f13.net

Surprise = none.

Close in two years, people wonder why, dev team says they learned some valuable lessons about making a new game and the experience will serve them well on the next one, team cranks out another diku... fucking yawn.

Make. Something. Different.

This is going to flop. Hard.

I presume there's no PvP?

The article said they plan on having various forms of consensual PvP.

I presume there's no PvP?

Like Stargate, this would've been an awesome franchise for squad instanced combat.  Every planetary away mission could be a new zone.  Oh wells.

I got the impression the SG-1 game was looking something like that, in fact, but frankly all I've heard is pretty mcuh early-design hand-waving about all the coolness, and some basic artwork.

I'm hoping it'll be that twitchy RPG PvP-fest that schlid so desperately needs, because it's an IP that works for it really well.

Which means it'll probably be all PvE with some PvP thrown in at the last minute.

It doesn't matter when it launches, 08. 09, 10... it will be a failure.

Innovation is for risk-takers, and risk-takers don't generally get massive 40-year-old licenses to play with.

I'm only playing if the ship elevators make that nifty open/close sound…

Will there be any hairdressing ships and dancing ships that other ships need to watch dance to restore their shields? 

Try to convince a newbie/startup developer that making games is hard.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner--and the VC's are even harder to convince--therefore more willing to listen to crazy proposals and fund them.

I can't really imagine a scenario that would create the right conditions for this game to be a success.  I don't know if game play really matters for the people who want this game.  They just want to run around declaring allegiance to Starfleet, and more power to 'em.  But I also can't imagine that the overlap of those kinds of fans with people who are MMO players is very high.  100k?  Less?  In order for the right kind of word of mouth that would attract more demographics, they'd have to have a game that was dramatically appealing to MMO fans, and it appears they won't.  They spent how long in 'pre-production?'  This is what they came up with?  WoW in space?  Well, maybe by the time this game comes out in 2025 we won't need to pretend to fly around in spaceships anymore.

Star Trek Online is the kind of game Raph should make. Unlike Star Wars, Star Trek is not action-centric. I can see a lot of social elements, living on the same ship, negotiating trade agreements and things like that.

It sounds like STO, the way it is being produced, would be much better off as an MMO X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter.

Isn't "Wee little" a redundancy?

;)

I completely agree with Margalis on the Trek stuff. These are great insights, particularly on the combat side. That's always been Trek's sorta-weak portion, except maybe Dominion-era DS9. There's just too much tech for them to so ignore how it could be used in four dimensional battles (they're so scared to use time-enhanced weapons when they so easily could). And ground combat? Please. You've either got unintuitive "which way is this pointing?" phasers, or the First Contact era Buck Rogers props. It's never been the point of the show to be all guns and war, which I suppose is why they're so inconsistent at it. But it doesn't make it easy for Perpetual either. Here you've got an IP where you literally do hit auto attack and watch.

Target their engines
Aye aye captain
Ready Room meeting
Sir, should we try hailing them again
There is only a 0.062 chance they'll respond sir
Captain, we just lost the forward shield to their 411th shot
Number One, move the civilians out of 10 Forward
...
<ten minutes and a commercial break later>
Sir, we're getting a response to our surrender
Good, now we can save that cat from the hole on Daikatania IV.

Nerf the Q race.  Take away that damn "I Win" button of theirs.

Make. Something. Different.

Remember that episode where Kirk, Bones, Spock, Sulu, and Scotty, flew their pack of ships to lower Neutral Zone, and camped some Romulans? Scotty forgot to repair, so the group broke up early. One of my favorites.

Give me a cross between Traveller, Omnitrends Universe (complete with duping bug ftw!), and Elite. Maybe mix in some squad based loving ala X-Com. No. GODDAMNED. LEVELS.

Nerdy question.  If time-travel is as easy as it appears to be in Trek, how does the universe ever make any sense at all?

So why isn't every shmuck with a spaceship flying a couple laps around the sun and screwing up the space-time continuum?

I believe the games were called Star Fleet Command.  It was pretty cool, I wonder if they ever got the galactic war working.

I played that game on teletype before monitors were commonplace.  Sadly, I think that is as good as Star Trek games are likely to ever get.

Not working in this industry - I truely wonder - what kind of responses they think they must have gathered in their market research in assessing the attractiveness of this game design.

Junk.

As long as it is Wow with ray guns.

and 7 of 9.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/Star_Trek_text_game.png/425px-Star_Trek_text_game.png)

http://www.cactus.org/~nystrom/startrek.html

Fuck, this thread title is funny.

This is why I lolled at this thread. (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=11065.0)

Yeah, it does not make me any more confident, its a shame to, this is one IP i was waiting for to be MMO'ized. ( I know i know, IPs make bad MMO's , we had this conversation)

IMO, phaser combat is just too 'sterile'; imagine the implementation for ground combat mechanics, add to the fact that they have to have space battle mechanic makes me wonder if they are going to go for an 'away team' style of ground play, ala Granado Espada / Sword of the New World party of 3.

Me too, I still wonder why no one ever asked why we were using so much paper.

Entry 4.0 - "Polling the Crew"
Stardate 61330.6 (November 12th, 2007)

Welcome back to the STO DevLog, our regular look into the development of Star Trek Online, the only game that dares to reveal what happens when good tribbles go bad!

This month we thought it would be fun to peer into the minds of the STO team, to find out what they think about Star Trek. Surveys were sent out, and answers were sent in... by the crate load. Here's just a small sampling of we like to call:

Polling the Crew: Selected Reponses from the STO Team Survey

Which of Star Trek's alien races do you most identify with?

We got a wide variety of responses to this question:

    "Those creatures in TNG that only speak in binary."

    "Antedeans. Fish-like, that's me."
    Can't We All Relate to these Guys?

    "Cardassians. I totally dig potentially redeemable villains."

    "The Romulans. They're mysterious, politically-driven, mischievous and cunning. Of course, as they appear on TNG, they're mostly militant jerks, but the fact that the series has focused on brewing internal debates shows they have redeeming characteristics."

    "I like the Andorians. They're blue, they're cool, and they have fricking antenna on their heads."

Our favorite warrior race got a lot of love, of course:

    "Klingons, they're ruff and gruff and their women have the most amazing pair of assets."

    "Klingon. I've always found the open machismo of their culture interesting."

    "Klingons. Sometimes I get a little out of control, too......"

Goddamnit. I hate trekkies. They are possibly my least favorite nerd deviant subset. We're talking lower than furry here.

Yes, really.

Are there even any Trekkies left? I thought Voyager killed them off, and then Enterprise raped their corpses...

We're in hiding, waiting for J. J. Abrams to save us.

Yes, really.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Well looks like you get to have some joy today.

Report: Perpetual Entertainment Liquidating Assets (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=16366)

Gravity Discloses Liquidation of Perpetual Entertainment, Inc. (http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1313310/000136231007003149/c71677e6vk.html)

Gamasutra should fact-check some more. (http://razorwire.warcry.com/news/view/79286-Report-Gamasutra-Jumping-To-Conclusions-About-Perpetual-Entertainment)

This is non-news.

The date on which Gravity stated the notice was sent, October 10th, is the same day that Perpetual announced that its PC MMORPG Gods and Heroes: Rome Rising would be put on hold indefinitely.

Star Trek would really benefit from a back to basics Ron Moore-style BSG reboot (heck, even Moore could do it, he's gonna be free in a year) but from what I've read Abrams is bending over backwards trying to fit a "reboot-style" movie into canon, which will serve only to piss off literally everyone.

[UPDATE: Perpetual's third-party PR contacts have indicated to Gamasutra that they are no longer representing the San Francisco firm, and can therefore offer no input into these claims.]

Not entirely. Read through the first three paragraphs carefully. The Gamasutra article frames it as if the company is being shut down and liquidated, as if it was a new development. Instead, it's just an SEC filing that reflects what already occurred (consignment of PE, Inc. to PE, LLC. for liquidation of assets). It fails to mention things like how the development of Star Trek is essentially unaffected by this development.

It's bad reporting through the omission of information, but then, crappy journalism in the gaming press? NEVAR!!  :oh_i_see:

Actually, I think Gamasutra does think Perpetual is being shut down in addition to the prior action relating to G&H. They're pretty specific about it, though their final paragraph is implying STO is an open question.

In the context of the latest "DevLog" though, does anyone here think there's active activity on STO? And I put "DevLog" in quotes for a specific reason.

In the context of the latest "DevLog" though, does anyone here think there's active activity on STO? And I put "DevLog" in quotes for a specific reason.

My guess is Perpetual as a company is done and they're waiting either for 2008 or some grace period after G&H was canned to make the claim.

Awesome. That means they're dead wrong and haven't done any fact-checking. There's active development. Go go gadget anonymous inside sources!

Update: Shacknews has receieved a considerable amount of new information regarding today's Perpetual news from a source close to the company, who requested to remain anonymous. Some information was gleaned from a letter detailing various changes to the company and Star Trek Online, which was recently distributed to all Perpetual employees.

Perpetual has been acquired by new ownership, reportedly a media company looking to use Star Trek Online to make its first major inroads into the video game market. Along with the acquisition comes a partial retargeting of Star Trek Online to what our source describes as a "more casual" experience, one which may potentially eschew subscription fees in favor of the practice of charging real money for optional in-game items, a practice popularized by various Korean MMOs.

Though there do not appear to have been any significant layoffs with the change in management, a number of Perpetual employees have allegedly left the company due to a dissatisfaction with the new direction the game is said to be taking.

I think the space-based sub-genre of MMOGs is cursed to shite development and flipflopping of company resources.

reportedly a media company looking to use Star Trek Online to make its first major inroads into the video game market.

(http://will.incorrige.us/facepalm/picard.jpeg)

and is for an audience that has little to do with the era in which STO was to be set

[edit] I'm actually a newb to Star Trek, but I really don't understand why so many think it's declined. I wouldn't mind more of it on TV right now. TNG had great characters, but damn, the show itself was heavily serialized and barely went anywhere. I like the movies however. Enterprise, otoh, had a decent amount of continuity (one story arc took up an entire season almost), a funny as shit Andorian side character, and the hottest Trek babe to date. And DS9 was better than anything else Trek.

I didn't know it was supposed to be based on the Next Generation. From the first time I heard about it, saw concept art, etc.., they had a post DS9 universe in mind. With Bajoran Starfleet officers, those grey uniforms, things like that..

[edit] I'm actually a newb to Star Trek, but I really don't understand why so many think it's declined. I wouldn't mind more of it on TV right now. TNG had great characters, but damn, the show itself was heavily serialized and barely went anywhere. I like the movies however. Enterprise, otoh, had a decent amount of continuity (one story arc took up an entire season almost), a funny as shit Andorian side character, and the hottest Trek babe to date. And DS9 was better than anything else Trek.

Yeah, I know of him well. Re-Animator is one of my favorite flicks.

We're in hiding, waiting for J. J. Abrams to save us.

They ditched the writers responsible for the Vampire Space Nazis but it was too late to save the show. It's a shame really. The new team seemed to be pretty good.

They should have made THAT the series.

