Who is tired of the same old MMO models?

[cocoa-jin]

I have to say Im finished with them. They are all the same, just re-dressed. The more I see and the less we are told of STO, the more Im begining to feel Ive played this game before..I've spent my money, played them, got tired of them or watched them fail.

Yeah, they get prettier and prettier but they bring to the table only a specialized, yet superfical theme...but under the skirt is the same old tired pair of Victoria's Secert.

I have to say Im losing the faith here. I fear we'll be getting a dressed up version of what I can already play in some other form or another for free. Im afraid any Star Trek themed based gimmicks will do nothing in the long run to differienate the experience from any other typical MMO.

Certainly many will be just fine with STO if this is the way its going...if thats their preference, more power to them...you guys need your game too(yet again). In the grand scheme of things that preference is just as valid as any other...some of us were just hoping for something different.

Some of us see so much potential for STO to be STar Trek first and foremost....not just Star Trek in its appearance, not just at the surface...but at its core, in its motivations, in its relationships in its modeling, ints depth and complexity.

The devs are certainly doing a good job of delving into Trek in their modeling of STO...but I cant help but think its being condensed down into just flavoring for the MMO, is this game really being made from Trek....or is it a typical MMO just being tossed with zest of Trek?

[Beaver8]

I'm just desperate for something different at this point. I have played many mmo's and I stuck with world of warcraft the longest but I need something new. I want a new game so badly I am going to buy the first thing that comes out if it looks halfway decent. Champions was that game until it got pushed back 2 months. i am even considering giving age of conan another try since their "relaunch" and giving people 2 weeks for free to see if they will like the improvements and get people back. They wronged me so much though that i am fighting that urge even though it's free.

STO was my biggest hope for something different and something I really wanted to play. Whenever I get a free moment I check the forums and that's getting tiring since it's just debates over things we have no control of. Unfortunatly the more I learn the more I don't think it will ultimatly be for me. Most of our information now is given to us by people who copy and paste IRC chats. Would we even get that information if the forum people didn't post it? People are doing their job for them it seems. I am quite sure if I didn't read anything for 2 weeks and came back all I would see is an IRC chat post with answers like "it's good we promise" and "trust us" then another several threads about when is beta, when is release, microtransactions suck and rolls/loops are needed.

[Xibala]

Regarding ST:O, I am going to reserve my judgment when we have a game to play. But with other MMO's, it could be said they are cookie-cutter games.

Game developers are in a business and most are unable to think out of the box. They use the same 'ole tried-and-true mechanics because that is what they know. They try to sugar-coat it but underneath, it is the same. They do this because the player-base will tolerate it. If the player-base would talk with their wallet, then change could be forced on developers to conjure new ideas and one day that will happen. Until then we will have to tolerate the lackluster features that most games are offering.

[Marytha]

Regarding ST:O, I am going to reserve my judgment when we have a game to play. But with other MMO's, it could be said they are cookie-cutter games.

Game developers are in a business and most are unable to think out of the box. They use the same 'ole tried-and-true mechanics because that is what they know. They try to sugar-coat it but underneath, it is the same. They do this because the player-base will tolerate it. If the player-base would talk with their wallet, then change could be forced on developers to conjure new ideas and one day that will happen. Until then we will have to tolerate the lackluster features that most games are offering.

I personall think that is changing. i think people are tired of the same things. In fact in my small circle of friends, they used to play every MMO that came out. They'd buy the box give three months to see if they liked it. It was automatic. Not any more. Now most of them are thinking that they won't play any MMOs, that they aren't good enough. They don't follow them at all.

I think the player base of MMOs are changing and the MMOs aren't. I'm very saddened at the lack of actual information on STO. When they infer heavily to us a fall 2009 release, they're low on time for that, but last we heard they're on schedule. Yet,all we get are small shots of information about a small aspeect of a larger game system, so we can't know how it may or may not work.

I'm personally very tired of things. I expect I may limit my posting soon, as it hardly seems to matter.

Marytha

[renderpix]

I personall think that is changing. i think people are tired of the same things. In fact in my small circle of friends, they used to play every MMO that came out. They'd buy the box give three months to see if they liked it. It was automatic. Not any more. Now most of them are thinking that they won't play any MMOs, that they aren't good enough. They don't follow them at all.

I think the player base of MMOs are changing and the MMOs aren't. I'm very saddened at the lack of actual information on STO. When they infer heavily to us a fall 2009 release, they're low on time for that, but last we heard they're on schedule. Yet,all we get are small shots of information about a small aspeect of a larger game system, so we can't know how it may or may not work.

I'm personally very tired of things. I expect I may limit my posting soon, as it hardly seems to matter.

Marytha

See what happened when they leaked alittle info about you know what. I think info is going to get scarce not because they don't want to give any, seems everything they do give out causes a back-lash of discontent. being quoted on items that are just sometimes hilarious. Seems they would get a hint they need to make some changes. :rolleyes:

As for limiting postings if you do then you can expect just another MMO here. I keep telling myself I gonna quite even tho I am playing SWG for now and drawing the family group there I still have hopes for STO :(

On the OP, a few say that STO cannot be compared to MMOs like Eve-Online or WoW or even SWG because the concept of STO is based on exploration, diplomacy and all good things about StarFleet. Their over looking the MMO due to the hype. They can all be compared in several ways. The MMO PvP and even the PvE concept has gotten very old with just new names like episodic missions = multi missions in one with concept storyline. In Eve-Online their called StoryLine missions sometime easy or extended, WoW is almost the same. Same poo different color. :eek:

We need someone to break the mold and Cryptic could if not I think SWTOR will. Or someone else that has the common sense to deliver what MMO players are practically begging for. :D

[Marytha]

See what happened when they leaked alittle info about you know what. I think info is going to get scarce not because they don't want to give any, seems everything they do give out causes a back-lash of discontent. being quoted on items that are just sometimes hilarious. Seems they would get a hint they need to make some changes. :rolleyes:

As for limiting postings if you do then you can expect just another MMO here. I keep telling myself I gonna quite even tho I am playing SWG for now and drawing the family group there I still have hopes for STO :(

On the OP, a few say that STO cannot be compared to MMOs like Eve-Online or WoW or even SWG because the concept of STO is based on exploration, diplomacy and all good things about StarFleet. Their over looking the MMO due to the hype. They can all be compared in several ways. The MMO PvP and even the PvE concept has gotten very old with just new names like episodic missions = multi missions in one with concept storyline. In Eve-Online their called StoryLine missions sometime easy or extended, WoW is almost the same. Same poo different color. :eek:

We need someone to break the mold and Cryptic could if not I think SWTOR will. Or someone else that has the common sense to deliver what MMO players are practically begging for. :D

My problem is the little info part. We don't know the combat system, we can't judge it except by what they've said, and they haven't told us all of it. Thus giving themselves an out, so to speak. I am also very tired of, well it's hard to explain if you haven't played it. really? Then how did the concept person get the idea to the programers? Maybe some communication or writing classes are in order.

Marytha

[inXi]

There's noting unusual about the "back-lach of discontent". It's quite common, and all developers are to expect it. It is not sufficient to not give out information at all.

[Manx]

From a certain point of view, any game is just a rehash of some tired old model; doesn't stop them being good, or in some cases, revolutionary.

Technically 'Deus Ex' was just an FPS. It was just a bit more elaborate than most others in terms of character customization. And there was a good story. And multiple paths/endings. And it was brilliant :D

STO is an MMO, and was always going to play like one. Whether it is a groundbreaking new take on the model or not will mostly depend on the fine details, about which we currently know little (because they havent been finallized yet, I imagine).

We don't really know anything about the story, or how we (the players) will be experiencing it and interacting with it (beyond going to the Neutral Zone and shooting things).

About customization, all we know is that there are a lot of options, and some of them will make a real difference to our game, and some won't. We don't know how detailed or complex the system is, nor do we know how significant each choice we make will be.

We don't know if it will be the norm for problems to have multiple possible solutions.

We don't know what the trading system will be like.

We don't know how resource management will work.

We know nothing about the crafting system . (Do we even know if there is going to be one yet?)

We know about the setting, and a bit about the backstory. We know a bit about the mechanics for combat and space travel. We know Cryptics general plans for PvP and competitive PvE (although, not the specifics). And we've seen some pretty pictures. Thats about it.

In short, we don't know if STO is going to be 'Deus Ex' or 'Quake'.

Waaaayyyy to early to be giving up on it, IMHO :)

[Marytha]

From a certain point of view, any game is just a rehash of some tired old model; doesn't stop them being good, or in some cases, revolutionary.

Technically 'Deus Ex' was just an FPS. It was just a bit more elaborate than most others in terms of character customization. And there was a good story. And multiple paths/endings. And it was brilliant :D

STO is an MMO, and was always going to play like one. Whether it is a groundbreaking new take on the model or not will mostly depend on the fine details, about which we currently know little (because they havent been finallized yet, I imagine).

We don't really know anything about the story, or how we (the players) will be experiencing it and interacting with it (beyond going to the Neutral Zone and shooting things).

About customization, all we know is that there are a lot of options, and some of them will make a real difference to our game, and some won't. We don't know how detailed or complex the system is, nor do we know how significant each choice we make will be.

We don't know if it will be the norm for problems to have multiple possible solutions.

We don't know what the trading system will be like.

We don't know how resource management will work.

We know nothing about the crafting system . (Do we even know if there is going to be one yet?)

We know about the setting, and a bit about the backstory. We know a bit about the mechanics for combat and space travel. We know Cryptics general plans for PvP and competitive PvE (although, not the specifics). And we've seen some pretty pictures. Thats about it.

In short, we don't know if STO is going to be 'Deus Ex' or 'Quake'.

Waaaayyyy to early to be giving up on it, IMHO :)

Well it seems to me, I get all excited about bridge crew and stuff, then they release some tiny fleck of information, that is disapointing, may not be disappointing if we had the big picture, but I can only react to what they tell me. Then over time I think about having my ship and exploring with my officers and doing cool things. Then they release some tiny fleck of information, that is disappointing, may not be disappointing if had the big picture, but i can only react to what they tell me. Repeat previous two sentence.

See it seems I'm upbeat and positive about the game when they aren't releasing information, for me that's a really bad sign. It is less a year to target release, and even should it get pushed back, it's less than18 months away. I know that may sound like a long time but it isn't. So yeah, I don't think it's waaayyyyyy too early to be thinking about it. In fact it's getting later and later for them. They are the ones who targeted 2009, and say they are on schedule...

Marytha

[Manx]

Well it seems to me, I get all excited about bridge crew and stuff, then they release some tiny fleck of information, that is disapointing, may not be disappointing if we had the big picture, but I can only react to what they tell me. Then over time I think about having my ship and exploring with my officers and doing cool things. Then they release some tiny fleck of information, that is disappointing, may not be disappointing if had the big picture, but i can only react to what they tell me. Repeat previous two sentence.

See it seems I'm upbeat and positive about the game when they aren't releasing information, for me that's a really bad sign. It is less a year to target release, and even should it get pushed back, it's less than18 months away. I know that may sound like a long time but it isn't. So yeah, I don't think it's waaayyyyyy too early to be thinking about it. In fact it's getting later and later for them. They are the ones who targeted 2009, and say they are on schedule...

Marytha

Being dissapointed with a lack of info is fair enough; I would like to know more myself. However, stuff will be getting reworked all the way through beta; telling us things now, that may not end up being true at release, would only hurt STO.

Cryptic should just keep on living up to their name; it'll work out better that way in the long run.

[Marytha]

Being dissapointed with a lack of info is fair enough; I would like to know more myself. However, stuff will be getting reworked all the way through beta; telling us things now, that may not end up being true at release, would only hurt STO.

Cryptic should just keep on living up to their name; it'll work out better that way in the long run.

Drastic changes to the game should not happen in Beta. Reworked changes in detail, Major game systems should be locked in by now. My problem is reacting to something i KNOW isn't complete, if that makes sense. I'm prejudging a system because I really have no other choice. I can say oh I'll wait, but I've still judged it in my head even if I don't vocalize or type it out.

Marytha

[renderpix]

My problem is the little info part. We don't know the combat system, we can't judge it except by what they've said, and they haven't told us all of it. Thus giving themselves an out, so to speak. I am also very tired of, well it's hard to explain if you haven't played it. really? Then how did the concept person get the idea to the programers? Maybe some communication or writing classes are in order.

Marytha

Seems frustration is common on the forums, I can feel you pain and agree with your viewpoint. Communication is a commodity not being use to it's full potential if done it would lower the forum congestion.

There's noting unusual about the "back-lach of discontent". It's quite common, and all developers are to expect it. It is not sufficient to not give out information at all.

I can see your point. But questions, are we here just for their amusement or do they want to see which bone we chew on the most or what gets our attention. Or are the forums a place to keep us busy doing nothing? I don't think the reference was to release info after back-lash just general info release.

From a certain point of view, any game is just a rehash of some tired old model; doesn't stop them being good, or in some cases, revolutionary.



Would do your entire quote but trying to cut down :p

Do you think were in the out of new material age. Look at all of the movie remakes along with toon comic movies. Seems anything that is suppose to be new is just a not intended copy of something else. When it comes to MMOs I don't think they have been around long enough to have exhaused all of the possible options like the old aggro system tank, DPS, healer model. Someone could come up with something new they just won't because it's not broke it's just old and they feel it still works. Molds need to be broken.

[AchillesHeel]

I'm biting my fingernails, metaphorically speaking, about STO. For example, the way they're arranging Star Trek's wonderfully intricate, multi-power political map into a simplified, WoW-like two camps scares the Heck out of me. And they appear to be transforming the Klingon Empire into some sort of multi-species coalition, a "grrr" version of the United Federation of Planets. That ain't no Klingon Empire. That ain't no Star Trek.

On the other hand, I'm happy they're working to make a system in which I can play the same ship for long stretches, and I don't have to upgrade to a new ship. I think I saw somewhere that they're planning to use a skill-based character advancement system without character levels, which is another place that MMOs generally seem to lag behind the state of the art (I think EVE Online is the only MMO I've tried that used a skills system instead of a levels system). I also like that they're trying to make space combat a bit involved and interesting (where EVE Online utterly fell on its face, imo).

So I'm willing to keep my fingers crossed and try to see the STO cup as half-full. But in a general sense, I completely agree with the OP.

[Alfie-Fandango]

Do you know what I find amusing?

The fact that I log into this site to check up on the *****ing and moaning rather than updates on the game :p

Seriously, I'm just leaving Cryptik too it now... So should you..

[spskeff2]

I bet it's tough to be in Community Relations sometimes, i don't envy those folks at Cryptic, but do applaud them for what they are able (permitted?) to share with us, whether in IRC chats or chime-ins on the forums. I can tell that some folks at Cryptic are ready to start dishing it out for us but are being held back, perhaps for "strategic marketing" or even legal reasons and what not. I dunno...

but i think it is time for more information to start unfolding for us as potential customers. i would LOVE to see a new trailer of current gameplay (July of 2009, not August of 2008 of which was still impressive for a working alpha). The screenshots are pretty and show promise, but i [patiently] crave more.

I keep thinking back to Zinc's original mission statement for ST:O - "We want to make this a Star Trek experience." well Star Trek is many things to many people, but i think the only way for STO to be successful is to make it unique, and I think they're striving for that in some aspects (Genesis system, etc.)

I continue to have confidence in STO, but i also have my doubts after a lot of discussion i've read over the past few months here. Cryptic certainly has an abundance of feedback at this point, but i still need to see more info on the game. and sooner than later. ;)

For that matter, my last post on a seperate thread was a bit heated, and I do apologize to those i may have rubbed the wrong way. I want this game to succeed just as much as you do, if not more! ;) Keep the discussions going!

Take care.

[inXi]

Or are the forums a place to keep us busy doing nothing?This... ---

[Xenoshaft]

I have to say Im finished with them. They are all the same, just re-dressed. The more I see and the less we are told of STO, the more Im begining to feel Ive played this game before..I've spent my money, played them, got tired of them or watched them fail.

Yeah, they get prettier and prettier but they bring to the table only a specialized, yet superfical theme...but under the skirt is the same old tired pair of Victoria's Secert.

I have to say Im losing the faith here. I fear we'll be getting a dressed up version of what I can already play in some other form or another for free. Im afraid any Star Trek themed based gimmicks will do nothing in the long run to differienate the experience from any other typical MMO.

Certainly many will be just fine with STO if this is the way its going...if thats their preference, more power to them...you guys need your game too(yet again). In the grand scheme of things that preference is just as valid as any other...some of us were just hoping for something different.

Some of us see so much potential for STO to be STar Trek first and foremost....not just Star Trek in its appearance, not just at the surface...but at its core, in its motivations, in its relationships in its modeling, ints depth and complexity.

The devs are certainly doing a good job of delving into Trek in their modeling of STO...but I cant help but think its being condensed down into just flavoring for the MMO, is this game really being made from Trek....or is it a typical MMO just being tossed with zest of Trek?

I think that you really need to look at the genesis engine they talked about. I think that is one of the more exciting elements of the game. What it means is that you will have a hard time playing a mission/episode that are even kind of alike, and even if you get one that is another "first contact" mission it won’t be the same episode. Another exciting change that is WAY trek, they don’t really have missions they have episodes. Some parts of an episode will be instanced others not. However the game is DESIGENED to play like an episode of star trek. Some of the game mechanics are going to have to be allowed by us "the users" because let’s face it... It’s a game. I do think that if you read up on the systems we know about you will see a difference.

I like you am tired of the same old deal. I have played 4 mmo's over the last 10 years and some i played for a long time, others not so long. Each of them did have elements that were unique to them however, largely they were the same. It is for that reason I am having a hard time seeing the SWTOR game being too much fun. From what I can tell its going to be a very good game as well. But the worry there is the missions will be "kill x number of these bad guys" or "FedEx" quests.

Star Trek Online is , from what I can tell, the only game talking about how they actually fixed it. Many games claim to have minimized grinding quests. STO is the only one saying yeah WE fixed it and here is how we did it.



I'm just desperate for something different at this point. I have played many mmo's and I stuck with world of warcraft the longest but I need something new. I want a new game so badly I am going to buy the first thing that comes out if it looks halfway decent. Champions was that game until it got pushed back 2 months. i am even considering giving age of conan another try since their "relaunch" and giving people 2 weeks for free to see if they will like the improvements and get people back. They wronged me so much though that i am fighting that urge even though it's free.

