a victory out their butts, or at least save themselves. One thing that sticks in my head is hearing how they will have "tricks up their sleeves". Considering captains going the route of "ME SMASH PUNEY flying space thingey" might have crazy damage but little ways to escape or pull out a losing battle. I see the brute DPS'ers being able to do so much damage they don't need any special tricks. That can be bad if they are losing becaues they don't likely have any special tricks to change the outcome. Science vessels on the other hand seem like they would have more tools other than brute force and some of them might help in the long haul more so than just raw damage.

As far as missions that we are sent out to accomplish, hopefully it will be dinamic enough that we can do it in other ways. If it's a simple "go to planet Beer, and make sure Mr. Miller Lite stops selling his beer"

Hopefully we would have several options such as:

Kill him.
Kidnap him.
Negotiate with him so he stops stealing business from the Budweisonians.
Threaten him or his family so he stops.
Destroy the hops transport ship.
Steal the shipment.
Sabotage his factory.
Threaten his workers to stop producing.

Everything could lead into sub-missions even and I believe could be a lot of fun. Instead of 20 seperate missions it could be one long story line with several sub-missions.

[jhem99]

A tri-cellular leptonic aperture with mesonic rupture cascading into a singular event. Stay clear of them.

[Tribbler]

Tribbles are especially fond of eating Ludicrous cassette ribbons, does that make a mark on the pseudo science world you speak of?

[Kinjiru]

I have a feeling that the technobabble portion of STO will incorporate some part of the crafting system. Just a hunch. :)

[Kinjiru]

Tribbles are especially fond of eating Ludicrous cassette ribbons, does that make a mark on the pseudo science world you speak of?

I want my ship to go ludicrous speed... what about that?



"They've gone to plaid..." :D

[jermungand]

It's a nice idea, but it adds a level of complexity that's not needed. It would be like putting a multiple choice test on a mission that requires you to restart the thing if you get the answer wrong.
Better to have your officers know the technobabble and they tell you what it is.

I think LordDave may be missing the essence the idea. I'm not referring to a tediously complicated minigame sort of task superimposed on top of the actual game, or only becoming accessible at the right time within a mission --- I'm talking about having a system fully inside the game itself, in the way that physics were present in Half-Life 2, or in the way that things can be destroyed in Red Faction. It's just THERE, and the opportunity to be resourceful presents itself as you play. I'm talking about doing THIS with a set of fictional physics, which can work in any way that is fun.

[justynhuculak]

I think LordDave may be missing the essence the idea. I'm not referring to a tediously complicated minigame sort of task superimposed on top of the actual game, or only becoming accessible at the right time within a mission --- I'm talking about having a system fully inside the game itself, in the way that physics were present in Half-Life 2, or in the way that things can be destroyed in Red Faction. It's just THERE, and the opportunity to be resourceful presents itself as you play. I'm talking about doing THIS with a set of fictional physics, which can work in any way that is fun.

Unfortunately, the average MMO gamer would get frustrated with such a system rather quickly and cry for the Devs to dumb the game down to the point where they don't have to do any thinking at all.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a system whereby personal intuition and understanding of the setting is rewarded. I just don't know if the average MMO'er would like the same as it'd require conscious thought and analysis when making decisions.

[Zepath]

Nice ideas, but there's a couple of issues ...

1) This is a game. Its not a TV or Movie that has to conclude its story in X miunutes, with all the stars living happily ever after.

2) No matter how much room they give you to maneuver around, it is a computer on the other end having to react to the things you do ... and the programmers have to have accounted for that or the computer just gets lost.

Unfortunately for us as players .... 100K players will come up with many more solutions (they deem logical) than 15 guys sitting around a conference table can.

3) 15 minutes after this game goes live, there will be 20 Star Trek Online Wiki's out there with complete explanations of how X mission was accomplished by Y player. So there's little point in any game developer knocking themselves out with unique puzzles.

Instead, they build their game so that your tools, your crew, your own personal logic allows you to solve the quests/missions a couple of different ways, and just accept that Wiki's that are out there are for those that just can't figure it out regardless of their experience as a player, are new to MMO's and just need the help, or don't care enough to figure it out in the first place.

What you propose is great, and for some players would be extremely entertaining. I'm just not sure that its right for the masses.