It took me a long time to write this response, but for the one geek that gets it... qu'

And sorry to be rude, but you're crazy to not like DS9. Besides Quark and the little cameos from Combs, Chief O'Brien is a kickass character... Really good actor there (especially the Syndicate/Donnie Brasco episode). But the real reason to watch that show is Gul Dukat. I'm not kidding when I say he's one of the best sci-fi villains ever. And definitely the best Star Trek one. Khan can suck his scaly nuts.

DS9 was the best ST series imo.  The characters on the show probably developed more then the ones on all the other series.  The fact that it was on a space station pretty much insured that, most of the time it was the character interactions that was the story.

I agree on Gul-dukat.  He was a great consistent villain for the show.  How can you forget about Garak though? ;)  The cast overall was pretty good.  I think the only character that really annoyed me on that show was Odo, although I like the actor.

It took me a long time to write this response, but for the one geek that gets it... qu'

Here's your actual news (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50065).


Also job openings (http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/bus/490201074.html).

There was some crazy financial news recently for Perpetual, the publisher of long-in-development Star Trek Onine. The practical upshot is that the company is in new hands, and, according to Shacknews' source, they're taking the game in a new, more casual direction.

That doesn't necessarily mean you'll have to match three dilithium crystals to engage your warp drive, but there is a possibility the game may shed subscription fees in favor of asking players to pay real-world cash for in-game items.

Perhaps this move is for the best though. With a new Trek film still a ways off and no versions of the series getting new TV episodes, we'd imagine that the place on the Venn diagram where hardcore gamers and Trek fans intersect is getting smaller every day.

From the pen (keyboard) of Daron Stinnett, for your consideration.

You guys are very charitable - thanks for the support. And I mean that. There are some really nasty and incorrect rumors circulating right now and while the support is obviously not unanimous, I was expecting much more piling-on in this thread than is the case.

I personally think that MMOs need to be a better deal. Paying $200/year is a good deal for some but I don't think that is sustainable for the category and certainly rules out a lot of people who don't have the time to get enough value out of that expense. So we are discussing this issue internally. Unfortunately that discussion leaked and the characterization is incorrect. It's also unfortunate that we have not yet come to conclusion internally so it is hard to present the real story since we are in the process of figuring it out.

But I do want to reassure everyone that STO is still going, it is still a triple-A game, and we are thinking hard about how to make our efforts even more appealing with a lower barrier to entry than is the norm.

Bloodworth, you're a kind of fruit. I haven't picked which kind yet. But that Raph, Save Star Trek shit at the end makes me think small citrus.

But that Raph, Save Star Trek shit at the end makes me think small citrus.

So many things would have to be covered in Trek, that I don't think one Vision™ could cover it. Away missions -- everything from diplomatic foibles to Orion girl lapdances to "God" wanting your starship ; tactical space combat; life aboard a starship -- Barclay to Quark to 10 Forward.

Probably best to just leave the idea alone. No one in the MMO industry can even do 1/4 of one of those features well.

It's just that no one can make it.

Stray, that makes it a stupid, crap license.

A Star Trek MMORPG could be quite good. 

It just has to not resemble existing MMORPGs in any way.

Not likely.  :sad_panda:

I think that's why a Raph Koster sandbox with emphasis on the social game might work. Trekkies will run with whatever tools you give them to be Klingons and shit.

Granted, I think EnB was a GREAT game... it just got overshadowed by other products and shitcanned by EA. 

Sandbox, and a ton of scripted content to boot.

And if you think it through, neither one could be done justice.


Just take one element that lends itself to sandboxing, for example: Planet exploration/surveying. Getting your virtual Darwin on. To be true to the idea of "science officers", you definitely couldn't cheapen it with a bunch of copy & paste maps, and identical mobs and resources everywhere like in SWG.

Then there's the other science officers who study cosmological events and anomalies...


And if you play down those two elements, and say, "Oh, it isn't very important", then you fucking fail. Both activities were basically the catalysts for almost every single storyline and encounter in Star Trek.


And this just exploration we're talking about here.

EnB was the first MMO I ever BETA tested.  Heh.  That game was awful.

Anyway, I think before you even enter in STO design questions, you have to ask yourself where you want to focus on?  Space Combat or Exploration?  Pick one and then make that the best you possibly can.

Not exciting! Give me dogfighting/Wing Commander instead.

I'd rather have an exploration one... Hell, Starfleet only if it came down to it. Star Trek combat sucks. I don't care much for tactical/submarine like warfare. Not exciting! Give me dogfighting/Wing Commander instead.

Yeah, but the Defiant was like... the only one, right? Why do you think Worf was such a cockblocker about it?

I think that some unexplored ground that Star Trek Online should look into is the idea of capital ships that require multiple players to operate.  It works fairly well in the Star Trek MU*s - you have multiple consoles set up (Helm, Engineering, Tactical, Captain, ect) and players can only operate one at a time.

Of course, a fighter or shuttle craft is something else entirely.

Oh yeah, the red squad. Either way, there weren't many though. War and Defiant class starships wasn't really the objective of Starfleet...And they ended up just kamikaze-ing and zerging the Dominion in the end.

I'd rather have an exploration one... Hell, Starfleet only if it came down to it. Star Trek combat sucks. I don't care much for tactical/submarine like warfare. Not exciting! Give me dogfighting/Wing Commander instead.

Combat wasn't really the point of the show.  [...]  I guess to market it to the masses you'd have to make it kill-a-klingon-liscious.

I think you are dead-on here (save for original series, which you could do as "beam to alien planet and fight alien speices which is trying to kill, LOOK! a hot alien chick!).  Which, IMO, reinforces schild argument that this IP sucks for MMO games.  People play games to be aggressive, why would anyone want to play a game with a social-straightjacket like the Federation insists upon.  "let's go online so we can talk about social issues!"   Zzzzzzzzz!!!

Coourse, you could go alternate universe where Federation, Klingon and Romulan are all at war and you get Mythic to make it... later, you could have an expansion called "Trials of Orion".

People play games to be aggressive, why would anyone want to play a game with a social-straightjacket like the Federation insists upon.  "let's go online so we can talk about social issues!"   Zzzzzzzzz!!!

There aren't enough games like this, in my opinion.

Actually no. I'm being sincere about that. Few game developers choose to do anything other than cater to our most juvenile impulses. And Star Trek should be a little more evolved than that. Don't get me wrong, I like running over pedestrians and shooting people as much as the next guy, but I probably had more fun gaming in the 90's, when the market was flooded with adventure titles.

but I probably had more fun gaming in the 90's, when the market was flooded with adventure titles.

I think that some unexplored ground that Star Trek Online should look into is the idea of capital ships that require multiple players to operate.

Amen.

YOU may play games to be aggressive, Typhon, but don't assume everyone does.  I love a good game of Civs where I don't have to annhiliate all my competition, or even Sim City or The Sims.  Fuck, I was an entertainer/ merchant in SWG and I get a bigger kick out of crafting in most mmos than beating shit up forever. (Tho I do it so I can explore more)
[...]

The only trouble with this approach is it that you're basically screening anybody who doesn't take the game seriously.  Maybe we can siphon them off to a luxurious life as a carnivorous grief-tribble or something.

WHat about a game where you pick your Ship (server), which is one of the many StarFleet has in operation. You play a crew member, of course, but as your Ship heads out into the unknown, the crew members are responsible for plotting the course (through a vote system, or an internal competition of some kind). The crew also enhances or detracts from the efficiency of the Ship though your assigned duties. If the crew collectively does a good job (making stuff, fighting aliens, protecting from pirates, guarding the officers on away missions, filling crew needs through crafting, etc...) over the course of some time period (weeks at least), the ship discovers new territories, new content, new rewards, faster rank for the crew, and, more importantly *bragging rights* between all Star Fleet Ships.

Not really new stuff taken individually, but I don't recall ever hearing about an MMORPG that allowed each individual server to become rather unique through the actions of the players. Of course, this would mean the game would need a robust space combat system, a deep crafting system, a twitch ground combat game (ala BF2), and great AI. But then again, any game out there right now would probably benefit from that list, heh.

I'm honestly not so sure about that.  Where's our past precedent that says that games have to not take themselves seriously to sell well?

I'm looking at the "we won't let you pass the tutorial map until you play it up to a standard we feel is appropriate" and the "enforced teaming because that's what happens in ST" and know that this can't be serious.

Plus: sandboxes suck. There, I said it. I don't now, and will never, play an online game to pretend it's my second life other job. Game > sandbox to most people who don't obsess about this kind of thing.

There is no way that a ST MMO could appear fully formed without a length of time and budget unheard of in MMO development circles. The only way a ST MMO is going to happen is as PE ironically started their planning - to get a few key systems up and working, then adding other stuff over time.

Plus: sandboxes suck. There, I said it.

Going back to the TV series discussion tangent (which was both more productive and more interesting than the main thrust of the thread which appears to be a lot of people proving that they didn't learn a single god-damned thing from SWG): New Trek TV series?

Klingons. (Or Romulans, Cardassians, or whatever). Leave Starfleet alone except as occasional antagonists, focus on a Klingon cruiser on patrol. Hell, they could get away with setting it at the same time as TNG/DS9 and just retelling things from an alternate PoV.

I think there definitely need to be more stories about Romulans though. I watched each series back to back a few years ago, and still know nothing about them.

Couple all this with Permadeath

Congratulations. Your game is an epic failure.

Here's a bit, fat, juicy fucking hint from the real world: Role-playing games and perma-death do not get along. They are two things that never, ever, go together.

People like their characters. They give them names. They play them for hours and hours. And they do not wish to reroll them because the baby cried at the wrong moment, and especially not because some jackass named "E3ltrt" or whatever decided to gank them while they were off taking a piss.

There is a lot of hate in that post.

I just liked the idea of blacks, whites, russians, and pointy eareds all getting along. Not sure why Roddenberry's involvement with the LAPD effects that.

As for Permadeath, if you adopt a skilless system it's not really an issue.  Aside from that, even WITH skills or even character dependent rankings, do you even REALIZE how hard it is to actually DIE in Star Trek?  I think I remember one Voyager episode where they're able to resuscitate someone who's been dead for 3 days.  Then there are episodes where their neural patterns are stored in a holodeck or x-porter buffer.  Escape pods.  Torpedo coffins.  The list goes on.  Fact is, in order to adequately give trek-style "moral objectives" in a gaming format, you HAVE to have a system of permadeath.  There has to be consequences or you'll just have anarchy and chaos and a game that sux WAY worse then one without pd.  I look at it as a way to maintain order, and in a Sandbox style game it really helps people flesh out a proper gamespace.

Look at EVE, technically... it's a Permadeath game.  You just have to have spent a certain amount of money to resurrect your character fully.  As for your ship (which are the true characters IMO) they're lost aside from insurance paybacks.  I'd probably put a similar "security zone" system in STO to institute some form of automatic protection; basically, if you kill someone you can expect to lose your own life as well (either by NPC or PC).

We can argue Permadeath systems all day if we wanted to.  They're not that cut and dry.  But for Trek to be Trek (especially in a game that focuses on sandbox and the spirit of exploration), there needs to be consequence.  Impending death or death itself also lends itself to great gameplay opportunities (rescues, wars, medical miracles, revenge, augmentation/alteration, ascension, escape, forced colonization, etc.).  Use your imagination.