STO was my biggest hope for something different and something I really wanted to play. Whenever I get a free moment I check the forums and that's getting tiring since it's just debates over things we have no control of. Unfortunatly the more I learn the more I don't think it will ultimatly be for me. Most of our information now is given to us by people who copy and paste IRC chats. Would we even get that information if the forum people didn't post it? People are doing their job for them it seems. I am quite sure if I didn't read anything for 2 weeks and came back all I would see is an IRC chat post with answers like "it's good we promise" and "trust us" then another several threads about when is beta, when is release, microtransactions suck and rolls/loops are needed.

I agree, I am looking for something different. For me it was going to be stargate, but that flopped.. This game I think WILL be the different game. I have kept up with most of the information here and I can see that if it does even half of what the devs promise it will have a very different mechanic to it.

See what happened when they leaked alittle info about you know what. I think info is going to get scarce not because they don't want to give any, seems everything they do give out causes a back-lash of discontent. being quoted on items that are just sometimes hilarious. Seems they would get a hint they need to make some changes. :rolleyes:

As for limiting postings if you do then you can expect just another MMO here. I keep telling myself I gonna quite even tho I am playing SWG for now and drawing the family group there I still have hopes for STO :(

On the OP, a few say that STO cannot be compared to MMOs like Eve-Online or WoW or even SWG because the concept of STO is based on exploration, diplomacy and all good things about StarFleet. Their over looking the MMO due to the hype. They can all be compared in several ways. The MMO PvP and even the PvE concept has gotten very old with just new names like episodic missions = multi missions in one with concept storyline. In Eve-Online their called StoryLine missions sometime easy or extended, WoW is almost the same. Same poo different color. :eek:

We need someone to break the mold and Cryptic could if not I think SWTOR will. Or someone else that has the common sense to deliver what MMO players are practically begging for. :D

Honestly man I agree with the mold being broken here. I also think that the discontent people express or back-lash from information is the complete opposite. People read one or even 5 bits of info, become a self proclaimed expert and begin to sew malcontent. I wish folks would express their opinions after reading information. How can we all not get excited about GENISIS ?!?!!?



thanks all

[Marytha]

I think that you really need to look at the genesis engine they talked about. I think that is one of the more exciting elements of the game. What it means is that you will have a hard time playing a mission/episode that are even kind of alike, and even if you get one that is another "first contact" mission it won’t be the same episode. Another exciting change that is WAY trek, they don’t really have missions they have episodes. Some parts of an episode will be instanced others not. However the game is DESIGENED to play like an episode of star trek. Some of the game mechanics are going to have to be allowed by us "the users" because let’s face it... It’s a game. I do think that if you read up on the systems we know about you will see a difference.

I like you am tired of the same old deal. I have played 4 mmo's over the last 10 years and some i played for a long time, others not so long. Each of them did have elements that were unique to them however, largely they were the same. It is for that reason I am having a hard time seeing the SWTOR game being too much fun. From what I can tell its going to be a very good game as well. But the worry there is the missions will be "kill x number of these bad guys" or "FedEx" quests.

Star Trek Online is , from what I can tell, the only game talking about how they actually fixed it. Many games claim to have minimized grinding quests. STO is the only one saying yeah WE fixed it and here is how we did it.





I agree, I am looking for something different. For me it was going to be stargate, but that flopped.. This game I think WILL be the different game. I have kept up with most of the information here and I can see that if it does even half of what the devs promise it will have a very different mechanic to it.



Honestly man I agree with the mold being broken here. I also think that the discontent people express or back-lash from information is the complete opposite. People read one or even 5 bits of info, become a self proclaimed expert and begin to sew malcontent. I wish folks would express their opinions after reading information. How can we all not get excited about GENISIS ?!?!!?



thanks all

How can we all not get excited about GENINSIS? Easy really. No -real- info. Seen plenty of promises before about how great the quest system of a game will be. Look, quests are -hard- to do in my opinion. Really, really hard. After all there are only two kinds of quests, kill X, and goto Y. That's it, everything else is a variant. Now, they say they are going to leave the quests up to an algorythm? Yeah it's exciting that they think it will work. I hope it does, but it does sound too good to be true, doesn't it? I mean, infinite content brought to you by an algorythm and a database, the game will be endless. Just feels too good to be true.

Marytha

PS I do want to play this game, and for it to succeed. It just seems they're placing obsticles in their path.

[Loekii]

I personall think that is changing. i think people are tired of the same things. In fact in my small circle of friends, they used to play every MMO that came out. They'd buy the box give three months to see if they liked it. It was automatic. Not any more. Now most of them are thinking that they won't play any MMOs, that they aren't good enough. They don't follow them at all.

I think the player base of MMOs are changing and the MMOs aren't. I'm very saddened at the lack of actual information on STO. When they infer heavily to us a fall 2009 release, they're low on time for that, but last we heard they're on schedule. Yet,all we get are small shots of information about a small aspeect of a larger game system, so we can't know how it may or may not work.

I'm personally very tired of things. I expect I may limit my posting soon, as it hardly seems to matter.

Marytha

I tend to agree. The market today (2009/2010) is not the same market it was in say as in 2004. There more options out there and Gamers have become more informed (via the Net and the newer Social networks). My friends son, is more informed about Games and the market, then I recall the typical 2004 forum poster.

So information and details get out a lot more quickly, and gamers are less tolerant of games today. People are not taking the 'wait and see if it gets better' approach. People are reading the impartial reviews and going to independent sources for reviews as well.

The atmosphere is far less tolerant, which is why when poor games get released, they tank, when they used to survive longer.

As far the 'clam up approach', not a great approach for Devs, because it WILL be played out as intentional deception, and covering up a 'poor product'. The old days of saying a game is 'Awesome' and people runnning out to buy it are over. Now you have to demonstrate it, before people put down their cash.

[wrussandrews]

I have to admit that I am in a bit of a rut when it comes to mmos. Not sure what I want either, but I will know it when I see it. Many mmos seem to be clones.

I really do not care for the really simple ones; you know those that are essentially an online fps? There needs to be things to see and do (not just shoot other players/AI) and a nice story. I also prefer a player-driven economy.

I really feel for game designers; I am hard to satisfy.

[marscentral]

Well, I'm hoping that STO breaks the typical MMO mould too. The Bridge Officers and Genesis systems sound promising, as does the fact that this has both space and ground gameplay. But until we get more details, I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Loekii]

I think part of the problem, is that we still have too many people that place far too much trust in developers -- despite the large number of MMORPG failures out there.

I think people basically 'Jeckle and Hyde' games, in some sense.

In development, they are fans, supportive and praising.

At release, they are customers, demanding of quality, critical and brutal.

Had AOC Development forums been less 'flowery', and more like the Post release Forums, perhaps the Developers would not have been so short sighted in their implementation of the game. Perhaps AOC would have had been delayed another 6 months, but launched with lv1-20 experience carrying to the endgame instead, and other issues addressed Before hand.

We have seen it time and time again:

DEVELOPEMENT FORUMS = Wait for release, Game is going be great, You dont know that, thats great Devs.
RELEASE FORUMS = The game suchs. You did what?, You lied to us, boring.


So perhaps we should get rid of the 'Development Forum' persona, and actually treat the Development Forums like they are the Release forums --- Hold Dev to the Higher Expectations, tell them what we want, and what is unacceptable, tell them their game 'sucks' in Development rather than at release when it costs them dearly.

[Piewacket]

But games are NOT the same.
Some are, but there are gems out there to be played. The problem is that some of these games take years to get into and really play and alot of those people won't stick around that long and earn anything.

There are a lot fo things that the dev.s could tweek to make this a much better MMO that the others out there, but those tweeks will take time. This is, I hope, a new way to looking at the game mechanics and could take a bit to iron out the bugs.

Yes, the Klingons should be pure bloods. I don't understand that one, but the developers may see something in the future that necessatates this.

No, it will take a bit of time after the release to see if this is just another MMO or something quite new and different.

Here is hopeing!!!!!

[VengefulTick]

I'm biting my fingernails, metaphorically speaking, about STO. For example, the way they're arranging Star Trek's wonderfully intricate, multi-power political map into a simplified, WoW-like two camps scares the Heck out of me. And they appear to be transforming the Klingon Empire into some sort of multi-species coalition, a "grrr" version of the United Federation of Planets. That ain't no Klingon Empire. That ain't no Star Trek.

On the other hand, I'm happy they're working to make a system in which I can play the same ship for long stretches, and I don't have to upgrade to a new ship. I think I saw somewhere that they're planning to use a skill-based character advancement system without character levels, which is another place that MMOs generally seem to lag behind the state of the art (I think EVE Online is the only MMO I've tried that used a skills system instead of a levels system). I also like that they're trying to make space combat a bit involved and interesting (where EVE Online utterly fell on its face, imo).

So I'm willing to keep my fingers crossed and try to see the STO cup as half-full. But in a general sense, I completely agree with the OP.

What you said.

[renderpix]

This... ---

hummmmm...... I guess that's doing nothing..... LOL

I think that you really need to look at the genesis engine they talked about. I think that is one of the more exciting elements of the game. What it means is that you will have a hard time playing a mission/episode that are even kind of alike, and even if you get one that is another "first contact" mission it won’t be the same episode. Another exciting change that is WAY trek, they don’t really have missions they have episodes. Some parts of an episode will be instanced others not. However the game is DESIGENED to play like an episode of star trek. Some of the game mechanics are going to have to be allowed by us "the users" because let’s face it... It’s a game. I do think that if you read up on the systems we know about you will see a difference.

I like you am tired of the same old deal. I have played 4 mmo's over the last 10 years and some i played for a long time, others not so long. Each of them did have elements that were unique to them however, largely they were the same. It is for that reason I am having a hard time seeing the SWTOR game being too much fun. From what I can tell its going to be a very good game as well. But the worry there is the missions will be "kill x number of these bad guys" or "FedEx" quests.

Star Trek Online is , from what I can tell, the only game talking about how they actually fixed it. Many games claim to have minimized grinding quests. STO is the only one saying yeah WE fixed it and here is how we did it.

I agree, I am looking for something different. For me it was going to be stargate, but that flopped.. This game I think WILL be the different game. I have kept up with most of the information here and I can see that if it does even half of what the devs promise it will have a very different mechanic to it.

Honestly man I agree with the mold being broken here. I also think that the discontent people express or back-lash from information is the complete opposite. People read one or even 5 bits of info, become a self proclaimed expert and begin to sew malcontent. I wish folks would express their opinions after reading information. How can we all not get excited about GENISIS ?!?!!?

thanks all

Episodic Content (http://trekmovie.com/2009/03/10/sto-update-new-screenshots-first-pre-order-more/)really sorry man, just a new word for chain questing, that's really all it is with a theme, Star Trek. Nothing new except the term and the content. It has already been done and in other MMOs where it is use only so many can be done and then repeatation sets in.

Over the past 10 years being home bound I have played a multitude of MMOs. Most canned after about a week being just so cloney I'd rather play the game they copied. Most games are WoW clones of some sort. Where space games are concerned there are only a few and out of those even fewer worth playing. And all of them so far can be compared to most every detail, same poo different colors.

So far STO has not fixed a thing. Marytha has a very good point, talk is talk and it's cheap.

Yes the mold needs to be broken we agree on that, so far there is no evidence it is being done on the contary they are doing exactly the opposite.

Experts? Only ones that disagree with a harsh opinion calls another a self proclaimed expert. There are alot of people here that have a great deal of experience and maybe even experts at some areas. These where a topic is concerned bring information that needs to be heard. Not once, not even once have I seen any opposition that has nothing to contribute except nonsense and trolling and being Cryptic Ditto Heads. I would however like to see opposition make determinations and offer a decent debate with knowledge, I really would but it is only argumentative, disrespectful with no real content except total trust in Cryptic.

GENISIS why can I not get excited about it. It's a really ingenious concept and approach to the mundane. But what is it, looks like it will be a planetary generator that takes account of certain base selections using a database that is finite. If you do alot of exploration sooner or later your going to see the same things over and over. It will have it limites of entertainment. And that's not being a self-proclaimed excpert that's just an opinion based on being a long time MMO player and having some exp in DBA.

The Star Trek universe is more than just exploration, diplomacy and spaceflight. So far they have a great idea as you referred to Genisis but that will not help the mainstay of the fears of the self-proclaimed experts sewing discontent about the basic attriubtes of a MMO based in space. Genisis is just not and is not powerful enough to be STO's saving grace. All the parts of STO to all the areas need to be to an acceptable level.

But let's see how you react when you find out that Genisis combined with exploration is not what you expected and falls way short of what can and should be done. Anyone in your favor then will not be referred to as a self proclaimed expert, they will then be referred to as friend.



We have seen it time and time again:

DEVELOPEMENT FORUMS = Wait for release, Game is going be great, You dont know that, thats great Devs.
RELEASE FORUMS = The game suchs. You did what?, You lied to us, boring.


So perhaps we should get rid of the 'Development Forum' persona, and actually treat the Development Forums like they are the Release forums --- Hold Dev to the Higher Expectations, tell them what we want, and what is unacceptable, tell them their game 'sucks' in Development rather than at release when it costs them dearly.



My dear Loekii I think that we have actually done this already. For a change a mold is being broke but not by the devs. i wish people could understand that if we just wait and see if a great percentage does not like the end product it will be doubtful or time comsuming to fix or redo anything.

The one thing I wish people would understand is that people like Loekii others and myself are taking a beating over trying not just to be a good forum clone, yippie give us what everyone else has. STO is as I see it the one MMO that can and should within it's own right be the best MMO that has been produced in the last decade. The IP alone will not do it, sitting back and waiting will not do it, just trusting when there has been enough reason to doubt will not do it.

If this was anyother theme or IP I think most of use so called self proclaimed experts sewing doom and gloom would give a rat's aurse. But this is Star Trek and it matters a great deal doing it badly will hurt Cryptic, the fanbaase, long awaiting MMO groupies an players and most of all any freaking chance that another dev house would want to even touch it if it completely fails. You may not care about these little things but we do.

Some say if Cryptic changed their stance they would loose confidance in them. Statements if Cryptic made an MMO based on what people want would be a mistake. I have never heard so much nonsense. If they changed their stance they would be showing an interest in what the prospective players want. I am not just referring to the long heated debate content, they will be listening to what the consumer base wants on all aspects. As for what we want, crap even the fast food industry got a clue about what the customer wants. Whe you get rib-eye do you just wait and see if the cook get's it right, no your ask for perference, waiting may deliver something you won't even eat.

[LordDave]

I think part of the problem, is that we still have too many people that place far too much trust in developers -- despite the large number of MMORPG failures out there.

I think people basically 'Jeckle and Hyde' games, in some sense.

In development, they are fans, supportive and praising.

At release, they are customers, demanding of quality, critical and brutal.

Had AOC Development forums been less 'flowery', and more like the Post release Forums, perhaps the Developers would not have been so short sighted in their implementation of the game. Perhaps AOC would have had been delayed another 6 months, but launched with lv1-20 experience carrying to the endgame instead, and other issues addressed Before hand.

We have seen it time and time again:

DEVELOPEMENT FORUMS = Wait for release, Game is going be great, You dont know that, thats great Devs.
RELEASE FORUMS = The game suchs. You did what?, You lied to us, boring.


So perhaps we should get rid of the 'Development Forum' persona, and actually treat the Development Forums like they are the Release forums --- Hold Dev to the Higher Expectations, tell them what we want, and what is unacceptable, tell them their game 'sucks' in Development rather than at release when it costs them dearly.



I doubt it would matter.
You can't please everyone and it's usually those who aren't happy who seem to be the loudest.
Besides, if they listened to everything people said, we'd never have a game. Too many "armchair developers" as it where.
Myself included.

[Kinjiru]

I doubt it would matter.
You can't please everyone and it's usually those who aren't happy who seem to be the loudest.
Besides, if they listened to everything people said, we'd never have a game. Too many "armchair developers" as it where.
Myself included.

Put me on that list too Dave. :D

But I agree. Honestly, Cryptic could give out $50 bills in each box and someone wouldn't like it.

[DanSeale]

The only thing I think Cryptic could use a little help on from time to time is a few ship models. Even there they do quite well. I just offer a few "suggestions" from time to time. ( One in particular )

Come on now ... you really don't think the old man is going to pass up this one did ya ?

:D

[JoJimGregory]

I have to say I'm finished with them. They are all the same, just re-dressed. The more I see and the less we are told of STO, the more Im begining to feel Ive played this game before..I've spent my money, played them, got tired of them or watched them fail.

Yeah, they get prettier and prettier but they bring to the table only a specialized, yet superfical theme...but under the skirt is the same old tired pair of Victoria's Secret.

I have to say Im losing the faith here. I fear we'll be getting a dressed up version of what I can already play in some other form or another for free. Im afraid any Star Trek themed based gimmicks will do nothing in the long run to differentiate the experience from any other typical MMO.

Certainly many will be just fine with STO if this is the way its going...if that's their preference, more power to them...you guys need your game too(yet again). In the grand scheme of things that preference is just as valid as any other...some of us were just hoping for something different.

Some of us see so much potential for STO to be Star Trek first and foremost....not just Star Trek in its appearance, not just at the surface...but at its core, in its motivations, in its relationships in its modeling, ints depth and complexity.

The devs are certainly doing a good job of delving into Trek in their modeling of STO...but I cant help but think its being condensed down into just flavoring for the MMO, is this game really being made from Trek....or is it a typical MMO just being tossed with zest of Trek?

There are some aspects of MMOs that are sort of immutable as far as I can tell. The notion of starting off a character's career weak and ending up strong, relative to the entirety of that particular game world. The experiences of the journey between that weak and strong point. The idea of moving out from a starting point to explore places you haven't seen yet. The minutia of details that hopefully make the game more akin to Go-Muko or Chess than Checkers. The ability to customize and differentiate one's character (ship) from others. The ability to socialize with other players of similar gaming interests.

But you have a point. It would be nice if STO really broke the mold of MMOs in at least a few new and interesting ways. Let me see if I can think of a few.

1) Quests via Sub-Space Comm - Unlike every other MMO I know of, at least some if not most quests in STO will be obtained via Sub Space Communications. Star Fleet Command message arriving, sir! There are likely to be some hub quest givers, but the fact that some portion of our quests will come to us while we are in the far reaches of unexplored space is pretty unique.

2) Space plus Planetary Exploration, Questing and Combat - While there may be some other games that offer this, none that I've ever played have other than Pirates of the Burning Sea, which is far enough removed genre-wise that it hardly seems comparable. So, for myself anyway, this is a new experience.