Most players have a very short attention span, if the mission/quest takes too much time they get disgruntled, start screaming its too hard, or just dump the quest/mission, move on, and then complain there's not enough content.

[justynhuculak]

Most players have a very short attention span, if the mission/quest takes too much time they get disgruntled, start screaming its too hard, or just dump the quest/mission, move on, and then complain there's not enough content.

This.

The average MMO gamer hates having to do work in the game. Unfortunately, thinking meets their requirements of 'work' so the notion of being rewarded for creative, original thinking makes them cry out in protest.

[DerManiac]

I'm talking about having a system fully inside the game itself, in the way that physics were present in Half-Life 2, or in the way that things can be destroyed in Red Faction.

Well. If I remember correctly Half Life 2 had Gravity, Buoyancy and Friction. In a shooter.. And it was already considered innovative!
Now you expect them to put a quantum physics engine in a MMO?
What's next? How about the NPC's have artificial intelligence?

[jermungand]

Unfortunately, the average MMO gamer would get frustrated with such a system rather quickly and cry for the Devs to dumb the game down to the point where they don't have to do any thinking at all.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a system whereby personal intuition and understanding of the setting is rewarded. I just don't know if the average MMO'er would like the same as it'd require conscious thought and analysis when making decisions.

Yes, well last time I checked, it looked like the popular opinion among people interested in this game was "I hope it's not going to be like another MMO", and you know why? As of yet, MMOs are terrible games with no imagination. Yes it would be different for the average MMO player, but then again, any half descent game would have to be different to the average person who plays an MMO or "ET" for that matter. This game should be given a chance to be a good game by the standards of people whose taste actually counts for something.

[justynhuculak]

Yes, well last time I checked, it looked like the popular opinion among people interested in this game was "I hope it's not going to be like another MMO", and you know why? As of yet, MMOs are terrible games with no imagination. Yes it would be different for the average MMO player, but then again, any half descent game would have to be different to the average person who plays an MMO or "ET" for that matter. This game should be given a chance to be a good game by the standards of people whose taste actually counts for something.

I'll ignore the thinly-veiled insult.

I think you missed the point of my post. I'm in support of a system like the OP suggested. I'm tired of being able to play and suceed while watching TV. I'm sick of the fact that MMO gaming is currently at the point where you can be nearly braindead, and still be considered 'good' at the game.

I understand that people don't want this to be 'WoW in space' or 'Pirates of the Burning Milky Way'. They don't want a Star Trek-skinned MMO. They want a Star Trek themed MMO, and inherent to that IP is a sense of eruditeness, whereby intelligence and application of intelligence is rewarded over the ability to repeat a series of keystrokes. The problem is that most MMO gamers (I'm speaking MMO gamers in general, not specifically MMO gamers that are currently interested in STO. As the game is currently in pre-beta stages and Cryptic hasn't really focused any advertising on it, it'd be beyond foolish to assume that the current community accurately represents what will be the launch community. Trust me, there'll be a lot of people who play STO because it 'looks cool' and not because its Star Trek, THOSE are the people who could care less if STO is a rehash of existing MMOs because they don't care about the association of gameplay elements with the IP) are comfortable with the current model of MMOs, and will fight tooth and nail to resist changing the status quo. That includes a system where careful forethought, planning, and implementation of game-world knowledge could put them at a disadvantage.

Once again, let me repeat, I would LOVE to see a system like this. It'd definitely give STO a degree of immersion unparalleled by any other game on the market. Hell, it'd even be a bit of sweet payback, because RPers would actually have an edge in the game rather than be looked down upon or made fun of (a la WoW). But, with the average MMO gamer having the attention span and incentive of a whiny five-year-old, it'd only be a matter of time before the system had to be compromised to accomodate the masses who play the game because it 'looks cool', not because they care one way or the other about the IP or its accurate, fair representation.

[jermungand]

I'll ignore the thinly-veiled insult.



Sorry Karik, I didn't mean to offend, I just felt compelled to make a blunt point. My logic here is: if people are complaining about there being an actual game present in what they're playing, how are their complaints even legitimate? These people are no doubt hugely outnumbered by those who are attracted by the CONCEPT of an MMO, but won't play them because the gameplay is so awful. What if every comedy film ever made was woefully boring (a supposedly funny scene might be watching ants crawl over a log)... would you follow the preferences of the remaining people who actually watched them as guidelines for the genre? That way, nobody who wanted to see a movie that actually IS FUNNY would ever have their way. In summary, the people who actually play MMOs (and would therefore be making these complaints) should not be regarded as the MMO audience, but as a very small minority within the MMO audience. It's a condition unique to MMOs.