Okay, here's the thing -- if your character "dies" and then you "Get it back", it's not perma-death. Permadeath means "Reroll a new character". Anything other than that is NOT permadeath, you're now discussing "death penalties".

Guess what? People don't like those either.

Ghambit,
That game you describe will make zero dollars.

<sigh>  I never said you'd always get your character back (do I really have to spell out an entire game's design?).  I merely said there are plenty of opportunities to SURVIVE and/or get rescued.  If you're traveling in a heavy cruiser ala ST: TOS and you're getting owned by 3 klingon heavies, you dont just simply sit there and die (unless you're being heroic and sac. yourself for the "good of the many").  You either transport, man a shuttle, or hit the escape pods... or some other creative way to keep yourself alive.  Before all that, maybe you plead for your sorry life to the Klingons and get captured.   If you make it to a class M planet via pod, you have to survive there until rescued.  If someone flips out on the planet and shanks you in the heart 'cause he's hungry, yah.. you may die - but if adequate help arrives soon enough... you live.

As for penalties, they're not always BAD things.  They can be quite immersive and add gameplay value.  It's just the vast majority of MMO penalties are damned stupid.  Obviously, if you get shot in the leg and have a movement nerf until healed, that's good.  If you die and are resurrected via technology, obviously you cant jump straight into an ambo'jitsu tournament either.  Maybe your character will forever be cursed with an artificial heart (picard) and have a nerf to stamina.  Maybe your character carries a permanent scar.  And on and on.  Currently, most MMOs just give you some arbitrary textual nerf to all stats for like 5 mins; how is this a better system?

I'd much prefer a system that reacts to my gameplay and those around me, rather than the usual 20+ year old timed stat-nerf system.  And yes, this involves permadeath.

Seriously. Think about this for a second. Even EVE, the most hardcore of pvp games has no permadeath.

Permadeath in Star Trek would be against the lore anyhow.

EvE is an interesting case in that it has proven that, despite the great number of things we could easily conceive could go wrong with an "open and deadly space" system, it can work and work well.  In many ways, EvE may end up being closer what Star Trek Online should be than the actual game turns out to be.

It [EvE's success as a harsh death open-ended space game] doesn't prove anything until at least two other companies have similar success.

Permadeath would force players to be so risk-averse that the game wouldn't be any fun. They'd be fighting level 1 rabbits at level 20.

You'd put a quarter of your hard-earned money in a machine, you'd have 3 lives, and if you lost those lives... "GAME OVER"   Unless you put in another quarter, many times which would wipe out your high score anyways.
[...]
The whole point of this format is CHOICE.  Let the players have it and they've got no fingers to point except to themselves.

The entire point of really old arcade games like Pac-Man was to play a very simple and repetitive game and see how long you would last.

You didn't have to grind for 100 hours in Pac-Man to see the end-game. If you played for literally 10 seconds you saw the entire game. It had ONE maze, 4 ghosts. That's it.

In a MMOPRG to see all the content you have to play for *days*, not seconds. In that context permanently dying and starting over makes no sense. People aren't going to choose to play a game where they play for hours, see only 1/100th of the content, then die and have to start over.

Who here would play Contra if you only got one life and no continues? Not as an optional super hard mode but as the only mode? Not many I'm guessing.

(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/5/58/Armus.jpg)

Look at EVE, technically... it's a Permadeath game.  You just have to have spent a certain amount of money to resurrect your character fully.

Nowadays, I think people are actually tired of the care-bear and are willing to swallow more hard-core games that dont have an Autosave every 3 seconds.

p.s.
Tasha Yar DID get brought back to life... kinda. 

Am I the only one that thinks it's silly to look at key characters being perpetuated by ratings-desperate writers and declare, "It must mean that, in that universe, nobody dies!"  swamp poop

No! Epic fail!

Nor do I really approve of a "Permadeath has never been done before in a big-name so it never will be done" standpoint.

It might take a while for people to swallow the whole load, but the gag reflex goes away after a while and they begin to like it.   

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bd/The_sims_2.jpg)

#1 PC game of all time beyotch.

Make sure you use that exact quote, along with "I'm going to make you my bitch", in any marketing / PR you do.

(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/5/58/Armus.jpg)

This guy disagrees.

In "Yesterday's Enterprise", the USS Enterprise-C travels into the future in the midst of defending a Klingon colony from Romulan attack, creating an alternate timeline in which the Federation and Klingon Empire are at war, and in which Yar did not die on Vagra II.[1] Learning from Guinan that she died a senseless death in the normal timeline, Yar opts to return to the past aboard the Enterprise-C.[1] There, she is captured and becomes consort to a Romulan general in order to spare her fellow survivors' lives.[1] She later bears a child, Sela, also played by Crosby. Yar is later executed by the Romulans. OR IS SHE?[1]

This guy too.

(http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd256/geldonyetich/STObsession.jpg)

But please, continue on with your completely unretarded suggestion that popularity equals quality.

So far, you're the only person who thinks this is a good idea Ghambit, and what's even funnier, is that you describe the gameplay as rape.

Think about that for a minute, you think that people are going to pay you to be raped, and it's going to be HUGE!

Keep up the good work, I've got a 20 year old fanual (thats a fan-manual) on warp core design and how to use that nifty butane torch to reconfigure plasma ducts so I can be l33t in your new game.

To create real masterpieces in any reasonable timeframe you have to enable the masses while keeping them immersed.  This fits perfectly with Trek's grand "Social Experiment" along with its Tech.  Why go the opposite direction?

Simple, true-so-far answer: Because *most* player-created content is crap.

And ultimately, if players dont like certain user-created content.. they dont necessarily have to take place in it, buy it, or exist among it.  Space has an advantage in that well... it has lots of uhhh.. SPACE

People scoff at player created content too quickly. If there are 100k sub's, I wouldn't be surprised if at least a hundred of them have the vision, organization, and tenacity to create *some* kind of interesting quest, dungeon, story-arc, etc... Even a single, simple 2-hour story arc is significant when there is the potential to have 200,000 playing hours or so to come out of it. Player created textures and skin's would add to visual variety, etc. Yeah, there will be crap, but with a system in place to filter it out, I don't think people will notice it any more than they do the stupid ass commercials on tv.

And how about this for something never done before: What if someone were to write a client similar to the SETI@Home, except this one would churn out fully rendered 3d terrain? World size seems to be limited by rendering times, but if 100k players gave over a nominal % of their CPU cycles while they played that were to be used for this job, it could end up with some pretty big spaces!

Anyway, his point is, there can be successful and fun sandboxes if they're done right. And surely you can't be arguing against that?

It might take a while for people to swallow the whole load, but the gag reflex goes away after a while and they begin to like it.   

Most successful car of all time: Toyota Corolla

(http://www.automotoportal.com/media/images/vijesti/060901002.1_mn.jpg)

Most successful movie of all time: Titanic

(http://images.boxofficemojo.com/images/titanic_poster.jpg)

But please, continue on with your completely unretarded suggestion that popularity equals quality.

I posted the two pictures that correspond with the Sims as victories of mediocrity. The Corolla isn't a bad car, but you aren't going to boasting to your friends that you bought one; ditto the Sims. Plus if that's your best example of a sandbox, well, the MMO version of it never really took off. Given that we are talking about MMO sandboxes, not single player ones (which aren't bound by the same rules) I think we aren't on the same page.

Geld gets it right - a little sandbox is fine when covered with a healthy heaping of game. I enjoy dressing up my virtual dolls and decorating virtual houses as much as the next MMO-er. However, large open sandboxes that require players to drive things forward tend not to work unless there are other things driving it (i.e. money (Second Life) or power (EVE)).

When Spock (Leonard Nimoy) learns of a villainous Romulan's (Eric Bana) revenge plot to execute a young Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) via Time travel, he races to the rescue. In meeting Spock of the past (Zachary Quinto), Spock hopes to teach his younger self to save his future best friend's life. With the help of Scotty (Simon Pegg), Chekov (Antoh Yelchin), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Sulu (John Cho), and Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood), Spock and Kirk must stop the enemy before history is dangerously altered.  Written by J. T. Curcio

Wow, seriously?


Didn't they learn from the fuck-up that was Enterprise?

Despite the fact that I usually think "back in time/holodeck" episodes only get created when the writers are desperate and out of ideas Star Trek IV is still my favorite so I won't dismiss this premise out of hand.  I haven't been following the new movie though, I only found out they were making it from this thread and I'm a bit confused.  I thought the JJ Abrams guy was making this but that says it was written by someone named Curcio, so which is it?

I also heard over my guild's vent that Shatner is unhappy he doesn't have a large role...

Despite the fact that I usually think "back in time/holodeck" episodes only get created when the writers are desperate and out of ideas Star Trek IV is still my favorite so I won't dismiss this premise out of hand.  I haven't been following the new movie though, I only found out they were making it from this thread and I'm a bit confused.  I thought the JJ Abrams guy was making this but that says it was written by someone named Curcio, so which is it?

I also heard over my guild's vent that Shatner is unhappy he doesn't have a large role...

What's NOT funny is you chose to twist my words into a violent act.  Nowhere did I refer to rape.  I referred to pimps and hoes.  
Like a good pimp I would bring the best content and tools to my hoes to make it happen and see the fruits of their labor.   Pimps are enablers, hoes are enablees.  Today's gaming unfortunately is more like the Pied Piper in a mentally challenged daycare center.  Given the choice, I'd rather be an enabling Pimp rather than a child-kidnapping Pedophile.

Lastly, you assume I want to cater to EVERYONE.  Fact is.. I dont.  Why?  Because for this IP it's unnecessarily destructive.  Trekkers are by FAR the largest fan base in the world.  This has been proven by the mere fact that they'll eat up all the gaming crap with the Star Trek logo on it no matter how good it is (devs know this, so they make crap).  If someone simply came out with a game that Trekkers alone would REALLY love, they'd in fact probably have the #1 MMO.

Why did SWG fail?  Because they forgot the above fact with regards to their own IP... they sold out to the mass market and ended up tanking their game.

<sigh>

Why is it in this forum people love to embrace mediocrity and the status quo?  Cynicism should breed innovation, not stagnation.  Everyone wants to know how on God's green earth a decent ST MMO would be made, well... I'm TELLING you how.  It sure as hell aint following the current gaming "model."  Which is why many people say it's impossible.

The only way to boldly go where no one has gone is to let the players do it themselves, not have their hands held.  Make a randomized sandbox galaxy (with known space fleshed out slightly) and unleash the hounds.

Everyone knows that to do STO any other way properly would mean a HUGE time and money sink (properly doesnt mean a lot of initial box-sales).  Even if the game gets completed, by the time it's RELEASED it'll already be obsolete and so much of a nightmare as to be un-expansable.... both because of shear size and money-sink.  And one thing STO should be is adaptive.

To create real masterpieces in any reasonable timeframe you have to enable the masses while keeping them immersed.  This fits perfectly with Trek's grand "Social Experiment" along with its Tech.  Why go the opposite direction?

Shatner had a moan about it - there's a story here:

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/26/people.williamshatner.ap/

Abrams apparently said he would like to include Shatner but doesn't feel he can, as he would only want him as Kirk and there's no way he can see to do it that would make sense. I don't have a link for that, I just remember reading it in a magazine.