3) Dynamic World Creation - While they have yet to reveal robust details of the Genesis System, I believe this new MMO subsystem could really blow the doors off of traditional MMO fare. It remains to be seen how randomized and dynamic and "alive" they make these worlds.

4) Bridge Officers - Okay, I know, it's like Guild Wars. But it sounds like they're taking them a step further since we can have a stable of these promotable pets for specific mission types onboard our ship(s) as well as for varying ground mission types. I'm really looking forward to this feature.

5) It's Star Trek - I realize this is perhaps a bit cliche, but it is Star Trek, and when we're in a space battle and the alarm clarion and phaser fire and photon torpedos sound and look exactly like they're supposed to, I think those of us who appreciate the Star Trek universe nuances are really going to enjoy the ambiance.

I could go on and on. Oh wait, no I can't, because they're still giving us information with an eye-dropper so that's all I can think of for now! :eek:

[Loekii]

I doubt it would matter.
You can't please everyone and it's usually those who aren't happy who seem to be the loudest.
Besides, if they listened to everything people said, we'd never have a game. Too many "armchair developers" as it where.
Myself included.

I think you are using far too large of a brush here.

Yes, you cannot please everyone, but that doesn't mean that you must then only appeal to the Psychophants. Developers have done that, and not surprisingly, even those fans left the bad game.

Unfortunately, I think far too many people paint forum posters as 'idiots', and that the Developers should 'not listen to them at all'.

The way I see it, many posters are well informed, and do reflect points that are shared in the gaming community. And it is the Developers JOB, to sift through the merits of those posters.

The problem is that Developer get their idea, and just run with with, not looking out for any warning signs, or seeing how it might REALLY be recieved by the gaming world. They are Cheered on by their Fans.....until release. Then reality hits them like a wave of ice water. The stuff the fanss 'ooohed and ahhhhed' about, is met with 'meh' by the customers.

Again, I think the fact that so many BAD games have made it to release, is indicative of some sort of problem.

If you told me that the Boss 'hates' long reports, fired the last guy that gave him a long report, I would make sure my reports are shorter, not longer. Developers seem to ignore this stuff, and then stand there 'amazed' that their game is tanking.

[cocoa-jin]

Ive played my fair share of MMOs and the only one Ive stuck with(Im atlking about 8yrs and still going strong) is an MMO that is set up nothing like the typical MMO.

We need true purpose in game. Give us the ability to choose how we contribute; combat, exploration, productinon, etc, but make whatever we choose to do make a difference, make it actually contribute to larger faction conflict.

When it comes to tactics and strategy for combat or when it comes to process of scanning for exploration(I guess for combat too...mainly regarding cloaked vessels) or when it comes to reserach and production, the model needs to be bit cerebral, well and thoroughly modeled, provide complexicity and options...not unnecessary limitations, restrictions due to over-simplification.

Honestly, how long can we sit in one place or fly in the same old circle repeativly spamming the same strip of attacks. If I find myself with one hand in my lap and the other hand pressing number keys across the top of my keyboard again Im gonna pop!

I can accept the general process of progression(skills, levels, equipment), I'd like they not be as significant as they are in other MMOs. But I'd like success to be based on what I do, what I recognize, how I respond, how I think, how I put two or more widely seperated bits of information and in-game experience together to come up with a response to a problem/encounter/situtation.

That is what keeps me coming back...how do I improve in my response to whats in game, how do I learn new things, how do i put it together to come out better....and how I do i apply it to make a difference in the game world. Take individual and group efforts individually and apply it collectivly to see the borders change, relationships evolve, factions expanding or retracting, growing and withering...

No more concrete shoe ground interactions(standing in place spamming attacks), no more vehicle combat on rails(non-existent maneuvering combat, lack luster damage and system modeling, no or limited LOS or firing and shield arcs), no more living in a bubble where everyone is playing out the same personal end-game inside their own little phase bubble. Where you play out each mission to be some grand hero, saving the universe all on your own(so you think) totally oblivious to the fact that someone else is doing the exact same thing as we speak, thousands have done it before you and thousands will do it after you....its fake, so nursery school.

Instead of being the hero of the universe, lets us be the hero of the scenerio, let that be a small battle in a much bigger struggle. Let it be a flash in the pan as a vehicle of growth, experience and learning. Let his real heroism be realized in applying what was learned in those individualized quests by making use of them in a manner outside of quests, in the sandbox of explorations, in the open market or distribution network(Starfleet) as a producer on the battlefields of contested planets and star systems. Make these "real world" non-quest experiences, tours of duty, production runs matter, make them count, allow them to change the game world...however small.

A combatant cant fight without someone making the weapons, production can produce without someone finding and moving the resources, holding resources rich assets and transporting the goods and resources cant be done without security/combatants. And combat doesnt have to be the motivations for it all...civilizations in general exist where there are resource assets, markets(in this case, non-combat/civilian) to sell them to, hubs and spokes and logistics to move these goods through. Civilizations thrive and expand the more secure these hubs and spokes and logistic vessels are.

Expansion/Retraction, changing of borders, development/evolution of new geo-political relationships through combat and non-combat means...combat, exploration, production. But it needs to happen out in the "real world" not in these self centric phase bubbles.

Quests should be for growth and real, personal experience within the game. What is learned there...I mean what you take as a player should potentially be useful in the real-world where true heroism is accomplished, realized...and likly for some time, unrealized. But if its unrealized, its not so much because of gear or skill/rank/level...but because of what you brought to the table. If that doesnt appeal to you...the phase bubble world of quests would still exist...where you can be your own personal nickle and dime hero...hero of the moment, hero only to yourself.

[Marytha]

Quote:

Honestly, how long can we sit in one place or fly in the same old circle repeativly spamming the same strip of attacks. If I find myself with one hand in my lap and the other hand pressing number keys across the top of my keyboard again Im gonna pop!
End quote


I'm sorry this made me laugh histerically.

Marytha

[bridgeburner18]

Ive played my fair share of MMOs and the only one Ive stuck with(Im atlking about 8yrs and still going strong) is an MMO that is set up nothing like the typical MMO.

We need true purpose in game. Give us the ability to choose how we contribute; combat, exploration, productinon, etc, but make whatever we choose to do make a difference, make it actually contribute to larger faction conflict.

When it comes to tactics and strategy for combat or when it comes to process of scanning for exploration(I guess for combat too...mainly regarding cloaked vessels) or when it comes to reserach and production, the model needs to be bit cerebral, well and thoroughly modeled, provide complexicity and options...not unnecessary limitations, restrictions due to over-simplification.

Honestly, how long can we sit in one place or fly in the same old circle repeativly spamming the same strip of attacks. If I find myself with one hand in my lap and the other hand pressing number keys across the top of my keyboard again Im gonna pop!

I can accept the general process of progression(skills, levels, equipment), I'd like they not be as significant as they are in other MMOs. But I'd like success to be based on what I do, what I recognize, how I respond, how I think, how I put two or more widely seperated bits of information and in-game experience together to come up with a response to a problem/encounter/situtation.

That is what keeps me coming back...how do I improve in my response to whats in game, how do I learn new things, how do i put it together to come out better....and how I do i apply it to make a difference in the game world. Take individual and group efforts individually and apply it collectivly to see the borders change, relationships evolve, factions expanding or retracting, growing and withering...

No more concrete shoe ground interactions(standing in place spamming attacks), no more vehicle combat on rails(non-existent maneuvering combat, lack luster damage and system modeling, no or limited LOS or firing and shield arcs), no more living in a bubble where everyone is playing out the same personal end-game inside their own little phase bubble. Where you play out each mission to be some grand hero, saving the universe all on your own(so you think) totally oblivious to the fact that someone else is doing the exact same thing as we speak, thousands have done it before you and thousands will do it after you....its fake, so nursery school.

Instead of being the hero of the universe, lets us be the hero of the scenerio, let that be a small battle in a much bigger struggle. Let it be a flash in the pan as a vehicle of growth, experience and learning. Let his real heroism be realized in applying what was learned in those individualized quests by making use of them in a manner outside of quests, in the sandbox of explorations, in the open market or distribution network(Starfleet) as a producer on the battlefields of contested planets and star systems. Make these "real world" non-quest experiences, tours of duty, production runs matter, make them count, allow them to change the game world...however small.

A combatant cant fight without someone making the weapons, production can produce without someone finding and moving the resources, holding resources rich assets and transporting the goods and resources cant be done without security/combatants. And combat doesnt have to be the motivations for it all...civilizations in general exist where there are resource assets, markets(in this case, non-combat/civilian) to sell them to, hubs and spokes and logistics to move these goods through. Civilizations thrive and expand the more secure these hubs and spokes and logistic vessels are.

Expansion/Retraction, changing of borders, development/evolution of new geo-political relationships through combat and non-combat means...combat, exploration, production. But it needs to happen out in the "real world" not in these self centric phase bubbles.

Quests should be for growth and real, personal experience within the game. What is learned there...I mean what you take as a player should potentially be useful in the real-world where true heroism is accomplished, realized...and likly for some time, unrealized. But if its unrealized, its not so much because of gear or skill/rank/level...but because of what you brought to the table. If that doesnt appeal to you...the phase bubble world of quests would still exist...where you can be your own personal nickle and dime hero...hero of the moment, hero only to yourself.


...Whoosh...

[Nasedo]

im sick of 99.9% of the mmo's out there right now

the only MMO that was different and fun, was Star Wars Galaxies Pre-cu, even tho they didnt updated it fix bugs or add new content to it, it was fun, and if they did fix it add stuff to it, it would be going to this day. and may have more people then wow...

in wow there are a few things i hate thats why i stop playng

first it was the Tanking healing DPS rolls. i hate these's rolls so much you have no idea the times i'll be siting in town looking and finding people who wants a DPS in there group...and times people would tell me, sorry we need a healer. or a tank. it really ****ed me off

then it came to group loot. so many times people jack crap that they didnt need. or had the same class in there and had some one took it from me, even in 10 to 25 man, something drops some one else gets it 90% of the time and you have to wait next week. and if it drops nexts weeks. and odd's are you wont get it anyway. sad.. very sad..

then thereis level from 1 to 80... then you pick the same talents that 1000's of already have, leveling from 1 to 80 is dumb old and been used to much, once you get to 80 there isnt much to do till you start runing for gear... i mean come on. D@D the roll playing game used levels long time ago, isnt it time to move on from that roll? Star wars galaxies you could mix and match, that was the first step to geting out of leveling roll

[KO_Gilligan]

Ive played my fair share of MMOs and the only one Ive stuck with(Im atlking about 8yrs and still going strong) is an MMO that is set up nothing like the typical MMO.

We need true purpose in game. Give us the ability to choose how we contribute; combat, exploration, productinon, etc, but make whatever we choose to do make a difference, make it actually contribute to larger faction conflict.

When it comes to tactics and strategy for combat or when it comes to process of scanning for exploration(I guess for combat too...mainly regarding cloaked vessels) or when it comes to reserach and production, the model needs to be bit cerebral, well and thoroughly modeled, provide complexicity and options...not unnecessary limitations, restrictions due to over-simplification.

Honestly, how long can we sit in one place or fly in the same old circle repeativly spamming the same strip of attacks. If I find myself with one hand in my lap and the other hand pressing number keys across the top of my keyboard again Im gonna pop!

I can accept the general process of progression(skills, levels, equipment), I'd like they not be as significant as they are in other MMOs. But I'd like success to be based on what I do, what I recognize, how I respond, how I think, how I put two or more widely seperated bits of information and in-game experience together to come up with a response to a problem/encounter/situtation.

That is what keeps me coming back...how do I improve in my response to whats in game, how do I learn new things, how do i put it together to come out better....and how I do i apply it to make a difference in the game world. Take individual and group efforts individually and apply it collectivly to see the borders change, relationships evolve, factions expanding or retracting, growing and withering...

No more concrete shoe ground interactions(standing in place spamming attacks), no more vehicle combat on rails(non-existent maneuvering combat, lack luster damage and system modeling, no or limited LOS or firing and shield arcs), no more living in a bubble where everyone is playing out the same personal end-game inside their own little phase bubble. Where you play out each mission to be some grand hero, saving the universe all on your own(so you think) totally oblivious to the fact that someone else is doing the exact same thing as we speak, thousands have done it before you and thousands will do it after you....its fake, so nursery school.

Instead of being the hero of the universe, lets us be the hero of the scenerio, let that be a small battle in a much bigger struggle. Let it be a flash in the pan as a vehicle of growth, experience and learning. Let his real heroism be realized in applying what was learned in those individualized quests by making use of them in a manner outside of quests, in the sandbox of explorations, in the open market or distribution network(Starfleet) as a producer on the battlefields of contested planets and star systems. Make these "real world" non-quest experiences, tours of duty, production runs matter, make them count, allow them to change the game world...however small.

A combatant cant fight without someone making the weapons, production can produce without someone finding and moving the resources, holding resources rich assets and transporting the goods and resources cant be done without security/combatants. And combat doesnt have to be the motivations for it all...civilizations in general exist where there are resource assets, markets(in this case, non-combat/civilian) to sell them to, hubs and spokes and logistics to move these goods through. Civilizations thrive and expand the more secure these hubs and spokes and logistic vessels are.

Expansion/Retraction, changing of borders, development/evolution of new geo-political relationships through combat and non-combat means...combat, exploration, production. But it needs to happen out in the "real world" not in these self centric phase bubbles.

Quests should be for growth and real, personal experience within the game. What is learned there...I mean what you take as a player should potentially be useful in the real-world where true heroism is accomplished, realized...and likly for some time, unrealized. But if its unrealized, its not so much because of gear or skill/rank/level...but because of what you brought to the table. If that doesnt appeal to you...the phase bubble world of quests would still exist...where you can be your own personal nickle and dime hero...hero of the moment, hero only to yourself.


You know, most great artists will tell you that the great works of fine art in the world are a mere reflection of what has already been done - experience that was built upon, not disregarded for innovation. This is why I'm very eye candy oriented. Immersion in my games is improved incrementally with the cost of my GPU :p

Better graphics and genre blending is the current state of the games. Stepping out in some new innovative direction has the WoW players appropriately mocking you. I'm not against it... just that it's a philosophy rather than a tangible.

I say all this not to derail our pie-in-the-sky hopes of greater immersion. I just want to put your idea in check. We are headed towards more interactive Artificial Intelligence and piles of innovative code away from what we consider is the typical game, but innovation is more a fleeting pursuit than a business model.

[bridgeburner18]

Well in theory it seems the game world is responding to our demands for new and fresh. Most (I can't think of any new full budget games with lots of buzz that are fantasy genre) new MMo's are breaking from the very old and tired fantasy tank heal dps. Many are focusing on sci fi (Jumpgate, STO, SWTOR, SGworlds to name a few) Where Everyquest was king of generation 1 MMO and WoW king of Generation 2, as we approach generation 3 MMo's you might find that it will not be a fantasy title that wins the day.

[Loekii]

Well in theory it seems the game world is responding to our demands for new and fresh. Most (I can't think of any new full budget games with lots of buzz that are fantasy genre) new MMo's are breaking from the very old and tired fantasy tank heal dps. Many are focusing on sci fi (Jumpgate, STO, SWTOR, SGworlds to name a few) Where Everyquest was king of generation 1 MMO and WoW king of Generation 2, as we approach generation 3 MMo's you might find that it will not be a fantasy title that wins the day.

While I do not play it, and it has aspects that I am not interested in, I think EvE has done a good job of trying to break out of the mold.

[KO_Gilligan]

Well in theory it seems the game world is responding to our demands for new and fresh. Most (I can't think of any new full budget games with lots of buzz that are fantasy genre) new MMo's are breaking from the very old and tired fantasy tank heal dps. Many are focusing on sci fi (Jumpgate, STO, SWTOR, SGworlds to name a few) Where Everyquest was king of generation 1 MMO and WoW king of Generation 2, as we approach generation 3 MMo's you might find that it will not be a fantasy title that wins the day.

I'm thinking more Hip Hop oriented, something where my mount is a Chevy Caprice with 23" Rims :D

[Drexxus3d]

STO as it's shaping up now has striking similarities with existing MMOs but they are distinctly different.

Most MMO's are just everquest clones divided into classes which level up from experience gained from killing monsters and then continued character development and progression is based on acquiring rare, hard to obtain equipment once the maximum level is reached.

STO can't be exactly like Star Trek or no one would want to play it. In star trek, a single borg cube could and would wipe out an entire federation fleet. But in the movies and shows, they always exploit some silly little mechanic to win that was scripted in for that one specific scenario then that tactic is never seen or heard from again. You can't have that kind of thing in this game because it would be too complex, in fact theres a whole thread on it on the first page right now.

So failing that, they have to fall back on designing ships with different abilities, different shield and weapon strengths, etc to have ship battles.

And you can't have everyone flying around whatever ship they want right at the start, or you'd never see the low tier ships ever being used, you have to make some sort of level or rank system that restricts ship useage so that you have to earn and work your way up to the better stuff in order to better diversify the universe and to simultaneously give the player a sense of accomplishment and progression.

After you hit max rank and have the ship of your dreams, you have to continually feel some reason to play. Doing missions all day, even if they are unique every time, gets old, MMOs handle that by giving you means of continually developing and making your character more powerful which they do via special bridge officers treating them like items.

I mean these mechanics aren't there to emulate other MMOs, they are just there because it's required for this type of game. People don't want to quickly cap out then feel no sense of advancement anymore, they get bored and quit and without subscribers the game company makes no money.

I think STO has (so far) handled these challenges in a more or less unique way that I for one and looking forward to playing. I fully understand how game balance works and is required for enjoyment of more people playing the game, even if hardcore trekkies might have nerd-rages over one ship beating another when it "never should happen".

Right now their biggest challenge is further developing their end game content to keep it interesting. I can only save the federation from a borg cube with 20 other ships so many times before it gets old.

Star Trek is very limited in it's scope, and really it's the fan's fault. I mean for example in World of Warcraft you can always make new big powerful raid bosses in interesting new dungeons with beautiful looks and unique layouts and makes each new expansion and content update exciting to explore and fight the new villains. But you can't very well make a new powerful race to "raid" in star trek because it would step on the toes of established canon, say for example if you kept making new races that were more powerful than the borg people would have cows about it because it wasnt in a movie or series. Because of that sort of attitude, Star Trek franchises are always pretty limited in scope. Best STO could do is offer us access to the Beta Quadrant with all new untold, unseen creatures to battle with and places to explore.