Now you expect them to put a quantum physics engine in a MMO?



DerManiac,I didn't say the system would be an accurate simulation of quantum mechanics, I said quite the complete opposite. A lot of people seem to be having misunderstandings about what I've said, but this one sort of bypasses the entire explanation I've given. The physics of Star Trek is removed enough from real science that the phenomena and strange activity that happens could be made to conform to any set of rules the designers want it to. It could have as much basis for being realistic as another game's magic system. "Phasing" has no basis for being understood within modern science, so why bother? Even if it did have some complicated existing quantum theory behind it, would players really stop mid-game to wonder if it were represented in an entirely legitimate way? My idea would just be applying science jargon to any interesting system of parameters the designers feel like making. It would be good fun for the player. It would feel just like he were doing what those starship captains do, even if it is a load of hogwash. May sound whimsical, but that's what games are.

[Kairutk]

If we use the deflector to match the resonating frequency of their warp plasma, we might be able to destroy the enemy ship.

[JoJimGregory]

parody

If we disconfigurate the cryoplexous coils and redirect the lazzerating synchrofloyds to match the crysmonating output of their snickerdoodles, we should be able to make Smores, Captain.

/parody

[Flatfingers]

jermungand, I believe I get what you're suggesting.

(As evidence, I offer the Sensors and Star Trek Online (http://flatfingers-theory.blogspot.com/2007/10/sensors-and-star-trek-online.html) essay I wrote a while back on the subject of environmental phenomena in Star Trek and how they might fit into the gameplay of Star Trek Online. I think you might enjoy it.)

While I appreciate the highly practical nature of some of the comments so far (*cough* ;)), I wonder if it might not be more fun to work constructively with jermungand to explore what the kind of gameplay he suggests might look like. Certainly some people who like today's simplified games might not go for a gameworld where perception and creative problem-solving -- i.e., thinking -- are the most effective way to progress. Still, instead of the easy "it can't/shouldn't be done," why not take that as a challenge to try stretching our game design muscles?

If after a good-faith effort to help jermungand come up with a gameplay design that would be fun for both perception-oriented gamers and persistence-oriented gamers we conclude that it's just too tall a challenge, then it's probably safe to assume "can't be done with reasonable time/budget." Until then, I'd hate to see some potentially interesting gameplay ideas lost because the discussion got cut off too early.

So, with that in mind, here are some questions I'm throwing out to try to spark some conceptual thinking.

1. How many different kinds of particles and energies would need to be available in order for the universe to feel sufficiently interesting? 10? 50? 100? 250?

2. Should environment-based challenges be simple (one phenomenon to recognize and respond to)? Or should they be complex (multiple phenomena that interact in hard-to-predict ways)? Or both?

3. To what extent should player-controllable objects in Star Trek Online (main deflector dish, tricorder, etc.) be able to emit these various environmental phenomena?

4. The issue (I wouldn't call it a "problem" overall) that some players will read a Star Trek Online wiki for the answers to specific situations is one worth thinking carefully about. Is there a way to create a system for generating environment-based challenges that allows perception-oriented players to create high-quality original solutions for each challenge while still allowing persistence-oriented players to read a good basic solution from a wiki? In other words, can a system be created that produces environment-based challenges with static "good enough" solutions but dynamic "best" solutions?

5. Should there be character skills that increase a player's ability to create/discover "best" solutions? Pax and I discussed this a while back, but it's still an open question: which should be more important in determining success in environment-based challenges, character abilities or player abilities?

6. Should characters from certain departments be better at detecting/manipulating particles and energies than characters in other departments? In other words, should Science characters have access to more skills for solving environmental physics challenges than characters from, say, Tactical? What about Engineering? In particular, what should Engineers be able to do with particles and energies that Scientists can't, and vice versa?

7. Suppose that Star Trek Online was designed to have lots of different kinds of particles and energies, all with plausible in-game effects on people and objects, such that it would be helpful to recognize those environmental effects and know how best to use (or avoid) them. To what extent could the ship's computer be designed to help players overcome environment-based challenges? How about our First Officer or Science Officer -- could they be designed to provide advice and suggestions for how best to use the available environmental features to solve a challenge?