Scotty (Simon Pegg),

Entry 5.0 - "Interactions in Action"
Stardate 61390.2 (December 4th, 2007)

Hola, STO fans, and welcome back to the DevLog! There's something darned cool lurking in this entry, so let's skip the endearingly goofy banter and get right to it...

Over the past few DevLogs we've primarily focused on a sampling of the low-level processes of STO development, taking a peek at terrain generation, object design, and version testing, among other things.

Today we'd like to seriously shift gears, and start revealing a little bit about the actual game systems themselves. We'll start with a deceptively simple game mechanic that's deucedly difficult to nail down: the Interaction System.

What's the Interaction System you ask? In a nutshell, the Interaction System controls every non-combat, player-to-NPC interaction in the game. If you want to talk to a Ferengi shopkeeper, it goes through the Interaction System. Need to get some additional phaser training at the local Starfleet Academy? That's the Interaction System. Want to beam down to a planet? Interaction System. Responding to a distress call from a crippled starship? That's the Interaction System, too. In fact, when one is done tallying up the mission givers, trainers, vendors, Transwarp Terminal operators, Dahar Masters, helpful cadets and informative colonists, you'll find that there are just about as many peaceful interactions in Star Trek Online as the phasers-and-bat'leths variety. Put plainly, the Interaction System is the glue that holds all the other systems of STO together, transforming a bunch of disconnected (though spectacularly well designed and balanced) phaser fights into an actual game, so it's vitally important that we get it "just right."

As we design, implement, and refine our Interaction System, we're trying to keep a few basic goals in mind:

    * Keep it Simple - The less clicks and extraneous buttons the better.
    * Keep it Intuitive - The best Interaction System is one the player can figure out without any instruction.
    * Keep it Consistent - No matter where the player is (ground, space, another dimension) or what kind of interaction he's engaged in (dialogue, buying, training, obtaining missions, etc.) the widgets of the Interaction System's interface should behave in a consistent manner.
    * Keep it Trek - A blanket goal of STO, but one that bears repeating.
    * Keep if Fun - You'd be surprised how often this gets forgotten.

So, what can you interact with in STO? A better question might be: what CAN'T you interact with?

When playing on the "ground" (the surface of a planet, the promenade of a space station, or the interior of an "abandoned" Borg cube, etc.), players will use the Interaction System to chat with terrified aliens, order cups of Earl Grey from station replicators, launch games of chance from charming Dabo girls, and get missions from Starfleet superiors, among scores of other activities. All of these interactions, from the mundane to the sublime, will be launched by the most casual of mechanisms ("Keep it Simple"): a single right-click of the mouse on a neutral or friendly NPC.

While flying through space in a starship, players will use the Interaction System in exactly the same way ("Keep it Consistent")... but the NPCs the player will interact with will reflect more of the awesome diversity of the Star Trek universe. In space, players can respond to hails from officials on distant planets, or get orders from the commanders of besieged space stations, or do business with the owners of untrustworthy Orion shipyards, simply by right-clicking on those planets, space stations, or shipyards in exactly the same manner as if they were on the ground. In fact, the Interaction System is often the key to the player's ability to transition between space and ground, as ably illustrated by our VERY FIRST RELEASED IN-GAME SCREEN SHOT:


Vulcan Village

Unfortunately, while the Interaction System of Star Trek Online may be nigh-infinitely expandable, our blog space is not, which is why it's time to bring this DevLog entry to a close. Please stay tuned for the next DevLog, which will reveal even more interesting tidbits about the development, systems, and content of Star Trek Online.

On behalf of everyone here at STO, thanks for the continued enthusiasm for Star Trek Online,
Mike Stemmle, Story Hologram

PS Big thanks to Greg, Steve, Daron, and Sean for helping to get this DevLog together.

These guys are approaching a LoTRO/Turbine-esque level of verbosity for what amounts to "what you've seen before, but with more words". A lengthy description of how UI systems are built in general and a UI that "proves" it? Come on. I think I believe the actual space shot is real, though there's something about the ultra-bright gleamies on some of the celestial bodies that has a very Photoshop feel to them. But not for a second do I think the user interface buttons and dialog box are real.

For one, they depart way too much from the LCARS they've been hawking for a year. For another, they just look pre-Alpha rough in layout with icon-art that looks lifted from another game.

That wouldn't bother me except some'll likely use this as a "proof" that the game is still in progress. I believe Mrbloodworth's screenshot more :-)

Hi everyone,

My name is Steve Mason and I'm the lead UI designer & engineer for STO. I come to this site every now and then to read the threads about UI issues and it's always really inspiring to see. Star Trek is unique in that it's one of the few science fiction universes that has a distinct look and feel for its computer UI, so it's not surprising that so many people are concerned with the interface in our game. I'm a huge fan of Star Trek and Mike Okuda's work, so it's been a dream-come-true to be able to work on this project. In fact, one of the reasons why I came to work on this game was because I was scared they would get someone who didn't have a deep affinity for LCARS and all the cool graphics in the shows! As a fan, I was already looking forward to being able to use a Star Trek computer interface in an MMORPG.

So, for the last 18 months or so, I've been working on a new LCARS design style that will not only look cool, but also *work* well. Remember, LCARS was made twenty years ago, before modern computer GUI standards had been established yet. You know, things like movable windows, scrollbars, drop down menus simply didn't exist back then, at least not in the mainstream (mac doesn't count, sorry). Heck, LCARS was intended to be used by touching it with your fingers, or speaking --- not using a mouse and keyboard. Not only that, but really it was intended to replace the TOS bridge control surfaces which were covered in pentiometers, sliders and blinking lights! So it's been a really interesting challenge to take the graphic design and interface style of LCARS, and apply it to the needs of a sophisticated, modern application like an MMO.

There's been a lot of speculation on here about what the UI might be like, or how LCARS will work on terminals a la Doom 3. And I can't talk about anything that might provide clues about gameplay, but I can say this:

Be prepared for a new LCARS style. Think modern, slick, clean, and elegant. Think shiny, black, and serious. Think iPhone. It's going to feel good. The design of the UI has been driven directly by the needs of gameplay. The last thing we want is the for the UI to get in the way of actually playing the game.

If anyone has questions about the UI for STO, or just LCARS in general, I'd be happy to answer. Obviously I can't talk about anything that might be considered "newsworthy" -- I'm leaving that up to Daron and Mike , but I think more abstract discussions about the design of the UI are safe territory.

Is it just me or was all that text a description of a right-click menu?

Is it just me or was all that text a description of a right-click menu?

When playing on the "ground" (the surface of a planet, the promenade of a space station, or the interior of an "abandoned" Borg cube, etc.), players will use the Interaction System to chat with terrified aliens, order cups of Earl Grey from station replicators, launch games of chance from charming Dabo girls, and get missions from Starfleet superiors, among scores of other activities. All of these interactions, from the mundane to the sublime, will be launched by the most casual of mechanisms ("Keep it Simple"): a single right-click of the mouse on a neutral or friendly NPC.

Personally, I like it better when my right-click button is reserved for more pressing matters.  Earl Grey and Dabo Girls are great, but I'd rather fix an EPS conduit or chisel a hole in someone's thorax with a laser scalpel.

Ahh, cutting edge context sensitive right click.  Gotta be careful with that level of interactive control, go to far and people start to complain that the game plays itself.

Kohnke v. Perpetual - The Opening Round

Posted December 11th, 2007 by Ethec

How a new civil case hints at the real story behind Perpetual Entertainment's moves in recent months and the demise of Gods & Heroes: Rome Rising.

by Jeff "Ethec" Woleslagle

December 11, 2007 - Details surrounding Perpetual Entertainment's dealings subsequent to the cancellation of Gods & Heroes are coming to light as Ten Ton Hammer uncovered court documents of a new complaint just submitted to California's Superior Court last week. The allegation: the San Francisco-based developer fraudulently transferred valuable assets (like the Star Trek Online license) to an insider-owned corporation at a loss, leaving those with a financial stake in the now-defunct MMORPG Gods & Heroes: Rome Rising without hope of payment save legal recourse.

Court documents reveal
surprising new allegations
against Perpetual

According to documents received last Friday in California's Superior Court for the County of San Francisco, public relations firm Kohnke Communications, Inc. – best known for promoting the efforts of numerous MMORPG developers like EA Mythic, Red 5, Turbine, and NetDevil – is suing Perpetual Entertainment, Inc. for breach of contract, fraudulent transfer, fraud, and various other charges for damages between $80,000 and $290,000, perhaps much more in terms of punitive or exemplary damages.

The complaints stem from allegations that Perpetual sold valuable assets like the Star Trek Online (STO) license to P2 Entertainment, Inc., a thinly veiled yet separate corporate entity, before executing the Perpetual ABC or "Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors" (a liquidation mechanism allowed by states like California as a less expensive alternative to the extensive litigation surrounding bankruptcy). The case could have drastic implications for future of the pre-alpha Star Trek Online title.

Pushing the Corporate "Reset Button"?

The problem was in Perpetual's valuation of transferred assets and the timing of the disclosure, or apparent lack of disclosure, of P2 and the ABC.  While the ABC was executed on October 10th, 2007 and the sale of select Perpetual assets at less than market value allegedly took place prior to that date, Kohnke and other creditors had not been informed about the ABC's execution more than a month and a half later. The transfer of assets left Perpetual financially destitute while Perpetual representatives continued to promote an image of calm in the wake of the cancellation of Gods & Heroes: Rome Rising. This, according to the complaint, constitutes a breach of Perpetual's contract with Kohnke with intent to defraud and a violation of the California Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act.

To quote the complaint, which in itself reads like a courtroom drama: "Star Trek Online Executive Producer Daron Stinnett published comments on November 28, 2007 at startrek-online.net, flatly denying that Perpetual was in the process of liquidating and representing that Perpetual was still an ongoing concern: 'There was also a report about PE liquidating our assets. That report relates to a transaction that took place a while back. And while I can't go into details right now, I want to assure the community that the entire Star Trek team is still here working hard…'

"Just one day later, the story changed dramatically. On November 29, 2007, Keene [Joseph Keene, an officer of both Perpetual and P2 with a 'significant equity stake in the company'] confirmed to counsel for Kohnke that Perpetual had executed the ABC, and that all of Perpetual's assets were in the hands of Perpetual ABC. However, Keene also admitted that, prior to executing the ABC, Perpetual transferred certain assets to P2.

"On information and belief, the assets transferred to P2 include Perpetual Entertainment trademarks and copyrights, the perpetual.com domain name, and assets related to Star Trek Online, including code and the license… Perpetual received less than market value for the assets it transferred to P2, and the transfer made Perpetual insolvent (or worsened Perpetual's existing insolvency)."

So STO was wearing the red uniform during the away mission?

Indeed, McKibbin said as much in his final address to the Gods & Heroes community: "After assessing all of Perpetual's opportunities, we have made the decision to put the development of Gods & Heroes on indefinite hold... Moving forward, we're shifting our collective focus, resources and development efforts to Perpetual's Platform Services division and Star Trek Online , thereby ensuring that the game lives up to the high level of expectation set by the dedicated Star Trek fan base."

Page 2 worked for me.