So right now it's pretty hard to imagine what end game progression will be like especially since you can only get so many ranks in star fleet and only get "so powerful" of a ship before you're capped out in those reguards. Again unlike WOW, you don't have an arbitrary level that they can simply raise the cap of periodically for continued advancement. And if bridge officers become the only means of advancing, after a while with a steady rate of advancement you'll have bridge officers that are so far and away superior to other bridge officers that you would have an enormous, unapproachable advantage over other captains even using the same tier and type of ship, just because their bridge officers weren't as good.

And I mean how can you quantify that sort of thing anyway, how can you have one bridge officer operate like 8 times better than another, which it would eventually come down to if continued progression is planned and BOs are the only way to do it.

I could see them adding a new, morepowerful ship class "once in a while" but they can't just pump out new and better ships ever few months or eventually it would be like Eve online and you'd have people flying around in titanic mega ships 10 times bigger than a borg cube.

I just don't know how they're going to address these types of problems in game. There HAS to be continued character development and progression in the game or it will wither and die quickly as people will lose interest once they cap out.

[bridgeburner18]

to fully appreciate what makes STO different from other mmo's you have to focus on what is Core to an mmo?

In most fantasy mmos it starts as such. Start at lvl 1 progress through levels, aquire gear, become stronger, fight stronger enemies. The whole basis of the game becomes the aquisition of gear and skills to give you the advantage over player or npc. You gain levels by killing creatures or completly quests....a relativly standard practice

Few games if any truely break from this architype but STO has promiss in one category. EXPLORATION.

In wow there is no payoff to simply explore and enjoy the world, in STO it is a viable strategy to progress your charector and enjoy the game. THAT is one of the most unique things about the game, not the classes or mechanics or whatever but by the fact that if you are tired of the "grind" you can simply turn the wheel and head north until you find somethign you have not seen before. that i believe is goign to be the true selling point of this game and the one aspect that seperates it from the pack (and im not an explorer im a pvp guy).

[Marytha]

to fully appreciate what makes STO different from other mmo's you have to focus on what is Core to an mmo?

In most fantasy mmos it starts as such. Start at lvl 1 progress through levels, aquire gear, become stronger, fight stronger enemies. The whole basis of the game becomes the aquisition of gear and skills to give you the advantage over player or npc. You gain levels by killing creatures or completly quests....a relativly standard practice

Few games if any truely break from this architype but STO has promiss in one category. EXPLORATION.

In wow there is no payoff to simply explore and enjoy the world, in STO it is a viable strategy to progress your charector and enjoy the game. THAT is one of the most unique things about the game, not the classes or mechanics or whatever but by the fact that if you are tired of the "grind" you can simply turn the wheel and head north until you find somethign you have not seen before. that i believe is goign to be the true selling point of this game and the one aspect that seperates it from the pack (and im not an explorer im a pvp guy).

If you can actually do that, sure. If Exploration isn't a different way to get a quest. You know like stumbling into a public quest. It's just a quest you didn't go to someone to get.

Marytha

[Loekii]

The aspect that I am not happy with STO, is that they mirroring the 'simplistic' aspect of say WoW.

While I would not want an Eve Clone, I would have preferred something that offered more challenge than it looks like STO will.

That is one trend I would like to see change: Increased difficulty.

Not mind blowing difficulty, but just more than what we are seeing.

[dryzabone]

Well, at least there moving away from the standard fantasy model though.
Dont get me wrong, im a huge David Eddings fan and love a good fantasy epic involving wizards, Orcs, sexy woodelfs and the occasional quest to obtain the awesome sword of awesomeness, but enough is enough.

I agree that MMO's could use a little more attention to gameplay though.

[Kreedo]

Cryptic has a chance to step it up and creat something far more than whats out there. Will they do it ? Hard to say, at the moment it doesnt look like much different than all the other stuff out there. Other than a few things that may done different. For me personaly This will be my last MMo and it will stay that way for sometime with it is successful or a flop. After all Mmo's played that are out there I am done with the same old just a different skin. Along with that I am finished believing into something and buying the hype only to end up with an unfinished product. After be sold on Aoc by Funcom and given a game that is clearly under developed and poorly done . I am now far more leary of jumping in and supporting game companies unless they can prove otherwise.

Ever since Aoc came out so many games that have been released since then come across as catching the Funcom flu.... Making Companies go dumb to the point where consumers and gamers have to hold their hand pointing out the flaws and what they should or could be doing that would improve things vastly .Putting product on the market thats obviously unfinished and broken only ****es off the masses of games and makes the company easliy black listed. It's 2009 companies should know by now what it takes ,what it's going to take and what kind of options should be inputed into a game. If your interface is half ass, your control options are limited , your character diversity shallow and game play is restricted movement your not doing it right.

With hope one day most likely many years at his point maybe somebody will develop something that is done so completely different . A lot of games do, do things right some part of the game .Some will have an incredible customizable Ui but lack in other area's , others will have great game play but low graphics and some have great crafting system but the rest of the game sucks. I think as a result the company thats going to win will put a game together from piecing all the good things about all the other games and make it all into one game. At least for the current race for subscribers. Until then Mmo's are going to be stale ,then in a few years time someone just may decide to invent a whole new way to do one.

Until then its going to be solo or partial story campaigns ,pvp cordinated co-op games that will be sought after.

[ParkerHayden]

Death to archetypes! (Tank, DPS, Healer)

[Jare]

I am tired of most MMOs having the same basics with different settings. Hopefully, there will be some new innovations for STO, but I am sure there will be a good portion of what's come before as well.

I am interested exploration aspect of STO, and as far as I have seen it sounds unlike any other game that's around, I am sure others can correct me if i am wrong, but that may keep my interest for quite a while along with pvp.

[_Pax_]

I have to say Im finished with them. They are all the same, just re-dressed. The more I see and the less we are told of STO, the more Im begining to feel Ive played this game before..I've spent my money, played them, got tired of them or watched them fail.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you (see signature), but in all honesty - what do you WANT to see?

If you were the Lead Designer/Producer for STO, and had a nice, sizable budget (say, seventy million dollars) ... what would YOU do with the game? How would YOU break with the past of MMO design, and break new ground?

In fact, what one single specific thing would you push hardest for, that in your opinion owuld set STO apart from the pack, while also making it truly "TREK before MMO" ...?

Some of us see so much potential for STO to be STar Trek first and foremost....not just Star Trek in its appearance, not just at the surface...but at its core, in its motivations, in its relationships in its modeling, ints depth and complexity.
What, exactly, do you mean by "star trek [...] at it's core, in it's motivations, etc, etc" ...?







But games are NOT the same.
Some are, but there are gems out there to be played. The problem is that some of these games take years to get into and really play and alot of those people won't stick around that long and earn anything.
I should be able to "get into" a game, and "really play" it, within two hours of logging in for the first time - and even then, IMO, two hours is a stretch.

Anything that requires years for that to happen, is IMO an abysmal failure at the design level. :rolleyes:

[Gerrard]

If you want the game to have ANY variety, you MUST have different roles for different ships. More than 1 or 2. Now there have been tons of MMOs out there that have tried and tried different ways of doing things. But yaknow, some things work and some things don't. Trust that they didn't just grab some idiots off the street and trust that they have a clue.

We have proof that they are listening to us. So sit back and relax. Bring out your opinions yes, but beating a dead horse over something you don't know about because it's not been released is counterproductive.

[Southpaw007]

The sad thing is is that the tried and true method used in alot of games is a good formula.

The mother of most MMO's spans from EQ and Ultima. EQ set the bar high and truely inspired alot of the modern developers. And well the dominate one is of course WOW. Did anyone seriously not like it? I honestly cant think of a reason to hate it. Like most things it just gets bland over time.

The thing STO needs to do is take the real high points from each and put a different skew on them. Every game is going to have the same concept. Levels or skills that determine your level of difficulty. Quests missions or tasks that raise those levels.

The part that will be refreshing about STO (hoping they do it right) is the fact that its something different. Its not hack and slash Orcs, goblins, and magic. Its Phasers, klingons, and Space. The content is what will make the game different.

Honestly they need to just think of what works and what doesn't in other games and mix in a few new ideas, and maybe we will all have the game we wanted. If not we will all have to search yet again for something to occupy our free time. Its kinda of like Fat Basstards (Austin Powers) problems he was unhappy cause he ate so much and he eats so much because he's unhappy.......Its a vicious cycle.

[cocoa-jin]

Not that I necessarily disagree with you (see signature), but in all honesty - what do you WANT to see?

If you were the Lead Designer/Producer for STO, and had a nice, sizable budget (say, seventy million dollars) ... what would YOU do with the game? How would YOU break with the past of MMO design, and break new ground?

In fact, what one single specific thing would you push hardest for, that in your opinion owuld set STO apart from the pack, while also making it truly "TREK before MMO" ...?


What, exactly, do you mean by "star trek [...] at it's core, in it's motivations, etc, etc" ...?


Purpose...that is what I want purpose, consequences, accomplishments that actually changes things, makes a difference in the game world. To expand borders, development new geo-political relationships, to win new allies. In my mind, that comes from a faction end-game.

I'd decrease the significance of gear, ships, loot, etc. Create standard hulls, provide flexibility in their load outs and equipment to allow task oriented designs, but I'd put the vast majority of what a ship is capable of doing(outside of basic hull constraints) in the hands of the captain...not skill sets, not BOs, not loot.

I'd find ways of making small ships essential and specilaized in fulfilling various roles so that no fleet battle would rely soley on the most number of biggest and baddest to be successful(though its hard to remove the importance of size and fire power). I'd have it so large fleet engagements would be looking for small, agile vessels as support units, because their value in fleet engagements would be recognized.

Motivations would be faction oriented, service based. Exploring, or escorting, or production or incursions, etc would benefit the player, but would also benefit the faction. Progressing the faction leads to an end-game goal that is tangible, decisive and finite...then it starts all over again.

The model will be flexiable enough to allow for combat and non-combat play styles. It would allow for solo, group and faction based operations. But the main source of acquaition is through those actions that are in the faction's interest(exploration, combat, productions, etc).

[_Pax_]

Purpose...that is what I want purpose, consequences, accomplishments that actually changes things, makes a difference in the game world. To expand borders, development new geo-political relationships, to win new allies. In my mind, that comes from a faction end-game.
In short - you want the (with current technology) impossible.

That sort of thing requires the direct oversight and intervention ofa thinking,s elf-aware mind. Since true AI has not left the realm of imagination and joined us in the real world (yet), that's simply not going to happen anytime soon.

As for the rest ... I don't really see anything that sounds truly innovative, new, and different. The lack of real detail is a big part of that. So, C-J, please ... pick just ONE game system, one thing, and describe it in minute detail. Point out how this is different, truly different, from what other games have done before. Point out what you think is truly innovative.

And, no offense, prepare yourself for some disappointment, because I'm sure I orothers will be able to lis occasions where X or Y etail - or something very similar to it - has been used already.


...


And so that I don't come across as a total ass, I'll do that very thing myself. Not for Trek, though; my big idea is for a different setting and franchise altogether ... "Shadowrun" (the REAL one, not the abomination MicroSh*t slapped the name onto).

Specifically, if I had the rights and budget, the one big system design I have in mind for it is ... on-the-fly generation of mission content tailored to the group's existing skillset. While some elements (goals/objectives, obstacles/opposition, situational complications, etc) might be dictated by the storyline ... the REST of the mission content - whether it's one-off random missions, or even missions tied to a story-arc - would be auto-generated based on what the party had available when the mission was undertaken.

Got a lot of combat-oriented characters? Then you can bet on a lot of ocmbat ... because those are the kinds of missions those people would be hired for. If you don't expect a big firefight, you don't PAY for four walking-arsenal types to be on the team.

Got a good hacker or technomancer? Then you can bet on needing them to get you past a lot of challenging locks and alarm systems, spoof camera feeds, and maybe even acquire the mission's final objective (a datafile you've been hired to acquire). After all, if you don't expect to face electronic security, you wouldn't HIRE a really good electronic-COUNTER-security guy ... now, would you?

And so on. The system would look at the skills and abilities of the group, assign the group a certain rating in various areas (combat, magic, vehicle or drone operations, electronic security, social interaction, stealth, and probably a couple otehrs), and using those ratings draw from a list of appropriate possible objectives (Primary, Secondary, Optional, Hidden, etc, etc) and opposition/obstacles.

The difficulty setting for the team would define just how challenging those obstacles should be, compared to the quantified ability of the team. So if the team is set for "Hard", then the ratings in each area might be boosted by a certain percentage and/or flat value; on "Easy", the opposite might be true. There woudl also be a (smallish) random element involved, which might occasionally through you a (not insurmountable) curve-ball, and require you to either recruit help, or rethink your approach to something.

Of course, as previously mentioned, the dictates of storyline for some missions - those which are part of a story-arc, as well as those tied in some way to the overall metaplot of the MMO itself - might trump certain ratings ... by imposing a minimum or maximum rating that the mission-generation system can use. So a storyline about dealing with .... oh ... a lodge of Toxic shamans? Whether you've got serious mojo-muscle on yoru team or not, there will be strong magical opposition along the way. Maybe you should go recruit an extra mage or two, if you're light in that department, yes?

And some story elements may be semi-random too - X or Y sub-plot might not be guaranteed to show up every time.

...

...

The innovative factors there are:

Flexibility -- if you and your two friends make a Hacker, a cyber-ninja, and a "gun bunny" street samurai ... you can still do a lot of missions together, DESPITE having no actual mage type. Your team just won't be HIRED for jobs that NEED a lot of magical ability. Sure, the occasional complication may arise, but never to a degree where you're SCREWED for not having a mage in the group.
Unpredictability -- No more knowing exactly what might show up where and when for EVERY mission, just by checking a Wiki. Story-dictated stuff maybe ... but the random, team-specific element will always be a factor. As such, REPLAYABILITY is actually enhanced. Two teams doing the same missions might have VERY different experiences.
Death to the Holy Trinity -- if you have an all-stealth-and-social-charm team, you will rarely (if ever) be hired for anythign that might require "truck-loads of firepower, and half a ton of armor apiece".
Always useful -- no matter what sort of character you make, you will ALWAYS be useful on a mission. If you're the stealthy guy, then you can GUARANTEE that there will be places whee stealth will be useful, and there's a good chance there's one or more places where it will be required. (For example: if you need to get into a secure facility, where the team's hacker can't access any of the locks because the walls block wireless signals? Maybe Mr. Sneaky-Dude can slip past a guard or two, get to a slightly-open window or air vent, and slip in a signal-repeater on the end of a fiber-optic cable ... the other end of which is connected to the Hacker's gear. Voila, the HAcker now has access and can unlock a door for the team!_
Supremely casual-friendly -- indeed, SOLO friendly. If you're a "gun bunny" (someone who likes to make frequent use of lots of high-power firearms) sort of guy, and log on for some solo play ... you can guarantee getting a small mission or two where you WILL, happily, need to make use of said high-powered firearms. OTOH, if you're a sneaky stealthy guy who avoids fights? You WON'T get the many-guns-or-bust missions, you'll get missiosn where never being seen is called for.



...


...


So. For STO, what sort of innovative approach to a standard MMO feature would YOU design and implement? :)

[KO_Gilligan]

Indeed these are the things that have kept me from sticking with an MMO.

Looking at your signature doesn't bother me as a Cryptic fan at all - I totally get it.

I really have to respect WoW players for their sense of reality on the issue - That typical MMO gameplay is still the leading standard.

I'm excited about STO - but in a "hope they are taking it to the next level" kind of way

[Loekii]

So. For STO, what sort of innovative approach to a standard MMO feature would YOU design and implement? :)

Things I would like to see STO do to break the typical MMORPG Trends:

Increased difficulty -- Create a system where 'defeat' is seen as a learning experience, rather than a 'Im going home and taking my ball with me'.
Mitigate rewarding poor tactics (ie address the mindless 'zerg'). There are reasons that smaller armies have defeated larger forces with better tactics.
Move away from the Level system, and look at a more skill based system
Better distribute the priorities and gameplay, so that the 'end game' is not the goal -- when you buy a single player game, you don't 'Rush through it', but rather, you enjoy the process of playing it (if its a good game).
Stop coddling people. There is a difference between making a game better, and 'feeding the lazy'.
Just make a fun game.


Games are games, but I do not think that you must have X from WoW to be successful. I think Eve - from what have read - is one of the better examples of moving away from some of the perceived 'tenants' of MMORPGs.

[cocoa-jin]

In short - you want the (with current technology) impossible.

That sort of thing requires the direct oversight and intervention ofa thinking,s elf-aware mind. Since true AI has not left the realm of imagination and joined us in the real world (yet), that's simply not going to happen anytime soon.




I play an MMO that does all this right now. It pulls it off because it doesnt try to exist within the mold of the typical MMO. What it doesnt have featured are quests that are tied to AI...though it used to have automated missions creation.

We do currently change the game world in this game, we expand borders, it had combatant and non-combatant content(though it is a war game...so everything revolves around war), we have production, but we dont take part in it...we provide security for it though.

The game is both solo and group oriented, you can participate with as much autonomy or as much leader control as you desire, you can out do whatever you want, but they only advancement in this game is in the execution of those things in the interest of your faction...destroying other units, capturing facilities, interdicting supply and damaging/destroying production facilities(like I said, its a war game). This all leads to the acquistion of territory, infrastructure and production impacts and eventually the end-game result of one side winning, the other side losing(it doesnt mean the losing side is reduced to nothing, just to a point they are considered no longer strategically viable).

But players have taken units and went exploring, they flown to far reaches of the world because they could, driven to the Alps because they could, found the roads and highways that make up an old(maybe its still in use in real life) racing circuit and raced supply trucks around it.

Im asking to combine the purposful and tangible end-game aspect on a strategic level, coupled with the exploration and production aspects of a typical MMO. Strategic gains dont have to be just combat oriented, it can be done through economic expansion, political expansion, colonization, treaty/alliances or absorbtion/joining into the respect faction, etc.

Im asking that skill sets and rank be less important in accomplishing goals(combat, explorations, etc) That instead, have the player's own skills and actions be more important.


I know you asked for one thing, but I dont think one thing would do it. I like to think big picture, grand scheme...figure out what it takes to make it complete and then work back. I can go into detail for any of this, but Im trying to not have another massive post like before. What i will do is answer any questions on emay have about the idea...in an attempt to keep everying in nice bite sized pieces.

[Stormnet]

I don't see STO being like every other MMO. God I hope not anyways.