Thoughts?

--Flatfingers

[Kairutk]

I know this mught now go here, but could we ignite a nubula?

[Flatfingers]

I know this mught now go here, but could we ignite a nubula?

Well, if that nebula contains a concentration of metreon particles (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Metreon), if those particles are detectable, and if they're given the "ignitable" damage-causing property...

...then sure, why not?

Sounds like fun. :)

--Flatfingers

[DerManiac]

DerManiac,I didn't say the system would be an accurate simulation of quantum mechanics, I said quite the complete opposite. A lot of people seem to be having misunderstandings about what I've said, but this one sort of bypasses the entire explanation I've given. The physics of Star Trek is removed enough from real science that the phenomena and strange activity that happens could be made to conform to any set of rules the designers want it to.

Making it less realistic doesn't necessarily make it less complex. Thera ar tons of different "waves", "beams" and "particles" that have been emmited in the series.. Each with their own individual effekt on mass, other waves/beams and even on space/time. Each molecule in the universe would have to have a specific state, influenced by these elements. As mentioned before, HL2 had only 3 forces, and that was a shooter, where you have small maps, few objects and few players.

As rad as your idea is, it just isnt realistic. Not yet.

[jermungand]

The first step in creating an interactive system like this should be to isolate the more common references within Trek science --- the elements that most consistently have a role, like subspace. We can begin on the groundwork of a system from there.

I'd like to give more thorough and helpful input, but I have a giant essay to write right now. Funny how I can go on and on about this stuff, but I can't compose an English paper to save my life (English is part of getting a bachelor's in game art, ironically).

[Reinkaos]

Now you expect them to put a quantum physics engine in a MMO?
What's next? How about the NPC's have artificial intelligence? One day soon, one day.. :cool:

[DerManiac]

The first step in creating an interactive system like this should be to isolate the more common references within Trek science --- the elements that most consistently have a role, like subspace. We can begin on the groundwork of a system from there.

Probably, yes. And I'm not saying it is impossible (or even very difficult) to implement. But so far it is impossible to run such an engine on todays infrastructure.
Hell, they can't even do path-based weapons ^^

[Flatfingers]

Thera ar tons of different "waves", "beams" and "particles" that have been emmited in the series.. Each with their own individual effekt on mass, other waves/beams and even on space/time. Each molecule in the universe would have to have a specific state, influenced by these elements.

...

As rad as your idea is, it just isnt realistic. Not yet.

I think there are two viewpoints in there that are worth closer inspection.

First, for what it's worth, in my essay that I linked to below I described 46 material particle types, 43 kinds of radiation, and 107 forms of energy, for a total of 196 different possible low-level environmental phenomena.

Is roughly 200 different effects a "ton?"

Or a "good start?" ;)

And it gets even easier if you pick and choose among those effects for the most entertaining ones.

Second, it is absolutely not necessary to model "physics" down to the quantum level in a game for environmental phenomena to be both fun from a gameplay perspective and wicked cool from a Star Trek perspective.

Good gameplay, it seems to me, requires looking at environmental phenomena in only three ways:

emitters
detectors
effects(A possible fourth perspective would be the sounds and graphics that each environmental phenomenon produces, but that's not directly related to rules-based gameplay.)

For each phenomenon, it's sufficient to define the objects (natural and technological) that can emit the phenomenon and the conditions under which emission is possible, the devices and character abilities that can detect the particular phenomenon and the conditions under which detection is possible, and the potential effect(s) that each phenomenon may have on every object.

That last bit might appear daunting, considering that there are likely to be thousands of different kinds of objects in the game. But a good system for creating objects will attach certain common phenomena by default to each kind of object as it's created, and will also allow developers to add additional special behaviors that are triggered when the object interacts with a few exotic phenomena.

Of course no system is ever as simple as it sounds on paper. I'm sure this one is no exception.

But why assume that it has to be as complex as a near-perfect simulation of real-world physics? I don't believe that's a necessary assumption -- I think a perfectly workable balance between gameplay and Star Trek is possible here by implementing the three key interfaces described above to a few dozen of the coolest Star Trek phenomena.