A Conspiracy Against Rome

To make matters worse for Perpetual, Kohnke alleges that the scheme to defraud Perpetual's creditors goes far deeper than paper transfers to a malformed corporation. According to Kohnke, Perpetual cancelled Gods & Heroes: Rome Rising in some part due to between $80,000 and $280,000 in incentives that would be owed to Kohnke upon the launch of the moribund game and the subsequent financial impact on the development of Star Trek Online. Under the third count, "Intentional Interference with Contract," Kohnke's counsel points out that "the reason that Gods & Heroes was cancelled had nothing to do with the commercial expectations for that game – it was cancelled solely due to the desire of Keene, McKibbin [Chris McKibbin, officer and significant equity shareholder in Perpetual and P2], and P2 to concentrate on Star Trek Online, which they believed was adversely affected by Gods & Heroes."

Chris McKibbin

Indeed, McKibbin said as much in his final address to the Gods & Heroes community: "After assessing all of Perpetual's opportunities, we have made the decision to put the development of Gods & Heroes on indefinite hold... Moving forward, we're shifting our collective focus, resources and development efforts to Perpetual's Platform Services division and Star Trek Online , thereby ensuring that the game lives up to the high level of expectation set by the dedicated Star Trek fan base."

But Kohnke saved its strongest words to inveigh against perceived fraud on the part of Keene, McKibbin, Perpetual, and P2. Kohnke alleges that, as early as September 27th, Perpetual knew that Gods & Heroes: Rome Rising would be cancelled and, subsequently, Perpetual would not be able to satisfy its contractual obligations to Kohnke. Still, as late as October 9th (a day before the ABC's execution) and according to Kohnke, Perpetual asked Kohnke to prepare promotional materials related to a new round of funding. Such actions in bad faith were, in Kohnke's words, "fraudulent, oppressive, and with malice."

No one at Perpetual Entertainment was available for comment by phone at the time this article was released. A case management conference date for Kohnke v. Perpetual is set for early May 2008.

Eh?  It's bullshit.  Kohnke is suing to get money for INCENTIVES.  Incentives that weren't due unless the game launched.  They don't want money owed them, they want bonus 'good job' money for work they didn't do on a product that doesn't exist.

Sounds like greedy assmunchery to me.

Reads more to me that they ant PE to be exposed, they could care less about the money.

The post above this one is blessed by Retardius, the god of stupid shit.

My statement about betatesters was supposed to be an odd tangent.  It was designed to make a point.  Forget the part about betatesters if you must; but I'd still like to explore the contractual language as it pertains to engaging testers for intended vaporware. (but, I digress)

Regardless, if PE engaged in ANYTHING involving GnH while they knew the game was cancelled (but didnt actually do-so) to the effect of obtaining goods/services/money, THAT'S FRAUD Schild... plain and simple.

I dont give a rat's ass about Khonke.  But, they've got a point.

If PE engaged you (Schild) to do PR for them AFTER an interior memo saying the game was going to be cancelled, I bet you'd be pretty pissed.  Especially if your contract stipulated the actual launching of a game.  Incentives is rich-folk talk for "you dont get jack until the game launches."

It's the classic management maneuver of trying to weasel extra work out of the staff just before you axe them...   bullshit

You're making some assumptions and assertions about Perpetual's crisis that are like shooting from the hip. Well, shooting from the hip and then fanning the hammer.

When a game company is in trouble (coming from the perspective of one who has worked for at least four troubled game companies, two of which are no longer going concerns, and a third one reduced to irrelevance), its leadership is not inclined to declare a public emergency at any point prior to some crisis-worthy event which forces the company to make a public disclosure. Until that moment comes, the leadership is justified in trying to maintain a calm facade, make payroll, keep the power on, and pay its beta-testers (assuming there are any being paid). To start talking fiscal crisis or declaring an inflight emergency, would only cause a panic among employees, concern among publishers, creditors and investors, and a whole host of other unpleasant factors which can only excerbate the crisis.

That's the reverse-slope of the game-company lifecycle sine-wave, the acoustic shadow that no one wants to talk about or enjoys thinking about. When a company is shrinking, dying, bleeding in the water, what have you, it embarks on a death-march to a certain extent. People don't get taken care of very well during a death-march, any more than they do during a panicked retreat through a live battlefield. Pointing out all the spectacular ethical errors being made by the studio in decline is a more or less pointless exercise -- the options available to leadership become acutely diminished as the downward spiral accelerates, to the point where extremely hard and troubling choices must be made, and legal tangles may become unavoidable.   

Getting self-righteously upset over it is also pointless. Professional devs get screwed horribly, and often in large numbers, when these things happen. You pick yourself up, dust yourself off, napkin up the blood and entrails, tuck the functional organs back into the gaping belly wound, and move on in search of a better gig.

Your statement is absolutely valid, but has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.   

Firstly, I never assumed anything... I said "IF."  The argument in play here is if they're justified in doing what they did if the circumstances indeed fall into said category.  Fact is, they're not... not morally, nor legally.
Second, it doesnt even matter if none of this even applies to PE.  The argument still maintains its validity.
Thirdly, no amount of failure or pain justifies defrauding yourself and taking advantage of others.
Fourthly (is there such a word?), if someone pitched goods/services out of me "payment due upon completion of a larger project" and that project didnt complete, and I could PROVE that you knew it was a dead project before they pitched me... you better BELIEVE I'd be coming for that ass.  Regardless of if you even intending on doing it, but just for the shear stupidity of it!

Yes, I said it, if PE is dumb enough to engage subcontractors in a task for a defunct project, then I believe they SHOULD be "spanked."

And this whole "gentle facade" these companies like to portray just before they tank is only a function of gross financial speculation.  It's just an "image" they maintain to appease their investors and keep their stock price from going in the red, while the guys in the back make for a hasty retreat, or prepare to defend the frontlines.   If to maintain that facade they defraud themselves, that doesnt make it any more right.

In fact, I could make more hype for a game than they could. Alone. With nothing but a computer and a phone and photoshop.

I still don't understand why Perpetual isn't swimming in cash. They are tapping into one of Paramount's flagship properties, after all. Why and how did they ever get to the point where they have to run away from debts?

Would you charge $1000 for it?  :uhrr:

Apparently I should charge $80,000.

I still don't understand why Perpetual isn't swimming in cash. They are tapping into one of Paramount's flagship properties, after all. Why and how did they ever get to the point where they have to run away from debts?

Star Trek Online: Exclusive Interview and First Avatar Screenshot
by Dana Massey, 12 Dec 2007 1:59 pm
avatar, exclusive, features, in-game, interview, p2 entertainment, perpetual entertainment, qa, screenshot, star trek online, sto

In this exclusive interview, WarCry chats with Daron Stinnett, the Executive Producer of Star Trek Online. What's more, we also debut the first ever in-game avatar screenshot since the company rethought its art direction. The image shows a human character in battle with a Gorn Soldier.

It's been a turbulent couple months for the folks at P2 Entertainment (formerly Perpetual Entertainment). They cancelled their anticipated debut MMORPG Gods and Heroes amid layoffs and concerns for the company's long term health. Now as the dust begins to settle, we find out about Star Trek Online the game, it's long term health and where it's headed.

Yesterday, their former public relations firm Kohnke Communications launched a lawsuit against them, which included allegations of fraud against Perpetual, P2 and the company's leadership. The following interview was conducted last week, but WarCry did seek comment on the lawsuit from Perpetual and Kohnke prior to publish. As is customary with pending lawsuits, neither company had any comment.

WarCry Q&A: Star Trek Online
Answers by Daron Stinnett (Exec. Producer)
Questions by Dana Massey

Phaser Strike on Gorn Soldier (Exclusive: First Avatar Screenshot)
Phaser Strike on Gorn Soldier (Exclusive: First Avatar Screenshot)

WarCry: This week you've released your first space image and now your first land image since you decided to move away from a photorealistic image and towards a stylized one. Can you talk about both images and why you think the decision you made is the correct one?

Daron Stinnett: We love the caricatures of the races in Star Trek and we had a strong desire to make sure that each race was as visually distinctive as they are on an emotional level. However that presented a game design challenge given that on TV, all those great races are just human actors with prosthetics and makeup to differentiate them; an approach does not translate well to the game world where subtle differences among players and NPCs would not be legible at typical view distances during gameplay.

So we gave ourselves the goal of creating very unique silhouettes for each race that better represented the character of each race. From there, we decided to keep going and wrap our stylized characters in a stylized world. We had the artistic talent to pull it off and it felt right to use the strengths of our medium to take the look of Star Trek in a new direction while staying true to it's core values. Of course, we had to get the approval of CBS, and we were certainly nervous that they would want to stick with the safer route of recreating what had been done before. But they got it immediately; saying "Yup, that's what we would have done with the look if we would have had the budget to do so in the TV series and films".

We're really proud to have the opportunity to evolve the look of Star Trek and it is because of our freedom and drive to do so that we've continued to attract the best talent in the industry. There have been a lot of Star Trek games in the past that have gone with the photo-real approach, and we came to the conclusion that it was time to try something new and haven't looked back.

WarCry: Recently, rumors suggested that STO would become a more casual game, while others said it would simply adopt a more casual business model. At its core, do you believe that the Star Trek universe is suited a casual experience?

Daron Stinnett: We've always believed that Star Trek is an inviting world for more than just the enthusiasts so we've stayed focused on making a game that everyone can enjoy. We know that difficult to learn gameplay can be a barrier for some as is the $15/month subscription fee. It is true that we have been discussing different payment models internally to see if there is a way to enable more people to experience Star Trek Online while ensuring that we are able to pay for the ongoing operating costs of a triple-A MMO. We haven't yet come to any conclusions though.

WarCry: A recent post you made suggested that your company is flexible and will work with future partners to adopt the correct business model. What kind of foundation have you laid to ensure that the gameplay compliments whatever business model you and your eventual partner eventually adopt?

Daron Stinnett: We're just doing our homework to make sure we understand what changes, if any, might be required for different payment models. I think most people will agree that there are a variety of payment models emerging so we're making sure that we are prepared should we decide to make a change. I think there are trade-offs to all the models for both the game developer and players. The obvious choice for Star Trek Online right now is the traditional subscription model, but we'll continue to consider the possibility of trying one of the emerging models.

WarCry: Your dev log focused on the "Interaction System", which is so fundamental to most MMOGs that it doesn't even usually get a name. Tell us what your system will do for STO that people might not necessarily expect?

Daron Stinnett: Given that we're making Star Trek, we started with goal of creating a really capable and well designed system for interacting with NPCs and the environment so that we could deliver the richness and storytelling that people expect from Star Trek. That means having a system that will enable us to create intelligent NPCs that can be more than just quest dispensers. We have also focused on making a system that would work equally well for both ground and space by helping us bring the richness of character interactions into space. Our recent devlog and accompanying screenshot was just a first peek into one of the ways we'll deliver a character driven space experience.

WarCry: You've always held that you would let fun decide how much time people spent in avatar vs. space form. What is it telling you now?

Daron Stinnett: That's right. We're not going to force players to spend a certain amount of time in either environment. Instead, we're creating a rich and diverse galaxy and let every player choose what path to weave though the ground and space experience. That's been our goal from the beginning and it hasn't changed.