I'm playing AION right now and it's the same old thing. Kill 10 crabs, kill 10 wolves, recycle, rinse and repeat in a fantasy setting no less (I'm so tired of fantasy MMOs).

From what I've read STO won't be like that. I also think by the very lore of STO in it's exploration that it will be different. I'm looking forward to it and reserve jusdgement until I actually play it.

It's been a long road to get to play this game. I hope I live to see it..

Coco what game are you playing?

[Thibor]

I don't see STO being like every other MMO. God I hope not anyways.

I'm playing AION right now and it's the same old thing. Kill 10 crabs, kill 10 wolves, recycle, rinse and repeat in a fantasy setting no less (I'm so tired of fantasy MMOs).

So then I take it AION is something you've already quit or is it you're playing something even though you're already tired of it? I'm not asking to be sarcastic or snarky, just curious in trying to understand the draw. I remember people in the early months of SWG lamenting about lack of space travel and comparing it to EVE ... but they stayed with SWG. I watch people complain left and right on the WoW forums about how easy the game has become and how much they miss the real challenge of EQ or UO ... yet those games still have servers open, but the people stay in WoW.

Is it a "I'd rather be playing something I dislike than not playing anything at all" kind of mentality? Again, just wondering.

Coco what game are you playing?

Give the reference to finding RL roads and holding races on them, etc plus the emphasis on combat, supplies, etc, my guess would be WWII Online.

[Stormnet]

Well to be honest I'm playing multiple games atm out of sheer boredom.

Aion, yes still playing but not loving it but for lack of another game to play. They only have once a month play beta dates anyways until thier release in Sept. (No NDA so I can tell you)

I have been golfing more though! Getting more things done around the house.

I haven't been this MMO-less in a long time. I guess there's just nothing that excites me about MMO's these days which is why I'm looking forward to STO. I am a big fan of the series and movies and that alone will make want to play this one, hopefully for a very long time.

There are other MMO's coming in the next few months that might capture my interest. I'll give Jumpgate a try as well as possibly Earthrise if STO isn't out yet.

[cocoa-jin]

Give the reference to finding RL roads and holding races on them, etc plus the emphasis on combat, supplies, etc, my guess would be WWII Online.

Ding, ding, ding, ding! Wow...good stuff.



Coco what game are you playing?

WWIIOnline...the only MMO I know, that is not set up like a typical MMO.

It approaches combat and its contribution to geo-politics(borders/front lines) in away I'd like to see STO go...of course STO needs to expand the idea outside of just combat's influence. STO needs to include diplomacy, economics(resource acquistion, trading markets...even if the players never get to actually gather resources or produce or sell goods), exploration and annexation of un-inhabitated and unclaimed systems.

For STO, I see most of this as non-quests activities...quested activities would likly have little to no impact on this stuff, though they could be lead ins.

In my mind, guided/scripted/pre-written quests should be learning and real experience building activities...the quests should help develop the player and act as a launch pad into more autonomous and game world changing activities.

Once you graduate from quests(though you can always do them, since they are meant to be entertaining content), you are provided dynamically generated open taskings that promote(or at the very least, propel you into the larger faction struggle) the faction's interest. Taskings(if you choose to accept them) would create dynamic "missions" like patrol here, investigate here, escort these valuable NPC vessels from here to there, attack here, defend this location. All these taskings are being used to direct the player to the faction vs faction hot spots. They can be divided into combat and exploration type taskings.

In addition one tasking for one faction can(and likly would aready) have a corresponding counter-tasking for the ther side(not always). So a defend tasking would channel players from that faction to defend a afction holding. This tasking might be generated by an untasked attack by players of the other faction(if its big enough...1 or 2 ships likly wouldnt trigger it), or by NPC attacks from the other faction. Once enough defenders accept the defense tasking, it could generate an attack tasking for the other faction, drawing in yet more players.

Exploration tasking likly wouldnt have a counter tasking. But an escort tasking for a NPC logistics convoy could(not always) generate a supply interdiction/raider tasking for the other faction.

Success and failure of these faction taskings generate change in the galaxy. Do we hold the system, did we capture the system, did we protect the convoy(s), did we destroy the convoy(s), did we find new systems, did they have valuble resources or new civilizations, can we pu in new minning facilities, can we protect them, can we protect the logistics, or are the civilizations warp capable, can we get them to join our faction(even if its just on paper), develop diplomatic relations, make new enemies, etc, etc.

Somethings would take a while to make difference(it takes a lot of lost convoys before a faction is dramatically affected), somethings will have rapid reprecussions(losing a star system is pretty significant, but you'd need to lose a lot of them to really matter). But everything makes a simple and computational contribution to the success and growth, or failure and decline of the faction. Some are combat, some are non-combat...each player gets to choose how he contributes. Some players will tow the line from day 1, some will do their own thing from day 1...many will likly fall somewhere inbetween, doing their own thing until they recognize the severity of a situtation and then jump in to lend their support.

[_Pax_]

WWIIOnline...the only MMO I know, that is not set up like a typical MMO.
You're comparing an MMOFPS with an MMORPG.

Apples and Oranges. Bigtime.

...

...

...

Furthermore, I will admit to laying a trap for you, and watchign you fall right into it. You haven't really innovated - you've just pointed at another game, and said "do it like that". Where's the original idea in there, really?

If you want games to do new things, think of new things for games to do. ^_^

[KashikoiBaka]

What it sounds like to me is that people want a ST table top rpg. It would give them everything they want, there is no monthly fee, only micro transactions for more goodies and your imagination can produce the best graphics and sound effects ever. Add the internet and you have yourself an mmo.

[RandomRedshirt]

I tend to agree with the OP. MMO games (as well as other games) have become stagnant and stale when there are so many knock-offs in the industry, where the games are identical with nothing different than the candy flavor shell around it.

Gamespot just released a "State of the Union" article about the gaming industry just the other day. One of the things that really stood out to me was an answer from Phil Spencer, the General Manager for Microsoft Game Studios. When asked the question "What is wrong with the industry" his reply was:

"There are too many games, I see, that don't really strive to stretch the envelope creatively. We seem to have hit this glut, to some extent, of people following tried-and-true, existing formulas and not trying to challenge themselves with every release--to really change consumer expectations and to wow people and really delight them."

He is 100% right. I have said the same thing for quite a while in regards to MMO's and the ever-running competition to be a "WoW-killer." It has always been my opinion that we will never see a true "WoW-killer" until someone or some company decides to take the risk and truly step outside the MMO box.

Alot of people will say that STO isn't in competition with games like WoW however, because the genre is different. That could not be further from the truth. Fact is, alot of players in WoW, Warhammer, Age of Conan, Everquest and others are also sci-fi fans. STO will be competing against WoW just as much as it will compete against Star Wars: The Old Republic, Stargate Worlds (if it ever releases) and EVE. And simply put, if the gameplay difference between STO and WoW is not that different, there will be little incentive for Trek fans that already play WoW to leave their max level characters behind and start over in a new game. Only innovation and fresh gameplay will sway the diehards, and thus far, I have not seen anything that would suggest STO will be so outside the box that it can draw the fanbase it needs from the competition.

[AchillesHeel]

You're comparing an MMOFPS with an MMORPG.

Apples and Oranges. Bigtime.
That makes no sense. I don't see any reason the aspects of WWII Online that cocoa-jin was talking about couldn't be applied to an MMORPG.

[thefreshjedi]

The only problem is that with any MMOG, you have to create a framework to ground or galvanize people around. You can add content till your blue in the face, but unfortunately content alone will not win over the casual player. What I've noticed a trend in traditional MMOs is the need to revolve the game around this notion of conflicts. Conflicts keep the gamers interested and give them goals. Games are just not games without goals. Anything less and you have another version of Second Life with a Star Trek skin. No thanks. I'm not going to begin an analyses of Second Life here either, but for those of you whom like or enjoy that type of Simy Style game, then fine, more power to you.

When I play a game, no matter what game it is, I want something to keep me hitched around the game. I need goals or established benchmarks that I can earn, and I think that the basic equasion usually lends a little toward grinding mechanics. Unfortunately, this is just a common reality with any MMO. Some systems work better than others. Some systems are poorly thought out. But each system that I've played, be it: WoW, SWG, WAR, AoC, DAoC, EvE, EaB, AO, etc., each has had it's quircks, and gameset rules which required leveling mechanics, grinding elements, pvp interface poised around conflict, etc. Even simple games such as cards, or chess have a detailed routine ruleset that must be followed to give it a sense of strategy, immersion, interest, and goals. Now if you're just playing a Massively Multiplayer Online experience, then fine, go to Second Life, use their engine to build your own Star Trek type of world. But if you're relying on Cryptic's work, then you're going to be playing an MMOG (Massively Multiplayer online Game. Now perhaps it's not Trek enough for you, and for that I'm sorry... however the game is being written deliberately to be appeasable to the greater masses, young and old. You have to add these elements for the purpose of familiarity. Now you can be creative like Warhammer Online was, and change a few of the details around, move some of the code around so that it looks a little different, but it's essentially the same thing, with a newer skin.

Trek will always be Trek, no-matter which way you look at it. And Cryptic is trying their hardest to maintain that environment for us. But they're also attempting to woo-over customers from other genres, while also maintaining a positive revenue influx. To do so they have to create something that is stylized to meet all of these standards, and hopefully to not let people down. Plus, they have the added challenge of creating a game which is easier to solo, so that they game itself can be played front to end by anyone whom doesn't necessarily want to group-up, but wants to not play alone.

I agree that there is just not enough info to go around, and from the sounds of it, they are also trying very hard to meet that challenge as well, so that not only the immediate community (us), will know what's going on, but so that they can get marketable information out there for the masses to see their progress.

I'm highly optimistic about this game in general, simply because from a development standpoint, with everything that they are planning on adding up-front as of right now, is an amazing task, and to some degree groundbreaking in and of itself. But I'm also willing to take the back seat and let them steer the ship without being a back-seat driver, because we all know that the destination will be a wonderous thing to behold. And I expect there will be many course corrections along the way. But in the end, depending on the appeal, the need, and the feasibility of generating newer content, or adding other content that we would like to see, that they have at least left that open-ended. Which means they are listening, and they do care about our input.

-avery

[wootage]

Ohmygod am I sick of the same old craptastic "gameplay system" recycled, rehashed and regurgitated into a different package. I have played a very few moldbreaking games (Planetside, which had "levels", but they just gave you cert points to spend so you could do what you wanted - there was no change in any other aspect of gameplay) and a modded Oblivion where you could just play and raise the skills you wanted to without caring about levels.

Both of those were tons of fun, because I didn't have to assess everything I saw and did by what level I was and they were. So you could just PLAY, and hey, there were still varying difficulties and varying rewards, so it was all good.

I'm hoping STO does the same. AFAIK, they've got the rank and ship thing flattened to reduce the variation in difficulty as you progress through the ranks, although I bet at top rank, you'll still feel like you've leveled out of the bottom rank missions.

But it's a start, and the bridge officer stuff is different, and customizing your ships' abilities is different, and we'll have fleets rolling player groups with different ships, which will be cool. All in all, I think it'll work out ok.

[cocoa-jin]

You're comparing an MMOFPS with an MMORPG.

Apples and Oranges. Bigtime.

...

...

...

Furthermore, I will admit to laying a trap for you, and watchign you fall right into it. You haven't really innovated - you've just pointed at another game, and said "do it like that". Where's the original idea in there, really?

If you want games to do new things, think of new things for games to do. ^_^

I would have to agree that there is rarely true innovation. but based on the typical MMO, WWIIOnline was and is innovation and for the general gaming public, taking some of their aspects would be innovation for the consumer.

Now yes WWIIOnline to the typical MMO is apples to oranges...but thats the idea, typical MMOs are becoming the boring, mundane, repetitive, bad apple. Lets remove the apple from the perception of what an MMO is, lets remove the expectation of the apple...but not necessarily make them all oranges...not necessarily make STO an orange.

Im saying lets smash up the typical apple MMO, take some the key aspects, some of the good things(like my idea does), use it as a base flavoring, for some texture...take this apple sauce(you might say) and mix it in with some orange juice and pulp, throw in some strawberry, some mango bits , some cherry juice, a splash of grape juice, mix and pour it into a new Star Trek(or any other equally applicable IP) mold, freeze it so it all comes together and create a more in-depth and thorough, more reflective and immersive product...one that.

But no more red apples, and then the next best thing a shiny new green apple, hey fuji over here, granny smith over there...Im tired. Put all those apples in a barrel and let em rot.

[Urantia]

Without getting to philosophical I will just answer the thread title directly. "Who is tired of the same old MMO models?" I am.

[ecsakron]

The only problem is that with any MMOG, you have to create a framework to ground or galvanize people around. You can add content till your blue in the face, but unfortunately content alone will not win over the casual player. What I've noticed a trend in traditional MMOs is the need to revolve the game around this notion of conflicts. Conflicts keep the gamers interested and give them goals. Games are just not games without goals. Anything less and you have another version of Second Life with a Star Trek skin. No thanks. I'm not going to begin an analyses of Second Life here either, but for those of you whom like or enjoy that type of Simy Style game, then fine, more power to you.

When I play a game, no matter what game it is, I want something to keep me hitched around the game. I need goals or established benchmarks that I can earn, and I think that the basic equasion usually lends a little toward grinding mechanics. Unfortunately, this is just a common reality with any MMO. Some systems work better than others. Some systems are poorly thought out. But each system that I've played, be it: WoW, SWG, WAR, AoC, DAoC, EvE, EaB, AO, etc., each has had it's quircks, and gameset rules which required leveling mechanics, grinding elements, pvp interface poised around conflict, etc. Even simple games such as cards, or chess have a detailed routine ruleset that must be followed to give it a sense of strategy, immersion, interest, and goals. Now if you're just playing a Massively Multiplayer Online experience, then fine, go to Second Life, use their engine to build your own Star Trek type of world. But if you're relying on Cryptic's work, then you're going to be playing an MMOG (Massively Multiplayer online Game. Now perhaps it's not Trek enough for you, and for that I'm sorry... however the game is being written deliberately to be appeasable to the greater masses, young and old. You have to add these elements for the purpose of familiarity. Now you can be creative like Warhammer Online was, and change a few of the details around, move some of the code around so that it looks a little different, but it's essentially the same thing, with a newer skin.

Trek will always be Trek, no-matter which way you look at it. And Cryptic is trying their hardest to maintain that environment for us. But they're also attempting to woo-over customers from other genres, while also maintaining a positive revenue influx. To do so they have to create something that is stylized to meet all of these standards, and hopefully to not let people down. Plus, they have the added challenge of creating a game which is easier to solo, so that they game itself can be played front to end by anyone whom doesn't necessarily want to group-up, but wants to not play alone.

I agree that there is just not enough info to go around, and from the sounds of it, they are also trying very hard to meet that challenge as well, so that not only the immediate community (us), will know what's going on, but so that they can get marketable information out there for the masses to see their progress.

I'm highly optimistic about this game in general, simply because from a development standpoint, with everything that they are planning on adding up-front as of right now, is an amazing task, and to some degree groundbreaking in and of itself. But I'm also willing to take the back seat and let them steer the ship without being a back-seat driver, because we all know that the destination will be a wonderous thing to behold. And I expect there will be many course corrections along the way. But in the end, depending on the appeal, the need, and the feasibility of generating newer content, or adding other content that we would like to see, that they have at least left that open-ended. Which means they are listening, and they do care about our input.

-avery


well put. Cryptic needs to find a way to reward non confrontational behavior without it becoming simm city in space. Most mmo's have your main profession and then your "crafting" profession that level up separately. Perhaps you're a "science captain" and you want to spend a few days catalogueing
gaseous anomolies or charting regions of space, and this in turn levels you up just as if you were fighting a space battle. I'm sure lots of people who are going to come play this game that are not familiar with the "kill 5 wolves" formula and expect to be doing things like I described. If we have options like this then maybe they will find a happy medium between simm style role playing and multiplayer combat.
As far as combat goes, having a space element brings something to the table imo. Now I'm sure there will be missons where we go down to the planet, infiltrate the underground complex, kill all the thugs that lead into the master computer room that we must destroy so that the shield that is stopping the refugee ships can leave the planet, but having the space battle option has got my interest.
Having played cryptics city of heroes/villians game, I sure hope they do not take the same approach to instances. They have like 4 different instances, the office building, the techno industrial complex, the warehouse and the underground cave. It doesn't matter if you're level 3 or 50 it all looks the same. To their credit though the game play is extremely fun and the graphics behind your superpowers are dazzling and exciting to watch. But it grows tiring quickly. The missions are monotonous and identical. I also played Dungeons & Dragons online and the missions could be quite challenging, with secret doors and levers to find, puzzles to solve, traps to disable. And if you didn't have a certain class with you that had a specific set of skills then a mission could be difficult or impossible to finish. I'd like to see a combonation of these good points in STO. okie dokey

[JoyRiderCaptain]

I have not really like any of the MMOs out there. Lord the Rings Online was not great either.

I hope Star Trek Online cuts above all the rest and goes for original instead of cookie-cutter.

[draxis_ralo]

The one thing i want them to focus on is Star Trek. Star trek in all it's series has been about a small group of people (ship or station) and their experiences as they lived on board exploratory vessels (or in DS9's case a strategically located station) as they fulfilled their mission - "to boldly go...".

I want to be able to explore fully the interior of my ship, walk onto my bridge, sit in the central chair or take a message saying "we're sending you here Draxis" in my ready room. I want to be able to get to know the crew (even if it's a ship as small as a Nova) build relationships with people on-board and on other vessels, planets etc .I want to experience the Star Trek like it's been portrayed in the very series' that made it as successful as it has become.

I don't want another PoS Star Trek game that will just wind up collecting dust on my shelf with the preceding garbage served up that had a Star Trek label on it.

SW:ToR is selling story as their innovation into the genre of the MMO space.
ST:O should be (god i hope they are) pouring their minds bodies and souls into Genesis and giving Star Trek Online the touches that made the TV series' so successful - the ships and the stories that unfold on them.

Everything i read sets of warning bells that Cryptic is not concerned so much about making a true Star Trek experience, but are just falling into a "we need to compete with wow and they do this and make money so we should go that way" kind of mentality. I am still holding onto hope for ST:O, but at this point that's all i can hold onto because information is scarce and vague at best.

[_Pax_]

That makes no sense. I don't see any reason the aspects of WWII Online that cocoa-jin was talking about couldn't be applied to an MMORPG.

The thing is, I strongly suspect that those very aspects rely on the fact that, periodically, the game ENDS ... and then a new one is begun. From scratch.