200 particles, radiations and energies might be excessive. (Or not.)

How about just 100?

Or 50?

As long as detection behaviors, emission behaviors, and gameplay effects can be attached easily to object types, why not let the universe of Star Trek Online be full of the distinctive environmental phenomena that help to define Star Trek?

--Flatfingers

[DerManiac]

First of all: Great post, flatfingers. Very inspiring.


Is roughly 200 different effects a "ton?"

I'm not sure if I got this the right way, but: You only counted the phenomena that can occur. But you didn't say anything about the properties of space/time and matter they effect.

I don't know, but I guess it gets a great deal more complicated taking into account what properties each piece of matter/object has to have, and how they are influenced by each individual event.

Also, they would need to define how these events interact with each other? What happens if beam X meets particle B.


That last bit might appear daunting, considering that there are likely to be thousands of different kinds of objects in the game. But a good system for creating objects will attach certain common phenomena by default to each kind of object as it's created, and will also allow developers to add additional special behaviors that are triggered when the object interacts with a few exotic phenomena.


I dont think the problem is within defining the properties of each event, but rather in calculating all the thousands of different events that occur every second on a busy gaming day, storing each object's and each events properties, and transferring that information to every player (within his/her region) without a too high latency.

As I mentioned before: They cannot even do path-based weapons, which would be sooooo much simpler than the system suggested here.

[THORN74]

I know what you're talking about. Usually it comes right after a commercial break (the last break in the episode) which was precluded by a close-up of one of the main character's faces looking like there's no hope left. Star Trek is, and forever will be, the king of Deus Ex Machina.

Usually the chief engineer reroutes power from somewhere to the "forward nacelles," then reconfigures the photon torpedoes to launch in a reverse-diagonal spread (whatever that means) while rotating the frequency of the deflector shield, followed by some mention of tachyon particles and a parallax wave. Tada! You just saved your ship from destruction. "Well done, Mr. Laforge."

It's standard "MacGyver" physics. You combine some string, a wire, a bit of styrofoam, a sewing needle, and a toothpick to make a compass. Except, related to ship combat somehow.

How do you propose they do this? I think this would be harder to do than you think, and so I'm wondering how you think this could be implemented. I think there are simply too many variables, and that, implementing this type of system in an MMO that includes both ship and ground combat, as well as diplomacy in some form, may be too much for one dev team to handle. Although, I agree it would be cool to be able to solve missions by truly thinking outside the box.

-Macheath.

dont forget the duct tape!! everything in McGuyver's world included duct tape!!

[jermungand]

I dont think the problem is within defining the properties of each event, but rather in calculating all the thousands of different events that occur every second on a busy gaming day, storing each object's and each events properties, and transferring that information to every player (within his/her region) without a too high latency.

As I mentioned before: They cannot even do path-based weapons, which would be sooooo much simpler than the system suggested here.

There are ways to make the calculations within an MMO be more localized with greater relevancy to those they effect, rather than providing everybody with the results of every single interaction that is taking place. Correct me if I'm wrong. I believe games with such a division of labor do exist.

I've come up with a groundwork theory for the system. I've managed to single out five central elements of Trek science: fields, subspace, particles, physical structure, and reactions. On-board hardware that utilizes an element in some way can be jury-rigged to deal with it in a different way, within the limitations of your engineer's ability, the hardware's versatility, and new additions to the system. I.E: the main deflector dish manipulates fields, and could be reconfigured to project a force-field type wall a la Invisible Woman.

I'll cover this in more detail after I get some sleep. Tomorrow.

[Tex_Trek]

All I can say is any problem that can't be solved by "reversing the polarity of the neutrino field" at 9 minutes before the hour must be a pretty bad problem.

*

I like the premise of this thread. Give something for science career paths to chew on. Those players are going to have the aptitude and appreciation for this kind of system. Mike Okuda left behind a treasure trove of internally consistent Trek para-physics. I'm sure it can be gleaned for a set of usable dynamics to keep the Vulcan characters earning their ears.

***
[Edited a brain f**t transposing Mark Okrand for Mike Okuda]

[Oltwentysix]

"99 knights of the air
Ride super high tech jet fighters
Everyone's a super hero
Everyone's a Captain Kirk
With orders to identify
To clarify, and classify
Scramble in the summer sky
99 red balloons go by"