WarCry: When Gods and Heroes was cancelled, many people left the company and others joined the development team. What has the entire Gods and Heroes project and its eventual demise contributed to STO's development?

Daron Stinnett: The Gods and Heroes team built a great server technology platform that we've been using since the beginning which gave us the ability to focus on gameplay systems, tools, and client technology. Anyone who's followed the business knows that making an MMO is our industry's moon shot; they are incredibly complex developments in every respect. I think Gods and Heroes is a very good game that will one day come to market, in the meantime I'm grateful to add team members who's experience is invaluable to our effort to build a great Star Trek game.

WarCry: Obviously, fan confidence is shaken when they hear news of cancellations and layoffs within a company. Why should people believe that STO is healthy and on track?

Daron Stinnett: There are a lot of development teams that can be very convincing that they are doing great - right up to the point when their product tanks in the market. And while I won't say it hasn't been a challenge to be a small developer taking on one of the greatest potential MMO franchises with a rabid fan following, the team is resolute in sticking to our plan to make quiet progress and release new information only when we're sure we can deliver on our promises. In the end, the most important criteria for success is the quality of the game we deliver and we're not going to get distracted from that objective.

WarCry: The Star Trek universe is huge, and realistically there is no way you can faithfully build it all for launch. The decision of how much to include and in what detail is likely one of the biggest and most controversial design and production questions you'll face. Where have you settled in terms of scope?

Daron Stinnett: MMOs and Star Trek share a core value: that people of different races, capabilities, and backgrounds can work together to solve problems. That concept is more important to us than any other aspect of Star Trek. It is with that idea in mind that we are focused building, testing, and tuning our core gameplay experience. And when we're satisfied with our gameplay, we will figure out where we draw the line between launch and post launch content with the knowledge that we'll never be wanting for interesting new planets to create and explore.

Forgive my ignorance, but... how do you have an item-based payment system in a world that's based on not needing money/items?  Seems kinda contradictory to Trek having to PAY for items and content, rather then having just a standard subscription and being set free.

It is true that we have been discussing different payment models internally to see if there is a way to enable more people to experience Star Trek Online while ensuring that we are able to pay for the ongoing operating costs of a triple-A MMO. We haven't yet come to any conclusions though.

The mere fact that they felt compelled to hire a PR firm in the first place to help them market their game, is a bit unusual to my point of view.

It's a Star Trek MMO. You don't *need* PR if your project isn't on the ropes. The monkeymass of fans should be out there fawning over the demos and screenshots which should exist in more abundance by now. If you don't have that, and don't feel confident you can get that, $80,000+ worth of PR firm involvement is only a band-aid... a very expensive band-aid.

Hate to say it, but why does it look like this guys is solo-grinding Mobs?

PE could've easily hired people on the inside. I think that entire office has a case of the lazies though :(

[screenshot]

Hmm... So all that talk about LCARS, and it turns out to just look like a Treked out WoW.

Ooookay... Wtf? That's a bit too far on the opposite side of the spectrum! Don't want hotkeys, don't want that.

That might be an interesting minigame.

As far as the UI, they had at one time contracted the guy who originally created the LACARS interface, he even went as far as creating a shock wave version that showed how one would use it to manage plasma flow ETC to the warp core, it was awesome...I don't know how this fits in any more, as i supect you will now just need to his "Reverse plasma flow rank 2".

Found some still, but they have removed the Shockwave from the site.

(snip)

I'll give you one guess as to why it was "at one time" instead of "currently." It's also the answer to "why shouldn't you let Star Trek nerds make decisions?"

Not only that, looks like they're raping the cartoony WoW graphics also (more like old school EnB though really).  (sigh)
They talk about photorealistic graphics in the interview like it's the second coming of the bubonic plague.  Are they really that stupid?  While virtually every other game engine is pushing high-end and photorealism (including the game they cancelled - GnH), these guys are backpeddling.  And it's just because they wanted to do something different from prior ST games?  rubbish

It's not exactly backpedalling, stylized graphics do make sense if you want to stress differences between different alien races vs "this is a guy with piece of plastic on his forehead". And just becayse engine can do realistic graphics doesn't mean it *needs* to, in order to make well working and visually coherent game -- vide TF2?

So you're saying in the 24th century they dont know how to tell differences between aliens at a distance?  Not only that, you're saying they should shoot first and ask questions later?

To go back to the stylized graphics argument (in case people dont feel my first statement);  in the way they justify using it for aliens in STO, they say it's so they can "tell aliens apart."  What this means is, there's no mechanism in place for you to figure this out on your own... no tricorder, no futuristic binoculars, no zoomable vision, no querying, etc.  It's the lazy man's way for target recognition and gives them a quick out to make a bland game.  So yeah, we're using playable looney tunes so we can tell differences between Bajorans and Humans easier?

Also, rather the re-stylizing the game into something no one wants, why not just make the extra effort, apply a few more polygons and model the aliens correctly?

Ghambit - "Gods and Heroes" and "photorealism" do not belong in the same sentence unless separated by a resounding negative.

Just assume nothing is coming. It's easier on the brain than trying to guess what they are thinking this week.

I don't think they can be called hotkeys when it's all that's on the screen.

Going for "photorealism" on a Star Trek game is a bit ironic.  :awesome_for_real:

But really, I'm sure they are ACTUALLY going after the stylized look for the same reason I've suggested other games do. WoW did it. By that I mean, WoW was able to be run on a whole host of shitty, outdated, old computers and it sold a quadrillion copies. EQ2 tried the photorealism and never even reached EQ1 numbers. You do the math.

Going for "photorealism" on a Star Trek game is a bit ironic.  :awesome_for_real:

But really, I'm sure they are ACTUALLY going after the stylized look for the same reason I've suggested other games do. WoW did it. By that I mean, WoW was able to be run on a whole host of shitty, outdated, old computers and it sold a quadrillion copies. EQ2 tried the photorealism and never even reached EQ1 numbers. You do the math.

But really, I'm sure they are ACTUALLY going after the stylized look for the same reason I've suggested other games do. WoW did it. By that I mean, WoW was able to be run on a whole host of shitty, outdated, old computers and it sold a quadrillion copies. EQ2 tried the photorealism and never even reached EQ1 numbers. You do the math.

The other "stylized" games totally miss this point if it's indeed their reason to go that route, given how their hardware requirements go nowhere near as low WoW gets theirs.

Wow doesn't run on shit pile and kitchen sink because it's stylized, it's stylized because it was designed to run on the shit pile and that was about the only way to hide it.

The other "stylized" games totally miss this point if it's indeed their reason to go that route, given how their hardware requirements go nowhere near as low WoW gets theirs.

EQ2 is still heavily stylized, i would not call it photorealism.

EQ2 became stylized, but it didn't really launch that way. They were trying buy-a-new-computer "photoreal", trying to pull the "they do it in the FPS genre" message, probably as a way to gain promotional cred with nVidia (which you'll recall had a fullscreen presence in the intro sequence of EQ2 as well as a logo on some loading screens). This did not endear them to people. It didn't work for VG either. And worse, WoW launched at what amounts to the same time (three weeks later) and would work on the hand-me-down machine you were about to give to your Aunt.

But for the same reason the artistic style of WoW didn't make it work on low end machines by itself, EQ2 did not change to a more stylized format to work on low end machines. They changed more likely because the world was brown and ugly, and the characters not inspired.

Err, those games are separated by just a few years. ;)

I didn't say EQ2 achieved photoreal though. I said that's what they seemed to be trying for, both in style and by using technology to drive for it. Compare that screenshot to anything similar from WoW or Dungeon Runners.

What is the second screenshot from.  That looks fantastic.

Yeah, i know. Years. But my comparison wasn't about TECH, its about technique.

I understand what you are saying. eq2 was some sort of stylized realism? Can we go with that? lol.

EQ2 devs in the run up to release HARPED ON the fact they were going for super photorealism, that they wanted to make the world immersive by making it as photorealistic as possible. Now obviously, they failed, not the least of which is because their models were terribly plastic, but also because the tech didn't exist to do Assassin's Creed type of stuff.

But they sure did try.

No, I understand what you are saying, that it ends up looking stylized. There's a very good explanation for this, and one that was floated around about the the time the EQ2 screenshots were coming out.

The EQ2 creature model artists (at least the ones on release) sucked ass. Which they did.

Not going for ULTRA OMG PHOTOSREALIST style for STO is a good idea, especially if they want more than a niche title. Having lower system requirements just opens up the potential audience.

Just remember, Quake says Reality is brown.

Also, rather the re-stylizing the game into something no one wants, why not just make the extra effort, apply a few more polygons and model the aliens correctly?

Remember, LCARS was made twenty years ago, before modern computer GUI standards had been established yet. You know, things like movable windows, scrollbars, drop down menus simply didn't exist back then, at least not in the mainstream (mac doesn't count, sorry). Heck, LCARS was intended to be used by touching it with your fingers, or speaking --- not using a mouse and keyboard. Not only that, but really it was intended to replace the TOS bridge control surfaces which were covered in pentiometers, sliders and blinking lights! So it's been a really interesting challenge to take the graphic design and interface style of LCARS, and apply it to the needs of a sophisticated, modern application like an MMO.

There's been a lot of speculation on here about what the UI might be like, or how LCARS will work on terminals a la Doom 3. And I can't talk about anything that might provide clues about gameplay, but I can say this:

Be prepared for a new LCARS style. Think modern, slick, clean, and elegant. Think shiny, black, and serious. Think iPhone. It's going to feel good. The design of the UI has been driven directly by the needs of gameplay. The last thing we want is the for the UI to get in the way of actually playing the game.

Tech has little to do with it. Compare the models. Look at her eyes.Ask any woman about the hips in that game...look at the skin tones... I understand that Tech was a problem back then...but there is some hard core stylization going on there. There were game put out at the same time that were not styleised, and did approach photorealism.

The reason Assassin's Creed looks good (and they made the game is a short time-frame) was because they used next-gen 3D apps (like XSI and Zbrush... zbrush in particular) along with a newer game engine (Scimitar, kinda like Unreal 3 I guess) and used good talent.  They literally painted this game together and the engine was able to flesh it out so you didnt need a mainframe-sized system to run it.

Granted, the 1st pic is in 2D and the rest are in 3D, but the stylization still hits home.  And note, the last 2 were done with a crappy old engine. 

When it comes to games -- I'd rather have the game I can run, not the game that requires hundreds -- or thousands -- of dollars in PC upgrades to play. Pretty is nice, but being able to play beats pretty in a heartbeat.

One reason I'm finally giving in and switching to consoles.

And you cant tell me you'd rather have stuff like this:

but man do I feel it was worth it

You can do it for $1000 for just the PC. $500 is not possible unless you are recycling components from another machine.

You can realign your car yourself, overhaul your tranny and in fact, do body work if you have a wreck and save a fortune.  You're all clueless twits who enjoy wasting their money if you don't do it.

See what I did there?  See why folks buy Dells/ HPs/ Whatever now or simply say "fuck it" and buy consoles?