That robs the game of the sort of "permanent persistence", especially of individual characters, that is IMO a foundational aspect of MMORPGs.

WW2OL looks, to me, more like "massively multiplayer HALO with two teams and map-based score-keeping" ... than like any sort of model you could base an MMORPG on.

[Resistance]

Am I tired of the same rehashed MMO model?

HELL YES

Things almost every MMO has in common:


1) Classes: (A lot use the typical TANK/HEALER/DPS.

2) Items given by a Quest or dice roll loot drop.

3) Leveling system

4) Experience needed to level

5) Damage done by showing numbers.

6) Dice rolls determining exactly how much damage being done on each hit.

7) Using Dungeons as end game content.

8) An economy with auction houses.

9) Gaining experience by killing stuff and doing quests.

10) Having a PvP system.

11) The general setting of the MMO being a fantasy/medieval based one.

-----------------------------------------------------

That's all I can think of directly off the top of my head. I AM READY FOR SOMETHING NEW.

MMO's today need to STEP AWAY FROM THE MOLD. A truely revolutionary MMO will take the reigns from WoW if it's done well. No 'traditional' MMO will ever take WoW on as a contender.

However, a revolutionary MMO may not be able to completely break away from every aspect of a 'traditional' one. It may have to use 1 or 2 things that are in 'traditional' ones.

[cocoa-jin]

The thing is, I strongly suspect that those very aspects rely on the fact that, periodically, the game ENDS ... and then a new one is begun. From scratch.

That robs the game of the sort of "permanent persistence", especially of individual characters, that is IMO a foundational aspect of MMORPGs.

WW2OL looks, to me, more like "massively multiplayer HALO with two teams and map-based score-keeping" ... than like any sort of model you could base an MMORPG on.

Just because the war ends, doesnt mean the galaxy ends. "Reset" would simulate a treaty, consist of a re-drawing of the borders(with some possible variations), newly created systems/worlds can stay, more systems/worlds will come, resource deposits and locations shuffled.

They can create an intermission after "Reset" in which the galaxy exist in temporary state of peace....then ramp of the conflict over time again.

WWIIOnline is so much than Halo. But it also centers around is focused soley on the war. So yes you fight, but some guys do non-combat tasking...like logistics.

[_Pax_]

1) Classes: (A lot use the typical TANK/HEALER/DPS.
3) Leveling system
4) Experience needed to level
9) Gaining experience by killing stuff and doing quests.

This is, really, all the same thing. Class/Level based design is one of the two main options for RPGs, and it's the easiest to balance and rebalance over time, making it especially appealing to MMO designers. The use of levels, and a metric for advancing from one to the next ("experience points"), is simply part and parcel of that entire design.

Not all use of Classes has to support the "Tank/Healer/DPS" mindset, though. That comes about from how the AI for enemies works.

5) Damage done by showing numbers.
Actually, the damage isn't done by SHOWING the numbers (or else, turning off your monitor would make you invulnerable).

6) Dice rolls determining exactly how much damage being done on each hit.
... and what would you prefer? An absolute lack of randomness?


11) The general setting of the MMO being a fantasy/medieval based one.

Tabula Rasa. Auto Assault. Both were non-fantasy MMOs, and both died. Teh marketplace seems to strongly prefer Fantasy over the alternatives, sadly.

[_Pax_]

WWIIOnline is so much than Halo. But it also centers around is focused soley on the war. So yes you fight, but some guys do non-combat tasking...like logistics.
Okay, "massively multiplayer Enemy Territory: Quake Wars with two teams and map-based score-keeping" ... better? It still strikes me as just "an FPS game with tons of players", more than an MMORPG.

Do you have levels and classes? Or at least, SKILLS? Or is everyone equally proficient with every weapon and vehicle (aside form player familiarity with changing UIs and physics, of course) ...?

Do you get to carry equipment and gear over from battle to battle? How about from one war to the next? If I pick up a nice, sweet German armored car and still have it when Battle (A) ends, do I get to keep it, and drive it around (repainted in Allied colors) in Battle (B) ...? Conversely, if Battle (C) ends with me reduced to a pistol, three bullets, a broken leg, a permanently ruined eye, and a missing left arm ... am I magically restored ot perfect health and full, brand-new kit for Battle (D) ...?

WW2OL just doesn't strike me as such a good model to base an MMORPG on.

[inXi]

OK people are you here to support the general marketplace or something? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure you want a quality game, not a "sell the most subs" game, or you belong on a WoW forum, in that case.

"It won't be popular" is a very, very bad approach to a video game. It doesn't lead anywhere, there is no innovation, art, there is no Star Trek, there is nothing really, "popular" games are usually bad and watered down to the common denominator. This forum is what WE want. Not what THEY want.

The marketplace supported EVE. EVE is a niche game for a specific audience. That's what Cryptic should be aiming at. Not competing with WoW, that will make both a terrible game and probably a failure, too. I'm pretty sure WWIIO wasn't aimed at "everybody", either.

Who here, on this forum, would play a WoW variant?

[AchillesHeel]

WW2OL just doesn't strike me as such a good model to base an MMORPG on.
I think we're all in agreement there. I think cocoa-jin was speaking specifically about the dynamism of the game world. S/he wrote,

"[WWII Online] approaches combat and its contribution to geo-politics(borders/front lines) in a way I'd like to see STO go...of course STO needs to expand the idea outside of just combat's influence. STO needs to include diplomacy, economics, exploration and annexation of uninhabited and unclaimed systems."

So I don't think cocoa-jin was advocating for WWII Online as merely a different, narrow, inappropriately-applied template on which to improperly map STO. S/he was just pointing out one aspect of that game that any MMO could benefit from.

Part of the problem with so many MMOs today is that they don't use techniques and designs that are commonplace in other types of games. Most of us aren't asking for Cryptic to reinvent the wheel. There may or may not be technical restrictions that are unique to MMOs, when compared to multi-player FPS games or single-player games, but I refuse to believe that technical restrictions force MMOs to all be like World of Warcraft.

As far as the market goes, yes, some games fail. That's in the basic nature of both art and business, and since computer games are a combination of the two, there's no escaping the possibility of failure. However, STO has the massive advantage of using an IP that almost sells itself. I think it could attract a great many people who've never played an MMO before, whose expectations for the game will be defined by Star Trek movies and shows and not by World of Warcraft.

[demonic25]

I think the current models of mmorpgs put too much empthasis on "end game" rather than when you start the game.

MMORPGS should be fun from the start and not just at the end, this is where WOW has gone wrong imho.

[inXi]

I think the current models of mmorpgs put too much empthasis on "end game" rather than when you start the game.Yes, and some issues are level discrepancy which makes conflicts meaningless, so everyone tries to get to level 80... >> I always wondered why not just give us level 80 if that's what the entire stupid game is about.

[Captain_Everett]

I've scowered these forums for a couple months now and haven't posted at all. Finally! someone posts a topic about something that has irritated for a long time. I for one am tired of the rehashing of the same MMO style..where the only type of enemies I fight are animals and insects! I miss the days when I first played COH/COV. I need to get that "feeling" back. All of my eggs are in one basket as they say. STO/Cryptic dont fail me! :D

[cocoa-jin]

Okay, "massively multiplayer Enemy Territory: Quake Wars with two teams and map-based score-keeping" ... better? It still strikes me as just "an FPS game with tons of players", more than an MMORPG.

Do you have levels and classes? Or at least, SKILLS? Or is everyone equally proficient with every weapon and vehicle (aside form player familiarity with changing UIs and physics, of course) ...?

Do you get to carry equipment and gear over from battle to battle? How about from one war to the next? If I pick up a nice, sweet German armored car and still have it when Battle (A) ends, do I get to keep it, and drive it around (repainted in Allied colors) in Battle (B) ...? Conversely, if Battle (C) ends with me reduced to a pistol, three bullets, a broken leg, a permanently ruined eye, and a missing left arm ... am I magically restored ot perfect health and full, brand-new kit for Battle (D) ...?

There are Levels...its in the form of rank. rank provides access to highjer tier equipment. You get to use whatever equipment you have access to as a memeber of the faction you are on. You use it until you die, the unit is destroyed or log off. No customization of the unit beyond a few decal options. Rank provides no increase in anything except access to units. What you do with the unit is up to you, you win and lose on your own merits.

When the war is over, the world resets, you keep you rank and you fight the war again. The war's progression is purley player driven, we decide where and when to attack, we draw up the strategies and evolve them in response to what the other side is doing.

The player brings into battle whatever his unit type is equipped for(though adjustable loadouts are planned). So an infantry has lots of options, rifleman, sub-machine gun, light machine gun, sniper, mortar, demolitions and repair kits.

Tanks have a large assortment of light tanks, med, heavy, scout cars, transports/pullers.

Support roles are an assortment of anti-tank guns, anti-aircraft guns.

The navy is stuck with just a destroyer, a river patrol boat and freighter to carry infantry and vehicles.

Te airforces have an assortemnet of fighters, bombers, attack bombers, paratroop transporters.

Every unit has it owns characteritics, strengths and weakness. All units are modeled based on actual historical data, the game is physics based, each model's damage model is fully 3D and model according to actual blue-prints, destruction of a unit is based on actually hitting something critical...like killing the various occupants(some units have several personel onboard) like pilots, or commanders, or gunners, etc. or damaging/destroying critical systems. So "killing" a tank can come by firing a around into the tank that kills the occupants through a series of spalling, richocets or direct penetration of their bodies(it even knows if it was a head shot or an extremity), or by igniting ammunition or fuel. Igniting ammunition is rapid and catastrophic, while igniting fuel and take like 30secs to a minute to run its course through the unit, killimg each occupant as it spreads...or it ignites the ammunition and finishes off everyone mercifully. In some cases you defeat the enemy by beating up some critical part of the unit until fails...like aircraft wings. Pepper its wing or tail long enough and it begins to lose its ability to mmaneuver the aircraft, perhaps resulting the puilot losing control and spiraling to his death...or you damage its support so much the wing fatigues and rips off...fluttering behind like a leaf in the wind.


WW2OL just doesn't strike me as such a good model to base an MMORPG on.

It sounds like a great MMORPG for WWII...thats the point. Build the MMORPG around the IP/Theme...not the other way around.



QUOTE=_Pax_;639675]


... and what would you prefer? An absolute lack of randomness?


[/QUOTE]

As demonstrated all the time in WWIIOnline, randomness comes from detail, thorough and complex damage and combat models. Because destroying a unit requires more than hitting a certain number of times, or dealing a certain number of damage points. You can fire a thousand rounds at a tank, but if they hit at the wrong angle, or its to far away for teh round to have the energy to penetrate, or if you gun is too weak, the tank wont be detroyed. Even if you do penetrate, you have to actually hit something critical or else you just have a tank with a bunch of fresh air holes, but its still functional and firing its guns at you. Since dispersion and gun vibrations is modeled, rounds rarely hit exactly in the same place or directly where you think you are aiming(especially at long ranges). SO even if you think you are doing the exact same thimg 100 times in a row, you are actually doing 100 things in ever so slightly(sometimes not so slightly) different results. So that means, you roll up on the six of a fighter seemingly the same way you did against the same type earlier that day. You open up with your 6 machine guns firing at almost 1000rounds a minute each(the tracks each round, its velocity, drop due to gravity and impact angles, energy lost on impact, spalling, richocets, etc) and the aircraft blows up, or maybe it catches fire, or maybe you saw a wing off or maybe you kill the pilot or maybe he limps off with all kind of fluids leaking and control surfaces torn to shreds, barley able to keep aloft and you are all out of ammo. Thats the "randomness" of war...but what the model actually shows is that its not random at all. Its all for a reason, just reason generally outside th eperception of the observer...so we chalk it up to randomness.

[mwood1387]

The lack of solid information about the game makes trusting Cryptic a pretty hard task. I'm holding out a little hope because of Klingons. I don't mean that I'm going to play because 'I <3 Klingons'. I mean that we have very little information on the Klingon side except that they will work differently than the Federation. It seems to me that the Cryptic will use the trinity system seen in WoW and its clones, at least for the Federation side but what of the Klingon side? The Klingons don't follow the same laws and rules the Federation do and so implementing the trinity system into the Klingon faction wouldn't be nearly as convenient as it was for the Federation and its trinity-friendly system of classes and divisions.

OK people are you here to support the general marketplace or something? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure you want a quality game, not a "sell the most subs" game, or you belong on a WoW forum, in that case.

"It won't be popular" is a very, very bad approach to a video game. It doesn't lead anywhere, there is no innovation, art, there is no Star Trek, there is nothing really, "popular" games are usually bad and watered down to the common denominator. This forum is what WE want. Not what THEY want.

The marketplace supported EVE. EVE is a niche game for a specific audience. That's what Cryptic should be aiming at. Not competing with WoW, that will make both a terrible game and probably a failure, too. I'm pretty sure WWIIO wasn't aimed at "everybody", either.

Who here, on this forum, would play a WoW variant?

I couldn't agree more. Whatever the outcome I think the only thing that can truly break or save an MMO is its community. WoW is a terrible game (imo anyway). Its PVP was a poorly implemented and unbalanced afterthought, its PVE is downright terrible and has become second to its PVP cousin but the popularity of the game has snowballed.

Eve on the other hand has great gameplay and a solid system of advancement but as said "EVE is a niche game" and will never have the sheer numbers that make up WoW nor the understanding of a larger audience.

I completely agree STO needs to be a niche game. After all, the franchise is famous for having the most devout and zealous fans of any franchise. The original series was almost canceled 3 times if not for the intervention of the fans.

Since the boom in WoWs popularity developers have had a childish 'I WANT IT NOW' mentality, expecting that their MMO's will suddenly garner the attention of millions like WoW by building a clone of it. But they forget even WoW started off small. It didn't even have PVP at the start. The original WoW was a niche game, role playing eye-candy for its RTS fans. Obviously since then its become a hulking Frankenstein compared to its former self but I digress. Being another WoW clone won't get STO anything except a lot of angry ST fans and bad reviews. WoW will always be better than its clones. STO needs to innovate, not replicate.

[Tain]

Since the boom in WoWs popularity developers have had a childish 'I WANT IT NOW' mentality, expecting that their MMO's will suddenly garner the attention of millions like WoW by building a clone of it. But they forget even WoW started off small. It didn't even have PVP at the start. The original WoW was a niche game, role playing eye-candy for its RTS fans. Obviously since then its become a hulking Frankenstein compared to its former self but I digress. Being another WoW clone won't get STO anything except a lot of angry ST fans and bad reviews. WoW will always be better than its clones. STO needs to innovate, not replicate.

Excellent, excellent post Warbird. I think it would do everyone good to read it a few hundred times.

[thefreshjedi]

Am I tired of the same rehashed MMO model?
...
1) Classes: (A lot use the typical TANK/HEALER/DPS.

2) Items given by a Quest or dice roll loot drop.

3) Leveling system

4) Experience needed to level

5) Damage done by showing numbers.

6) Dice rolls determining exactly how much damage being done on each hit.

7) Using Dungeons as end game content.

8) An economy with auction houses.

9) Gaining experience by killing stuff and doing quests.

10) Having a PvP system.

11) The general setting of the MMO being a fantasy/medieval based one.

...


The things that you're listing however are the quintessential elements that distinguish an MMO, from and MMOG. In an MMO, you're essentially just floating about with absolutely no purpose. No purpose equates to no fun (in my absolute honest opinion). And quite frankly, no thanks.

With regard to STO, I want an MMOG. A massively multiplayer online game. I want something that challenges me, but also gives me numerical benchmarks to categorize my progress. I want challenging missions with medals and rewards that are virtually tangible. I don't want to float endlessly in space without a purpose or direction. I don't want a simulation akin to Second Life...

So while some of you are touting that you don't want these types of elements present within STO, then let me ask the prominent question: what do you expect out of STO? What model do you propose based on the listing presented here that you feel would make STO a worthwhile entertainment piece. How do you propose to woo-over the many gamers out there that have already been absorbed by these elements, and are used to a categorical system of achievements wrought through endless hours of grinding, grouping, or exploring? How do you propose to demonstrate achievements in game and give players a feeling of acomplishment?

-avery

[Archangelwoghd]

I have to say Im finished with them. They are all the same, just re-dressed. The more I see and the less we are told of STO, the more Im begining to feel Ive played this game before..I've spent my money, played them, got tired of them or watched them fail.

Yeah, they get prettier and prettier but they bring to the table only a specialized, yet superfical theme...but under the skirt is the same old tired pair of Victoria's Secert.

I have to say Im losing the faith here. I fear we'll be getting a dressed up version of what I can already play in some other form or another for free. Im afraid any Star Trek themed based gimmicks will do nothing in the long run to differienate the experience from any other typical MMO.

Certainly many will be just fine with STO if this is the way its going...if thats their preference, more power to them...you guys need your game too(yet again). In the grand scheme of things that preference is just as valid as any other...some of us were just hoping for something different.

Some of us see so much potential for STO to be STar Trek first and foremost....not just Star Trek in its appearance, not just at the surface...but at its core, in its motivations, in its relationships in its modeling, ints depth and complexity.

The devs are certainly doing a good job of delving into Trek in their modeling of STO...but I cant help but think its being condensed down into just flavoring for the MMO, is this game really being made from Trek....or is it a typical MMO just being tossed with zest of Trek?

I see absolutely nothing to indicate any need for concern at all. In cryptic, I see a team that goes way out of it's way to address the issues that players have. I've seen a lot of MMORPGs, some handled better than others, and I have to say that this feels like it's going to be pretty good. Look at all the time they are putting into it, look at all of the concern they have for keeping canon, and to address our concerns as players.

No I don't think there is anything to worry about. If STO turns out to be "stale" then everyMMO from now until the end of time will suffer the same fate because I don't think I've ever seen so much time and effort put into a gaming project of any kind. If STO doesn't satisfy you, then nothing probably will.

Short of some sort of disaster beyond cryptic's control, I expect STO to be quite a success.

[Awarkle]

I will be happy with a game that is startreky enough to justify the lisence with a solid gaming system without too much enforced grinding.

if the questing is fun and grouping is fun and basically the game is FUN then ill enjoy it, the worst issue i ever had with wow was this statement "the game gets better after 50/60/70 (whatever the cap is now)" sorry but unless im having fun getting towards that cap i cant see the point in having all the content after i ding final level.

I want to be able to sit in orbit above a planet in my ship and decide how i want to do a quest, i dont want to hit the interent and follow a wiki on how that quest is walked through and the quickest route to take.

i also want to be able to roll alts and different characters however i dont want to end up doing the exact same content till i reach a point that diverges and gives me choies. Its why i prefer killing mobs to questing, ok the mobs might be the same but at least im not reading the same text and watching the same cut scenes over and over again.

The reason WOW is successful is because its easy it doesnt require you to go away and research 50000 different things before you start. it litterally spoon feeds you all the way through the game, hell my brothers got a fire wiz in that game and hes dyslexic and doenst read anything thats how well they did the tutorial mish.

I like to think of Warcraft as a kiddy pool where new swimmers go to learn the ropes and the basics, after they are tired of standing in the shallow end with a float they want to expand and explore the deep end with no bottom. and so they try new things, but you dont want your swimmers drowning the first time they venture in to the deep end all that will happen is you will scare them off swimming for good or they will go back to what they know and never venture out again.

You could say that this is self defeatism as the newer players may just go back to wow if your game is to wowified.

i think the areas that mmorpg companies always neglect

1. crafting
2. customisation
3. housing / home ownership

i know it sounds silly but a lot of people love to craft love to have a house to put things in and love to be able to customise their avatar. the rest of the game with killing monsters and hearing ding every now and again is beside the point. I think pve in games is pretty straight forward how you make your game stand out.

I mean consider SWG pre nge it was pretty broke we all knew that but it provided the tools for people to set up virtual shops and virtual citys and generally they did what they want without requiring to see a NPC with somthing floating above their head to tell them to kill 100 wookies and return with their noses. However as soon as the NGE ruined that people left.

As long as cryptic makes the little bits inbetween the pve interesting then it will work, if its a cut and paste exersize then no it wont. Not all of wow's features are rubbish.

[Terra_Blade]

Considering that Cryptic has already stated that their will be a rank system that to ask for no levels would be silly, and for me to ask for it as well would be just as silly. However I will ask that there is no or little grinding. But again since they said that random missions occur as you explore then the grinding I hope would be more invisible then others. (*cough* WOW *cough*) I want to go out to adventure and explore in these games, not kill everything in sight for that next 'ding' on the level system. If there must be levels, I just hope its based more on RL military systems which is higher rank means more access to cooler toys. But not that in the game a newbie can't challenge a vet due to 'stats' and not really 'skill'. THAT is my wish.

Also, like Awarkle brought up I want to be able to choose how to do a mission. I don't want it like WOW where you have guilds that require you to apply and watch hundreds of Youtube videos to do insistences or raids. I want fleet actions to be random enough that everyone has to think on their feet. Yes you can have someone in charge, but he/she isn't in charge because they have seen the video or done it before and know the 'right' way to kill a boss. I want organized chaos. I want a boatload of variety even if it is the same content i've seen before.

So you give me a game where even if its based on the tried-and-true, give me a game where each time I log on I wonder "ok, what lies in wait out there in space today?" I will gladly play, and pay, that game it.

Oh, and no elves. :D

[thefreshjedi]

...
Oh, and no elves. :D


Well... Vulcans and Romulans are like Elves....

Ferengi are trolls....

And there are a whole other type of species out there that could be considered... middle-earthish.

-avery

[Terra_Blade]

Well... Vulcans and Romulans are like Elves....

Ferengi are trolls....

And there are a whole other type of species out there that could be considered... middle-earthish.

-avery

Shhh, no, I wish to keep thinking that they are aliens. =P

Seriously, long as it is not swords and sorcery i'll play it at this point. Much as I like fencing I want a gun in my games every now and then.

...and if anyone points out WOW i'm going to mail you a tribble packed in with grain. :D

[KashikoiBaka]

Shhh, no, I wish to keep thinking that they are aliens. =P

Seriously, long as it is not swords and sorcery i'll play it at this point. Much as I like fencing I want a gun in my games every now and then.

...and if anyone points out WOW i'm going to mail you a tribble packed in with grain. :D

Well you can blame TOS for making fencing canon to sto.

[WinterPark1701]

I played both SWG and WoW. WoW never got my attention, I just never got into it for whatever reason and I quit SWG after about a year of playing when all I ended up doing was the same damn missions over and over and over again.

[Krakkken]

I think we are all waiting on a system where levels are a thing of the past. Grinding is non existant. And character balance means that everyone is equal as far as toons go and the skill of the player comes down to who wins and looses. I am so sick and tired of devs making a game where you have to endlessly kill npc's, do countless raids, or just farm a sight to death to get a one in a thousand chance of of an item. We need real world simulations where there is no end game, where there is no forumula or downloadable walkthrough, character development and skills come from a rich and diverse group of skill sets which makes each persons toon an individual instead of a copyable clone, and where the universe and lands are wide open to explore. This is the niche for players like us that hasnt been filled since the original SWG pre nge and pre CU versions.

[_Pax_]

And character balance means that everyone is equal as far as toons go and the skill of the player comes down to who wins and looses.
Go play an FPS, then.

Seriously. If I can't have a CHARACTER who's skills actually matter, and mae that character different from someone ELSE'S character in more ways than "name, and color of hat/boots" ... then it's not an RPG.

[cocoa-jin]

Go play an FPS, then.

Seriously. If I can't have a CHARACTER who's skills actually matter, and mae that character different from someone ELSE'S character in more ways than "name, and color of hat/boots" ... then it's not an RPG.

I think its unfair to assume s/he'd have to play a FPS for player skill to an important factor in engagements.

S/He isnt saying skill sets are meaningless, s/he is saying(I believe) that they shouldnt be so prominent that that one need only spam his hadest hiiting moves over and over while sitting in one place.

There is nothing worse than playing against some one of a higher level and not be able to hit them or damage them just because their rank/level magically makes it harder. Or where your hits do less damage because of their level or because gear only avilable because of their level. So not only do they possess more hitpoints, but your hits magically take less of them...its just gimmicky.

I think he wants it where a torpedo does a torpedo's worth of damage no matter who fires it and who it hits. But if there is some deminsihed damage from the torpedo, it isnt because they have a bigger ship, or higher rank...but because player did something, figured something, or tweaked some aspect of some system to achieve that advanatge....something the other guy could have done also, had he learned, figured it out, or stumbled across it himself. The key is that players use tactics and thought to achieve advanatge that another could have done. No level or rank gimmes.

[Thibor]

I think its unfair to assume s/he'd have to play a FPS for player skill to an important factor in engagements.

S/He isnt saying skill sets are meaningless, s/he is saying(I believe) that they shouldnt be so prominent that that one need only spam his hadest hiiting moves over and over while sitting in one place.

There is nothing worse than playing against some one of a higher level and not be able to hit them or damage them just because their rank/level magically makes it harder. Or where your hits do less damage because of their level or because gear only avilable because of their level. So not only do they possess more hitpoints, but your hits magically take less of them...its just gimmicky.

I think he wants it where a torpedo does a torpedo's worth of damage no matter who fires it and who it hits. But if there is some deminsihed damage from the torpedo, it isnt because they have a bigger ship, or higher rank...but because player did something, figured something, or tweaked some aspect of some system to achieve that advanatge....something the other guy could have done also, had he learned, figured it out, or stumbled across it himself. The key is that players use tactics and thought to achieve advanatge that another could have done. No level or rank gimmes.

So then in your dream MMO game, what definites avatar progression? What's the carrot on the stick that people are going to chase? What's to be gained to improve their avatar?

[Stormnet]

Better ships, achiving rank, and I agree. My torpedo should do the same damage as an admirals torpedos. A torpedo is a torpedo and if you somehow tactically have an advantage I'd like to think we could take on a larger ship if he's caught with his pants down per say...

[cocoa-jin]

So then in your dream MMO game, what definites avatar progression? What's the carrot on the stick that people are going to chase? What's to be gained to improve their avatar?

Self improvement, personal impact on the world at large, faction victory. Encounters bring experience, real and quanitative(EXP). Experience(EXP) brings rank and access to new equipment, real experience brings personal growth, learning, true achievement to be utilized as actual effective strategic and tactical assets.

Customizable skill sets provides a means of developing the ship toward a specific tasking, pressumably a tasking for operations you find enjoyable or for taskings which cater to your own personal strengths and style of doing things. Any bonuses and boosts one acquires through ranking of skill sets would be supplemental. Designed to provide small advantages over stock set ups, but they arent significant enough to live and die by...in the end you have to be effective without the bonus/boost before they can be utilized in any truly competitive manner. Like basketball shoes...buying a pair of fancy shoes wont make you into a 'Baller', but if you have real skills, every perk makes you more of a truly competitive threat.

So a Player 1 doesnt equip pulse phasers because they hit harder, but because he(the player) excels in maneuver combat. He gravitates to a particular ship not because it has uber shields, but because it is fast nimble, a highly agile and maneuverable ship. These cater to his personal skills or to a role he enjoys. Granted this brings with it various advanatges and disadvanatges, but he accepts these...mainly because as a sound captain, he expects to utilize it to its strengths and knows to disengage or avoid encounters that play to his weaknesses.

Trade-offs are key, developing the character/ship is less about uberizing them, and more about tailoring them. Ultimatly success lies within the player, not so much within the character/unit/ship/etc.

Achievement doesnt come from level or gear, it comes from successful utilization of the skills and tactics for which the charcter/units/etc is just a tool. Achievement comes from impacting the gaming world(acquiring terrirotry, affecting borders, securing faction desired assets, etc). Achievement comes from defeating the mind and tactics of the other player, outsmarting opponents(PvE and PvP) and out utilizing the environment to achieve success.

[_Pax_]

I think its unfair to assume s/he'd have to play a FPS for player skill to an important factor in engagements.
S/he didn't just say "important", s/he said that teh CHARACTERS woudl all be exactly equal, and ONLY player skill would differentiate one from another.

To which, I say again: go play an FPS.

There is nothing worse than playing against some one of a higher level and not be able to hit them or damage them just because their rank/level magically makes it harder. Or where your hits do less damage because of their level or because gear only avilable because of their level. So not only do they possess more hitpoints, but your hits magically take less of them...its just gimmicky.
Except, you know, that's pretty darned realistic, at least for melee.

Take a completely untrained guy off the streets, and pit him against a fifth-degree blackbelt in ANY martial art. Guess who's going to win, 999999999 times out of 1000000000, at the very least? The guy who knows HOW to turn the other one into a pretzel.

Or, take two men equally-trained in the use of Roman-era arms and armor. One guy gets a dagger, a linen shirt, linen pants, and some open leather sandals. The other guy gets full Lorica Segmenta, shield, helmet, gladius, and two pilums. Guess who's going to win, 999999999 times out of 1000000000, at the very least? The guy who is better-EQUIPPED to turn the other one into hamburger.

I think he wants it where a torpedo does a torpedo's worth of damage no matter who fires it and who it hits.
Except, of course, if he's in an Oberth (fitted with a single Photon torpedo launcher) and I cruise by in a Sovereign (fited with half a dozen Quantum torpedo launchers) ...? Sorry, I should be able to deal more torpedo damage, more often, than he can.

But if there is some deminsihed damage from the torpedo, it isnt because they have a bigger ship, or higher rank...but because player did something, figured something, or tweaked some aspect of some system to achieve that advanatge....something the other guy could have done also, had he learned, figured it out, or stumbled across it himself. The key is that players use tactics and thought to achieve advanatge that another could have done. No level or rank gimmes.
Tactics begins long before you reach the battlefield.

And bigger ships probably have better shielding systems.



Self improvement, personal impact on the world at large, [...]
.... and financial ruin for Cryptic.

No, seriously. The vast majority of the potential audience for STO would not pay money for something like that.

[thefreshjedi]

S/he didn't just say "important", s/he said that teh CHARACTERS woudl all be exactly equal, and ONLY player skill would differentiate one from another.

To which, I say again: go play an FPS.


Except, you know, that's pretty darned realistic, at least for melee.

Take a completely untrained guy off the streets, and pit him against a fifth-degree blackbelt in ANY martial art. Guess who's going to win, 999999999 times out of 1000000000, at the very least? The guy who knows HOW to turn the other one into a pretzel.

Or, take two men equally-trained in the use of Roman-era arms and armor. One guy gets a dagger, a linen shirt, linen pants, and some open leather sandals. The other guy gets full Lorica Segmenta, shield, helmet, gladius, and two pilums. Guess who's going to win, 999999999 times out of 1000000000, at the very least? The guy who is better-EQUIPPED to turn the other one into hamburger.


Except, of course, if he's in an Oberth (fitted with a single Photon torpedo launcher) and I cruise by in a Sovereign (fited with half a dozen Quantum torpedo launchers) ...? Sorry, I should be able to deal more torpedo damage, more often, than he can.


Tactics begins long before you reach the battlefield.

And bigger ships probably have better shielding systems.




.... and financial ruin for Cryptic.

No, seriously. The vast majority of the potential audience for STO would not pay money for something like that.


I agree with almost everything you said except this small part:

QFE

"Or, take two men equally-trained in the use of Roman-era arms and armor. One guy gets a dagger, a linen shirt, linen pants, and some open leather sandals. The other guy gets full Lorica Segmenta, shield, helmet, gladius, and two pilums. Guess who's going to win, 999999999 times out of 1000000000, at the very least? The guy who is better-EQUIPPED to turn the other one into hamburger."

Don't forget about Maximus, he stood against well equiped gladiators, heavily armed compared to his light armor and mediocre equipment and beat the crap out of them. I guess Maximus would have been that .00000001% of the equasion. Except that I think you're exaggerating a tad. I think the reality is that anyone who is better trained at anything stands a significant chance depending on their preparation, awareness, motivation, and need for survival.

Other than that, I agree... I don't want a half-assed SEMI-RP / Fps experience, no thanks.

-avery

[cocoa-jin]

Let the skill which determines if someone lands a hit come from the player...and not so much from the character and its artifically applied skill sets.

Let skill sets determine what is used(styles, weapons, etc), but let the actual application come from the player.

Its understandable that new ships or discoveries may have some new tech that improves something like shields, though I'd rather see bigger ships have shields that generally absorbs more damage(like more hit points), but all things being equal a torp does mainly the same damage to his shields(as energy/damage delivered) as it does do a smaller ship using comparable shield tech.

Now, I cant accept there being tech or tweaks that allow shields to be better resistant to certain energies/weapon types...or even more resistant across the board, but these should be minor perks. So instead of recieving 100 damage points, maybe 90-95 hit points to shields. The goal is to supplement the player's skills, style and tactics.


Lastly, strategy happens before you meet in the field, tactics are actions taken in the heat of the battle. Strategy is great, but the best laid plans fall apart when you meet the enemy...the great commanders are those who can adapt, respond, re-act and pro-act on the field of battle...thats tactics. Those who respond the best tactically generally prepare and take experiences from the past that prepare them for battle, but its the actual utilization of them at the moment that counts. That means skill, intelligence, situtational awareness and improv use of the environement to achieve victory.

The Strategy(on a personal level) is in the set-up of the ship, the combat philosophy you bring into the fight, th einitial set-up or entry into the conflict...but tactics is the use of the ship and the surroundings during the battle....that only comes from the captain, the player....thats what I'd like to encourage.

Weither or not this concept leads to failure is yet to be seen.

[_Pax_]

Don't forget about Maximus,[...]
You're talking about a MOVIE scene, right?

Hollywood doesn't reflect reality. Rarely even close. :D





Let the skill which determines if someone lands a hit come from the player...and not so much from the character and its artifically applied skill sets.

Let skill sets determine what is used(styles, weapons, etc), but let the actual application come from the player.
I say again ... go play an FPS. I might recommend Enemy Territory: Quake Wars: different classes have different equipment (skillset determining styles and weapons), but actually hitting is still incumbant upon player skill.

[Zepath]

Go play an FPS, then.

Seriously. If I can't have a CHARACTER who's skills actually matter, and mae that character different from someone ELSE'S character in more ways than "name, and color of hat/boots" ... then it's not an RPG.

BOOM!

Right on the money Pax.

[thefreshjedi]

You're talking about a MOVIE scene, right?

Hollywood doesn't reflect reality. Rarely even close. :D


I say again ... go play an FPS. I might recommend Enemy Territory: Quake Wars: different classes have different equipment (skillset determining styles and weapons), but actually hitting is still incumbant upon player skill.

No, I agree, but Maximus Decimus Aureleous was not a real person in history either. He was a homogenization of different people from different eras that were coined to represent Maximus Aurelous in the Film.

The thing that I'm hinging upon was that there were victors in the Gladitorial games that were not very well equiped on purpose, because the Romans were notorius for sending sheep to slaughter, and many gladiators that were poorly trained, armed with poor equipment failed. Some were not even Gladiators at all, but slaves, criminals, political prisoners, or orther Government Dissenters that were tossed into the fray with little more than a wrought iron sword to protect themselves with. Those that were at least substantially trained had a better chance at winning the match as long as they were to keep their wits about them, and would eventually move on to other combat, or die in the arena.

My point was that it is still possilbe to beat a superior foe, provided you have the right training to do so. The tools don't make the craftsman... so-to-speak.

Footnote to history: Commonus was actually strangled by a personal trainer in his bath according to some historical accounts and wikipedia. But obviously Commonus was deeply hated by the Romans since they deliberately sabotaged and destroyed most of his efficacies and other historical artifacts from that period.

-avery

[inXi]

Well, this is why I was talking about the "skill range". Or skill radius. Or whatever.

In other words, the range in which a player can change the turn of events outside of his pre-defined parameters. Basically, a level 50 warrior would always defeat a level 5 warrior. But if their level sare 25 and 30 that is not necessarily so and it should NOT be dependent on in-between pre-final-build cycles like it's in WoW and Diablo and etc. where your character basically doesn't exist until he hits level 60/70/80. Characters should be balanced in the middle as well as at the end and the beginning.

Otherwise, what's the point of char X ever attacking char X+? None. He will never win. No incentive. And all battles are unfair. Boring.

[cocoa-jin]

I say again ... go play an FPS. I might recommend Enemy Territory: Quake Wars: different classes have different equipment (skillset determining styles and weapons), but actually hitting is still incumbant upon player skill.

Im saying we could have that with a Trek MMO. Even if STO never goes that route, there was nothing preventing STO from being player skilled based. But to tell me to go some place else is a bit dismissive and presents no argument with respect to the concept Im presenting. Yeah I could go play Quake Wars, but its not Trek, I could suggest you play WoW, but that would be pretty pointless too...its only purpose being an attempt to persuade the arguement to leave than deal it.