$1000 is build-your-own. The breakdown is something like:

$250 video card (8800GT)
$200 CPU (E6750)
$100 motherboard
$50 memory
$100 drives (HD + DVD-RW)
$100 case + PS
$100 misc.
$100 OS

If you aren't comfortable upgrading your CPU you can swap the video card and CPU budgets around and buy a nicer CPU initially and then plan on upgrading the video card sooner rather than later.

If you buy from a "white box" store you'll have to pay for assembly and testing so you'll have to skimp on a few things or give up the "misc." category.

That system would play any currently made game at Medium or better settings.

You can realign your car yourself, overhaul your tranny and in fact, do body work if you have a wreck and save a fortune.  You're all clueless twits who enjoy wasting their money if you don't do it.

See what I did there?  See why folks buy Dells/ HPs/ Whatever now or simply say "fuck it" and buy consoles?

Building a computer from scratch takes about 10min. An hour if your totally clueless.

Case + Power supply: $49
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811144039
Motherboard $73 (onboard sound and lan)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131042
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Brisbane 2.7GHz $115
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103210
2 Gig Memory $50
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134488
160Gig HD $53
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148230
Radeon HD 3850 256MB Vid card $169
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102714

That system would play any currently made game at Medium or better settings.
Total: $509

You left off the OS.

Yes, yes I can.

Actually, Wrex was animated quite well I thought.  I was pretty impressed by the level of animation in Mass Effect overall, really.

Don't forget the ever important "Warranty". I could keep a dozen reciepts, try to remember or record a dozen different warranty terms, or I can shell out 300 bucks for a three-year "We don't ask questions, we just ship you a replacement part" warranty.

Which comes in damn handy at times, depending on your situation -- pets and kids can greatly increase the chance of damage. :)

The reason Assassin's Creed looks good (and they made the game is a short time-frame) was because they used next-gen 3D apps (like XSI and Zbrush... zbrush in particular) along with a newer game engine (Scimitar, kinda like Unreal 3 I guess) and used good talent.  They literally painted this game together and the engine was able to flesh it out so you didnt need a mainframe-sized system to run it.

The apps have little to do with it. Its all in the art and the artist. A tool is only the means to an end, and do not automatically apply "Awesome" to anything created in them. You can achieve the same results in most other (AAA) 3d applications, just differently. I'm not sure what you mean by "The engine just fleshes it out", engines only do what you tell them to, a crappy figure in a high end engine is still a crappy figure..

I will also go so far as to say that most modern engines are WASTE FULL, TECH is used all to often to attempt to cover up crappy artwork. In fact, a good artiest can achieve incredible looking  effects using refined, measured, and conservative techniques, Most Graphics "WOW" factor is in the art.

Fact is, I want the genre to improve... right now software is lagging HORRIBLY behind hardware because corporate bigwigs want to cater to the masses rather than be innovative; and that's just rubbish.

A good artist can only be creative if given the right tools to express himself in a timely manner.  Newer games like UT3, Crysis, GoW, AC, etc. show off some of this talent in-game, only because they use NEWER tech.  And I'm not about whine that they should feed me crappy art because I wanted to save $500 on my PC.  Fact is, I want the genre to improve... right now software is lagging HORRIBLY behind hardware because corporate bigwigs want to cater to the masses rather than be innovative; and that's just rubbish.  Luckily, these newer engines and apps can take up some of the slack... so there's no reason not to use them IMO

A good artist can only be creative if given the right tools to express himself in a timely manner.  Newer games like UT3, Crysis, GoW, AC, etc. show off some of this talent in-game, only because they use NEWER tech.

Ghambit's post makes absolutely no sense to me.

I'm starting to think I'm the stupid one.


am i stupid?

Artists in game development aren't there to 'express themselves'. They create the work that is assigned to them on their schedule, which is usually thought up by game designers, the art director, a producer or two, maybe a writer, and maybe a creative director.

Hmm will have to disagree with that one a bit. The 'expressing themselves' phrase was unfortunate, and i think Ghambit meant something quite simpler -- good tools allow the artist to match the designs they have/make for the game quite easier/closer/faster than more primitive tools would. Also, stylistic direction of the game isn't just the job of art director... if you check the work offers in the industry this kind of task is also expected from both concept artists and 'regular' artists who take care of the technical aspects. So stretching it somewhat you could say the artist gets to 'express themselves' through tools that allow them to precisely transfer their ideas of what the game should look like into actual game engine.

And yeah, you can do that work programming pixels by hand. But good luck doing stuff more advanced than 2-colour sprite with that, within reasonable schedule. Better tools do help to achieve better results, it'd be quite silly to deny it. (they don't guarantee better results on their own, but that's different matter)

Artists, designers, etc. all put something personal and valuable into their work, but I would never deign to call that 'expressing oneself'. I've seen the chaos that results and the damage done to AAA projects when artists go for freedom of expression over business reality.

It was the absolutist statements in Ghambit's post that I was reacting to, that is the kind of thinking that leads game companies to become slaves to the notion that more expensive art budgets necessarily lead to better games. I've seen that line of thinking disproven again and again and again, but it endures and remains entrenched.

Art tools are important for modern game development, but without trained professionals using them for the good of the project above all other considerations, they can be just as useless as any other piece of technology. I've seen people do really good work with crappy tools, and I've seen people fail to use some really nice tools (or use them stupidly). 

The license, as well as the game's content - but not the code - have been transferred to another Bay Area development studio where work will continue.

Back from the dead to the... well, to the fully dead I guess:

http://www.warcry.com/articles/view/breakingnews/2802-Breaking-News-P2-Out-As-Star-Trek-Online-Developer

(Don't actually know if San Diego is Bay area or not...)

"Transferred", not sold.

Sounds like more accounting shenanigans to hold on to the license through the inevitable bankruptcy.

Actually, it sounds more like Paramount took the ST IP off them, but still wants STO to come out. That PE has attracted very little goodwill towards the STO probably helped. AFAIK, it isn't uncommon for when such relationships disintergrate that the developer gets to keep their work but that is it mostly useless to them commercially because it is completely devoted to the IP in quesiton that they lost.

As for the new dev studio: Cryptic certainly has to be in the running. Regardless of what is happening with MUO, Cryptic would probably be very hesitant to let such an opportunity slip by should they be offered it.

(sigh)

How can anyone still call the Trek IP an 'opportunity' at this point amazes me. It's a cursed item, like the Ring of Power. You want to play with it, you had better be prepared to go
all the way to Mount Doom with it, and be prepared to suffer horribly along the way.

That anyone in the MMO market can bring themselves to think that they can pull this kind of complex, inconsistent, and rather dysfunctional IP off as a quality massive multiplayer experience, when it's already so very hard to build successful MMOs without all that lore-weight and glamour and fan-factionalism dragging things in different directions, is equally amazing.

It's a cursed license. It requires game devs who are so deadly serious about their craft that they would sacrifice a loved one to help it succeed in the game format. I think there are only six devs like that in all of North America (at least, ones that I know for sure would do that for a project). 

Having said all that... best of luck to Cryptic or whichever studio has the stamina, the vision, and/or the brass-plated chutzpah to succeed where many others have failed.

I've always felt Star Trek video games paid way too much focus, almost exclusive focus, on the combat.  The combat is cool and all, but think how many episodes of the various shows had no combat in them at all.  A Star Trek game without a lot of (entertainingly implemented!) problem solving and diplomacy and never-seen-this-before exploration is always going to disappoint.

STO really needs a design outside of the Diku format.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

Ok, so the most solid rumor, (If indeed a rumor can be solid) is that the new developers will be Cryptic studios (http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/14/perpetual-looking-to-transfer-development-of-star-trek-online/).

Seems they have been interviewing some of the old developers, and contacting fan/podcast sites about possible news releases and interviews.


I'm just glad to see the IP in the hands of a company that HAS shipped a Product. No offense to the people who may have lost there jobs over at PE, i blame your management.

Most game devs that go into Trek game development would probably disagree by a narrow margin, and I dare you to try to get a studio head to see the logic of publishing a Trek-based Myst-style adventure game in today's gaming climate.

Star Fleet Battles/Starfleet Command the MMO.  :drill:

Star Fleet Battles/Starfleet Command the MMO.  :drill:

It's been done. (http://www.dynaverse.net/)

(Mind you, it could be done a lot better. OMG PERSISTENT BATTLES, PRODUCTION, MILITARY PROMOTIONS, INVASIONS... you know, kind of like WW2OL. But in space.)

[...]half-assed board game design[...]

Eh...

1) Combat in Star Trek itself (the series) was basically naval combat in space. See the Enterprise/Reliant battle at the end of Wrath of Khan (OMG KIRK CAN THINK IN THREE DIMENSIONS you know, like a fighter pilot and stuff) not to mention the whole Romulans as submarines thing. So it's a pretty good simulation.

2) By the time of Orion Pirates the feedback was at a pretty good place; you got readouts on if you were overspending your energy budget (which is the true measure of SFB geekery) and instant feedback on damage done if you unloaded with your weapons on your target. Couldn't ask for much else, except maybe automated anti-drone/plasma torp fire or something (not sure if that ever got added). Loading a DDG with MIRV'd out drones and taking names at close range isn't terribly Star Trek canon but it IS fun.

3) SFC3 was an attempt to make the series casual friendly and really went into a bad place -- among other ill concieved dumbings down, you couldn't ever completely destroy weapons platforms (they would just be 'damaged') so battles went on forever and ever.

That being said I never played online, because Dynaverse never really got good enough to motivate me to. And yeah the mod community is somewhat mildly retarded. "Cracker" isn't that bad though - it's trying to use Nato-style Fed code names for Romulan ships, similar to the MiGs "Foxbat", "Foxhound", "Flagon", and everyone's favorite, "Fagot". The link, amusingly enough, goes to "Cabbage", not "Cracker".

1) Exploration. The universe needs to be vast (Q-webbing to simulate the end of the universe only works for so long) and 3D. Planets should provide instances for exploration and for when things need to be dealt with in-avatar.

2) Combat. Space combat needs to be tactical yet real-time. And in 3D. Ground combat can use how Tabula Rasa and Planetside as examples of the right and wrong ways to do something.

3) Diplomacy. Vanguard's mini-game is one example of how it could be handled. I also think Paradroid's droid take-over mini-game could be updated and used.

At the high level, easy-to-say-devil-is-in-the-details things that STO needs, it comes down to:

1) Exploration. The universe needs to be vast (Q-webbing to simulate the end of the universe only works for so long) and 3D. Planets should provide instances for exploration and for when things need to be dealt with in-avatar.

2) Combat. Space combat needs to be tactical yet real-time. And in 3D. Ground combat can use how Tabula Rasa and Planetside as examples of the right and wrong ways to do something.

3) Diplomacy. Vanguard's mini-game is one example of how it could be handled. I also think Paradroid's droid take-over mini-game could be updated and used.

4) You need to be able to fly a spaceship by yourself, but Star Trek is a show about a team. As such, I could see the player as captain of their ship who has a number of AI shipmates, but these AI shipmates can be replaced by human players who get bonuses in performing the actions of medical, comms, security, etc. So you can solo, but if you want to play coop, you can. Yes, it makes everyone under the captain a support class, but I'm not sure how to try to compromise the soloers vs those who want the full Trek communal experience. Away teams could also be made up of human and AI 'redshirts'.