[LordDave]

*sigh*

STO will be ship gear, captain and BO skill based. BOs will have a limited number of skills that augment the captain's skills in battle. This means that, for ship battles anyway, it's not the captain with the highest level, it's the captain with the best crew and ship. Even if the ship is the same, it's the captain with the best crew and the captain who has put together a winning set of BO skills.
Ships of exact technical specifications will rely soley on the skills of the captains and the BOs.

Also, WoW is stat based, just like STO will be. A level 50 is harder to kill then a level 5 because a level 50 has more armor (shields) and more health (hull plating). Strip him naked and he's not nearly as tough. AND even fully armored, a level 70 can die from enough lvl 15s. It just requires about 30.
Same with STO.
A tier 1 science ship is no match for a tier 4 escort.
BUT 10 tier 1 science ships could probably blow up a tier 4 escort.

[_Pax_]

Im saying we could have that with a Trek MMO.
For it to be an RPG, the character's skills must matter, decisively ... not the player's.

[cocoa-jin]

For it to be an RPG, the character's skills must matter, decisively ... not the player's.

I dont see how RPG(especially for a MMO game) requires skills to matter in the way i which you imply. Im not saying skills shouldnt count, Im just saying they shouldnt over-shadow intellect and actual skill. One can role play a character, choose/train and make use of skill sets/attributes pertinent to the character being RPed and still have one's personal ability to make use of those skill sets/attributes be the major determinator of their success.

[cocoa-jin]

*sigh*

STO will be ship gear, captain and BO skill based. BOs will have a limited number of skills that augment the captain's skills in battle. This means that, for ship battles anyway, it's not the captain with the highest level, it's the captain with the best crew and ship. Even if the ship is the same, it's the captain with the best crew and the captain who has put together a winning set of BO skills.
Ships of exact technical specifications will rely soley on the skills of the captains and the BOs.

Also, WoW is stat based, just like STO will be. A level 50 is harder to kill then a level 5 because a level 50 has more armor (shields) and more health (hull plating). Strip him naked and he's not nearly as tough. AND even fully armored, a level 70 can die from enough lvl 15s. It just requires about 30.
Same with STO.
A tier 1 science ship is no match for a tier 4 escort.
BUT 10 tier 1 science ships could probably blow up a tier 4 escort.

For some of us, those are some of same old, non-innovative design models we are tired of seeing recycled over and over within MMOs. I can accept the general concept of improvements through character progression, but why must a rank and BOs have such a artifically significant impact.

The crew certainly makes a significant impavt on how well a ship operates, but lets also acknowledge the importance of the captain/player of utilizing and coordinating the talents of his crew and commanding the vessel into advantageous positions, maneuvers and use of environement in order to make tactical use of his crew.

[_Pax_]

The whole point of Role-playing is to be someone you are not. Character should trump player, in as many ways as possible.

[cocoa-jin]

You are someone you arent...but you still need make use of your non-self effectivly and tactically. Letting the character trump the player makes more sense for single player games, but when others are involved, the player its better off trumping the character.

If we are going to let specs/stats/skill sets dominate the game play, we might as well be playing with STO Poke'Mon card style play or "Play I Declare War"...thats only a couple steps below typical MMO models.

[7of9]

STO won't have much innovations, because it remains a plain MMORPG.
All such games are pretty all the same, give one has better graphic, or better quests, better skill system,.. etc etc.

The revolution came from MMO itself. Changing from solo game where we could pause the game, save it, re-load it and try different actions over and over all by ourself. MMO introduced persistent world which brought a brand new way of playing.

Honnestly I'm not sure what the next revolution will be. I was hoping Wii would bring more, but the graphics suxx, same for the precision of the controls (probably due to making lower price game would hit more homes). Maybe a next generation with full jacket or suit with precision sensors, higher graphics, combined with MMO, would be get us into a next level of game.

Just my 2 cent view.

[renderpix]

I think until someone really wants to risk years of development in an untested design that even may be revolutionary the MMO will remain the same except for the skin deep aspect. Skin deep can be everything if your lead to believe that what’s underneath is different. Skin deep eye candy gets our attention everytime but just our attention not out commitment. I guess it's a guy think for me :o

Most of us can see how an MMO could be a success with a new different design. I wish most of us had the money to dev an MMO that would be different and mold breaking. But we don’t and just have to watch others do it.

And even if millions were dropped into you lap with a staff of devs to command after deciding a route in todays market and the needs to make you cash retrun what would you have...... another typical MMO inspired by theme for the sake of not loosing what you have invested. OMG I really hope this changes someday soon but it will never happen unless MMOers as a group demand something different. Look at us we can't agree on anything, not even the background color here would invite a unanimous decision. But what we do as a whole is play so they keep giving us what they do even tho we say we want more.

I hope that STO has a really thick skin and a variety of things to wrap it in so we get the newness and variety we think we are getting.

Kinda like Pizza, they have all the same things on’em some taste ok, some are crap and some you just can’t get enough of even tho you can get tired of it easily. :p

I’m hoping for a good Pizza with the best toppings and a really great sauce. Thin crust please. :D

[_Pax_]

Letting the character trump the player makes more sense for single player games, but when others are involved, the player its better off trumping the character.
Thirty years of playing RPGs in one form or another points directly OPPOSITE what you just said.

If we are going to let specs/stats/skill sets dominate the game play, we might as well be playing with STO Poke'Mon card style play or "Play I Declare War"...thats only a couple steps below typical MMO models.

Hyperbole ... for the LOSE.:rolleyes:

[Korrific]

You are someone you arent...but you still need make use of your non-self effectivly and tactically. Letting the character trump the player makes more sense for single player games, but when others are involved, the player its better off trumping the character.

Thirty years of playing RPGs in one form or another points directly OPPOSITE what you just said.
Ah, so that's why you two are talking past each other on this issue - computer gamer vs. pencil-and-paper RPGer.

Don't forget, _Pax_, that computer games offer a lot more immediate character-environment interactivity than the old-style 3d6 or d20 games you and I used to play. It only makes sense for folks to want gameplay to incorporate that interactivity and reward clever use of it - whether it's in combat or in "puzzle" play - rather than just rolling against a skill to overcome obstacles.

As for cocoa-jin, we already know there will be a skill system in place, and I, for one, expect it to be useful. While I agree that, fundamentally, a torpedo is a torpedo regardless of rank, I still want my Tactical officer to be able to eke out some beyond-spec performance from my weapons and shields.

[inXi]

Did everyone just skip over my post? You guys get carried away in your wars too much.

[_Pax_]

Did everyone just skip over my post? You guys get carried away in your wars too much.

I'm sorry, did we not make the Unique and Special Snowflake the proper center of our universe, like we were supposed to? :rolleyes:

[inXi]

I'm sorry, did we not make the Unique and Special Snowflake the proper center of our universe, like we were supposed to? :rolleyes:I offered a compromise. I at least wouldn't mind hearing what's wrong with it, since we have the skill camp and the RPG camp, and the answer may be somewhere in the middle... ;)

[cocoa-jin]

Thirty years of playing RPGs in one form or another points directly OPPOSITE what you just said.

The Big three automakers felt the same way about cars.



As for cocoa-jin, we already know there will be a skill system in place, and I, for one, expect it to be useful. While I agree that, fundamentally, a torpedo is a torpedo regardless of rank, I still want my Tactical officer to be able to eke out some beyond-spec performance from my weapons and shields.

Agreed, but not so much that it over-shadows actual player skills. A 5-10% increase in torp yield or shield output is significant, yet not so battle altering that it dictates the battle. If the player cant get into a firing position to make use of the torps or if he doesnt prioritize the best system or shield arc to hit , then the bonus doesnt mean much.

In the end it should be skillful use of system that deterimines success...not the stats of the system itself.


I offered a compromise. I at least wouldn't mind hearing what's wrong with it, since we have the skill camp and the RPG camp, and the answer may be somewhere in the middle... ;)

I think it certainly is some where in the middle. Im not trying to eliminate stats/specs...just minimize their impact on their overall outcome. Instead, I'm trying to elevate skills to a respectable and worthy position as a major contributor to success.

I hate the idea my defeat being given to my opponent almost by defualt. I want to earn my success and failures through my own actions.

[Blodveard]

STO has (or I hope not "had" ) the opportunity to be truly a unique MMO if it allowed players to main various stations on the same ship.

Some have said, "No one would want to be a Science Officer, or a Navigation Officer, etc.." This of course bares false considering the fact that many, many players were content to play Dancers and Musicians, or Vendors in Star Wars Galaxies.

The difficulty for Cryptic would have been to develop enough situations for the various officers to be occupied in each mission. However, if Cryptic managed to pull this off, Star Trek Online would truly be ground breaking!!

[_Pax_]

It's not that no-one woudl ant to be any of those, Blodveard. It's that each such position would require developing an ENTIRE MMO, centered justa round them.

For most missions, half or more of a ship's crew would just be sitting around, with their thumbs up their asses, doing nothing.

Hoping that any company could create enough content that gave EVERYone something meaningful and entertaining to do, which owuld then carry a crew from tutorial to endgame without gaps or the need to repeat anything ... is serious pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking.

[Korrific]

In the end it should be skillful use of system that deterimines success...not the stats of the system itself.
I don't think there's a happy medium here, but I'll point out one thing. Since stats are part of the system, thoughtful and creative stat/skill/gear planning is a "skillful use of the system." It's as much a game to experiment with odd "builds," or break the current fotm, as it is to out-tacticize your opponent. I really don't think it needs to be "one or the other," but I don't know that there's a balance point that would satisfy everyone.

But, yeah, largely I'd agree that fighting in MMOs often devolves into boring slugfests where your only purpose is to give your opponent better than you get. I find it hard to get into DPS or "tank" classes for exactly that reason. On a related note, I also get bored with non-dps, non-tank classes where the skills are structured such that what you should do next is a no-brainer (pure "healers" come to mind, but I'm also in a slump right now with my LOTRO Captain).

I got spoiled by CoH, where you can make characters that can bring several qualitatively different tools to bear - and it's up to you, the player, to decide when and how to use those tools. I also love being able to make characters that go against their "class" and still be effective (e.g. "blappers" and "scrankers" and such - even had a Stalker who could off-tank). I'd love to see that sort of diversity in whatever skill sets (or ship configurations) we're getting.

[cocoa-jin]

I don't think there's a happy medium here, but I'll point out one thing. Since stats are part of the system, thoughtful and creative stat/skill/gear planning is a "skillful use of the system." It's as much a game to experiment with odd "builds," or break the current fotm, as it is to out-tacticize your opponent. I really don't think it needs to be "one or the other," but I don't know that there's a balance point that would satisfy everyone.

But, yeah, largely I'd agree that fighting in MMOs often devolves into boring slugfests where your only purpose is to give your opponent better than you get. I find it hard to get into DPS or "tank" classes for exactly that reason. On a related note, I also get bored with non-dps, non-tank classes where the skills are structured such that what you should do next is a no-brainer (pure "healers" come to mind, but I'm also in a slump right now with my LOTRO Captain).

I got spoiled by CoH, where you can make characters that can bring several qualitatively different tools to bear - and it's up to you, the player, to decide when and how to use those tools. I also love being able to make characters that go against their "class" and still be effective (e.g. "blappers" and "scrankers" and such - even had a Stalker who could off-tank). I'd love to see that sort of diversity in whatever skill sets (or ship configurations) we're getting.

I think we can find the happy medium by embaracing the ability to choose and set skils in a "skillful" manner like you said, but deminishing their impact relative to typical MMOs. So they create individuality and distinction, etc. They provide color and flavor for the charcter...but player skill reigns supreme. These chosen skill sets and attributes will be most valuable for opponenets with comparable ship class and player skills who go head to head. Their fight will come down to makes the best choices with the unique attributes they have, who plays most their strengths and who makes the first or most mistakes. Every little percentage point and its tactical utilization will count tremendously as they slug it out blow for blow.

[AchillesHeel]

I have to think it's possible to create a game system that allows a skilled player to utilize his or her skill to advantage, while also providing assistance to players in areas of the game they find challenging (and I think every player should be challenged by something in the game - it is a game, after all). Star Trek is (yet again, imo) almost the perfect property in which to create such a game, because of its balance of shipboard action and ground action, and its core ethic of cooperative crisis resolution.

[cocoa-jin]

I have to think it's possible to create a game system that allows a skilled player to utilize his or her skill to advantage, while also providing assistance to players in areas of the game they find challenging (and I think every player should be challenged by something in the game - it is a game, after all). Star Trek is (yet again, imo) almost the perfect property in which to create such a game, because of its balance of shipboard action and ground action, and its core ethic of cooperative crisis resolution.

I can see BOs and such being much more influential in PvE and Quests(especially because they are scripted), etc. But PvP needs to be more player skill oriented...with BOs and other rank/spec/stat/skill set based items/features being deminsihed in their importance compared to skillful and tactical use of the ship's attributes during encounters.

[Terra_Blade]

For it to be an RPG, the character's skills must matter, decisively ... not the player's.

Why is that? Even in traditional mmo games it is obvious when you get a player who does not know how to play his/her toon right. That in itself is skill of the player and not the toon.

If i've been reading all the information out there on this game and how the developers want it to play I think both sides may end up happy...sort of. It feels more like that a ship is a ship, and every ship is the same, but how you outfit that ship determines what it can do. Then you have better ships, who are newer and with better technology, that means they can do more, but you take two of the same class of ships and put them side by side with no equipment and you still have a ship.

Then you have tech, this supplements your ships role interior something more defined and distinct. So someone who likes to play a more healing role of a scientist ship might outfit it with more medbays and such while another might outfit it more for reconnaissance. So the cutout ship, with the same specs, can behave very differently in a fight depending on what it has for tech.

Next layer in is the BO system. From what I get it seems that your BO squad gets picked for their own skills and abilities so that your ship gets the powers it needs. You get BO by ranking up or exploring right? So the those who explore more will probably have a more varied BO crew then the ones who spend all their time in the neutral zone. So the tech sets out the role, and the BOs strengthen it while backing up the captain.

After that you got the main attraction, the avatar itself. I think it will be like a BO, but player driven. Thus as you rank up you get access to more abilities. So again one combat officer could specialize in a certain play style, such as hit and run. So everything, the BO, the tech, and the ship all support this play style. But say another likes to slug it out. Same thing.

So in the end, to make a WOW analogy again, its like having two tanks who wear the same armor. (come to think of it endgame they usually do) But it comes down to the enchantments (tech), their talent specialization (BO), and their weapons (usually player choice so Avatar). Maybe not a perfect analogy but good enough.

So two ships of the same class could in theory be at a level playing field. But the one who knows his/her ship and outfitted it to do what they want will prevail. Thus you get the reduction in importance on level like some want, while making it still character driven like others want. Did that make any sense?

[inXi]

Even in traditional mmo games it is obvious when you get a player who does not know how to play his/her toon right. That in itself is skill of the player and not the toon.More like, guy A is new (or just a person who can't play well in general) guy B is not. There really isn't anything in between. There isn't a guy C who players better than guy A but worse than B, really isn't.
There is no learning curve aka Counter Strike or something. Play for a bit, read some junk, and voila, you can play your character well. At the highest level, most people are of that sort, anyway. That's the problem with skills in RPG's. Cookie cutter. It kills them. The best skillset, talent tree, order of buttons to click is already known and tried and if you dare do something else, 90% of the time you're going to make something deficient, and since in MMO's skill doesn't matter, you will loose to someone who just did a cookie cutter.

Ever heard "paladins are OP"? That's what it means. Paladins, assuming they don't mess around, will win, 100% of the time, and "messing around" or "being new to the game" doesn't count as a learning curve.

On the other hand, there really isn't anything you can read about how to play CS better. And while there are plenty of guides for, say, an RTS like StarCraft, you still need to basically train your macro-micro skills and speed and etc...

In MMORPG's, you don't see that.

So in the end, to make a WOW analogy again, its like having two tanks who wear the same armor. (come to think of it endgame they usually do) But it comes down to the enchantments (tech), their talent specialization (BO), and their weapons (usually player choice so Avatar). Maybe not a perfect analogy but good enough.There is no skill anywhere in this paragraph.

It's all about which one of you read more cookie cutter guides.

[revenantsoul]

I'm just desperate for something different at this point. I have played many mmo's and I stuck with world of warcraft the longest but I need something new. I want a new game so badly I am going to buy the first thing that comes out if it looks halfway decent. Champions was that game until it got pushed back 2 months. i am even considering giving age of conan another try since their "relaunch" and giving people 2 weeks for free to see if they will like the improvements and get people back. They wronged me so much though that i am fighting that urge even though it's free.

Man, I totally feel your pain. I am so desperate for a new GOOD mmo to come out I can't even think about going back to WoW. I thought about giving AoC a try and even flirted with going back to SWG a bit, but I am going to hold out a bit longer and see how CO turns out.

[Terra_Blade]

There is no skill anywhere in this paragraph.

It's all about which one of you read more cookie cutter guides.

*Sighs* I know, silly me, I forget that there are people who don't play a game for fun but to win. Maybe because i'm a woman. Don't know about you but I build my toons the way I want them to play, not because that is what other people say makes the 'best' character.

As for the point about high end players just being good, well that isn't the case. In the words of an anime character, "The most powerful spell means nothing if you don't know when or where to use it." Same for anything in these kinds of games. Yes you may have that great ability your BO gives you, but do you know the best place to use it? IT seems a lot of the time people don't. Skill, its more then an itchy trigger finger.

[Telinous]

*Sighs* I know, silly me, I forget that there are people who don't play a game for fun but to win. Maybe because i'm a woman. Don't know about you but I build my toons the way I want them to play, not because that is what other people say makes the 'best' character.

As for the point about high end players just being good, well that isn't the case. In the words of an anime character, "The most powerful spell means nothing if you don't know when or where to use it." Same for anything in these kinds of games. Yes you may have that great ability your BO gives you, but do you know the best place to use it? IT seems a lot of the time people don't. Skill, its more then an itchy trigger finger.

Yeah I would agree with that point of view as well, I have never been one to follow the proven paths, I like to play things my way, the problem is most MMOs do not accept that. infact of all the MMOs I have tried thus far, only EVE-Online was able to accomodate that play style and even then in a limited degree. Mostly I hope this game has several options for play style, so that one day I could rely on brute strength to win a fight, another sharp eyes to scout a asteriod field, and yet another where tact plays heavily in the conversation which can go anyway. Most of all I just hope they make it where there is no "right" answer to any of the quests/missions/battle systems in the game but are many diffrent paths to victory.