5) Set 20 years into Trek's future past Voyager. This was the only thing that PE was doing right on STO. Build ON the existing continuity, not WITHIN it.

If they can capture those things (and not screw up too many of the other details) then you're probably going towards capturing what ST is about while still being a fun game to play.

Heretic! Burn him! :mob:

Umm, isnt the code not being transferred a good thing?

p.s.
I'm still working on that STO game design I talked about earlier, and I just had to put it down for awhile...  I almost started cutting on myself in frustration

Nargle garble. Obviously this game needs to find a developer that can survive the Trek Curse before any kind of meaningful game design can take place.  :roflcopter:

Who exaclty is even left at Cryptic these days, given the 100% retention of those folks offered jobs by NC?

Exploration sounds good but would be almost impossible for an MMO. Within 72 hours of release there would be websites with every single star system mapped out and the MMOGtards will head to the planets with the best missions/rewards/experience and all the rest will never be touched.

At the risk of giving the world hints for how to do something that cannot and should not be attempted...

1) Exploration could be done with cutting-edge tech that can generate plausible star systems, trigger points for instances on POI's in those star systems, and allow players to place starbase infrastructure or whatever. Then you need a way to plot those freshly created star system 'zones' onto a navigation map that multiple users would be able to zip around on. Complicated and far ahead of its time, but it would have to be a well-designed, automated tool to get the sheer number of star systems necessary to have Trek-like sense of exploration. There would be an argument as to memory resources and whether players should be confined to Class-M worlds or not (like the focus of the original show was constrained), maybe a year of parallel dev time to get that system up and running assuming you've got a full-size team. A system only gets generated if a guild-crew actually goes there, it remains instantiated only if someone builds something there. Feasible, but would require excellent planning and next-level implementation tools.

4) 90% of the likely players (if not more) are gonna wanna be the ship's captain. A 1-20 newbie leveling experience where you graduate from the Academy and get some experience rising through the ranks before you actually get your own ship might work, but apprenticeships on some higher-ranking player's ship's Science or Engineering console just isn't going to work for a variety of reasons. Some of the bridge crew jobs might be slightly fun or interesting (Scotty's job, maybe), but all of the other jobs are really just reading off input coming from the game, or performing vital functions that the captain could be doing just as easily, since they are his orders they're carrying out anyway. Paying $14.95 a month to RP the experience of being someone else's subordinate in an MMO doesn't appeal to that many people. I think the only way to handle this is through grouping: anyone who joins a given captain's group must automatically use a support-staff 'alt' that reflects a useful expertise like science, engineering, medical, or security. These alts are basically along for the ride and can RP during a starship trip, but actually appear in avatar form during away-team instances.

4) 90% of the likely players (if not more) are gonna wanna be the ship's captain. A 1-20 newbie leveling experience where you graduate from the Academy and get some experience rising through the ranks before you actually get your own ship might work, but apprenticeships on some higher-ranking player's ship's Science or Engineering console just isn't going to work for a variety of reasons. Some of the bridge crew jobs might be slightly fun or interesting (Scotty's job, maybe), but all of the other jobs are really just reading off input coming from the game, or performing vital functions that the captain could be doing just as easily, since they are his orders they're carrying out anyway. Paying $14.95 a month to RP the experience of being someone else's subordinate in an MMO doesn't appeal to that many people.

Puzzle Pirates manage to pull it off quite nicely. The key appears to be, all the crew station works are mini-games that are actually fun on their own. While each station is quite independent from each other, the performance of each crew member translates directly into ship attributes, allowing the captain to pull off harder stunts in combat etc.

Don't worry you aren't revealing any secrets -- Starflight did this sort of thing, uh, 22 years ago.

I tend to agree I could in theory come up with a class concept for a "star ship" with multicrew, this is assuming you make these mini games interesting.

Helmsman, basically a dodge tank.
Weapons, the mage.
Comms, the CC class for multiple JNPC engagements.
Scotty / Jordi, err engineering, the healer.
Spok / Data, err science officer mitigation tank or defensive weapon CC.
Doc, could in theory be a back up type healer or a pure healer if you have both ship and crew stations take damage.
And finally the captain.....what does kirk do?  Picard....I guess I'd make them a buffing class with "diplomacy" side game or something.

This would fall into the non standard MMO roles.  Some one to take down a photon torpedo as a defensive tank?  Umm don't know any games that do that...

The question is can any one make these roles engaging to create a colaborative mini game fun to play?  Do you then have that as a side mini game or the main focus?  Do you make the away / planet exploration your main goal?  Do you have lots of space ships?

I can see why lacking a definitive vision or the resources to properly execute a gazillion concepts you could come up with for this IP would be daunting.  it really just needs to end up in the right hands, is there a Gene Roddenberry of MMOs?

As a complete side note, while checking on the spelling of Gene's last name, I had no idea his middle name was Wesley.  If some one made an MMO where the game play involved only a virtual version of Wesley and you leveled by how hard you kicked him in the balls, I'd pay to play that.

I tend to agree I could in theory come up with a class concept for a "star ship" with multicrew, this is assuming you make these mini games interesting.

Helmsman, basically a dodge tank.
Weapons, the mage.
Comms, the CC class for multiple JNPC engagements.
Scotty / Jordi, err engineering, the healer.
Spok / Data, err science officer mitigation tank or defensive weapon CC.
Doc, could in theory be a back up type healer or a pure healer if you have both ship and crew stations take damage.
And finally the captain.....what does kirk do?  Picard....I guess I'd make them a buffing class with "diplomacy" side game or something.

This would fall into the non standard MMO roles.  Some one to take down a photon torpedo as a defensive tank?  Umm don't know any games that do that...

I assumed nothing of the sort. If I were really interested in designing a Trek MMO, which I have indicated is a bad idea with near-maniacal urgency, I’d probably give the starter captain a choice of starter ships, which could be customized towards various roles. I would certainly give the player captains something sexier and less asinine than a shuttlecraft on their first time out of the spacedock.

But what you’re calling for with this capital-ships-requiring-bridge-crew-to-function-better feature, is essentially ‘runabout zerging’. The dude with the brand-new Archimedian-class cruiser that needs a minimum of four players to operate is at a grave disadvantage to the ships that require only a single player. The guilds made up of runabouts are going to have the most fun in this world, people are going to give up on capital ships until the bridge crew requirement is disabled in the very first patch you’ll have to upload on Launch+3. The captain going linkdead is bad enough, but it will be really frustrating to have vital function-operating crew logging in and out, going linkdead, etc. That will break the experience. One ship, one mind, one DSL connection, one captain! A bridge-crew requirement is just too pedantic and makes the experience of owning a capital ship an exercise in clusterfuckery. Why is it considered fun to wait around for other human players to get their shit together and start operating my ship, when I could be out in a one-player runabout, having fun now without the un-fun organizational hassle?


This paragraph collapsed under the weight of the paralogical statements it was trying to convey. It started off okay, then it seemed like the crazy pills were kicking in.

Not everyone wants to be a raid leader, because not everyone can be a raid leader AND because not everyone NEEDS to be a raid leader, in order to go raiding. The status of being a raid leader is something that tends to go toward those people who are good at assuming power over others and using that power effectively. This is different from the more-attainable status-oriented desire to be a ship captain, which is the only role in the Star Trek IP that is analogous to kind of experience an MMO player wants – to be the star of the show. Make Star Trek captaincy as hard to get as a Jedi character in SWG (pre-NGE), or even as a raid leader, and you’re going to have problems. The only way to find success is to make it be a game about starship captains. Not enough people will be enthralled by the notion of playing a deckhand or a security goon or a fresh-faced ensign navigator.

Sorry, maybe the ratio of ‘phat lewts/phat gameplay trumping phat egos’ is balanced in games you’ve played before, but in Star Trek the egos will certainly be coming to town with crazy looks in their eyes. Only the more well-organized (read: scaryfanaticsauce) fan clubs led by the power-nerd with control issues will do well with this ‘bridge crew’ business. Everyone else will chafe.

(and yes, I did check out the Pirate Puzzle thing… putting in little Tetris-style javapuzzles or something like them isn’t going to cut the mustard, it’s going to have to be relevant to the actual IP-related functions the actual bridge crewmen perform, or all these fans who take their IP so seriously are going to cry foul)


But then you’re slapping another arbitrary, unfun limit on how many of a certain kind of ship there can be. Everyone who levels to the cap is going to buy a Galaxy-class (or whatever the coolest antimatter-guzzling monster turns out to be) from the shipyard, and you’ll have to keep introducing Bigger-Better-Faster-Hotter starships to keep everyone happy, each expansion.



What if a player gets attached to a certain class of ship or style of play that that ship tends to provide? They level out of that, and find they aren’t enjoying the game as much, and your rigid level-gating-of-ship-classes feature becomes an exit-door.

BTW – referring to the ‘needs’ and ‘effectiveness’ of your unimplemented, unplayed design is not possible until you have a working build of your game, with actual human players testing it. Until that point, it’s not just counting angels dancing on the head of a pin, it’s talking to them and asking them who you should kill tomorrow.


No slight to you either, but whatever your design is, whatever you think most Star Trek fans are going to go for, you’re going to find that some will like it, most of them won’t, some of the ones who won’t may get really nasty with you, because to them, you represent someone whose will can be changed to their liking if they just apply enough pressure on you… especially when it might be the only time a Trek MMO gets made. The myriad tastes and perceptions of the fanbase, the fanaticism it has for the IP, the internal inconsistencies of the IP material, and the failure of the IP to lend itself to gaming in a relevant, straightforward way makes Star Trek the most difficult license in the human experience to create a game around. Trying to divine what this supposedly-monolithic playerbase wants and will be happy to pay $14.95 a month for is an exercise in futility. In short: the fans lie. 

My statement is correct because a Star Trek MMO cannot help but be designed shittily – games in general, and the MMO format particular doesn’t lend itself to the material in a way that will guarantee financial success for the developer without ignoring vast chunks of that material, and minimizing others. To make a Trek game fun, you have to get around the IP. To make a Trek game true to the IP, you have to dull down the fun. You can please gamers, or you can please Trek fans. Whatever balance you end up striking, will still nerf the gameplay to some extent, and the title ends up being a watered-down version of a better, non-Trek oriented game.

Creating a Trek MMO is folly. It is a cursed license. Every joule of energy spent on this reality-detached consideration represents energy not being spent on worthier concerns such as raising awareness of the CO2 content of our atmosphere, being involved in the political process, or preventing people from unlawfully removing tags from their mattresses.

A rumor that P2 Entertainment, formerly Perpetual Entertainment, will be shutting down today was circulating the after-hours party scene last night.

Multiple sources close to the company came forward late last night to confirm the story, though no official announcement has yet been made.

P2 recently laid off the vast majority of its work force after opting not to continue developing Star Trek Online, and were embroiled in a lawsuit with Kohnke Communications, their PR representation, over back pay owed; they settled out of court. Before it changed its name to P2, Perpetual Entertainment laid off staff and stopped production on its first MMOG, Gods and Heroes, late in the development cycle.

We were unable to reach P2's management for comment.

The webmaster of www.startrek-games.com was going to post the design documents that used to be in the now-defunct Perpetual Entertainment's possession (the original developers of STO). Apparently, just before the site was to publish the first part of the design breif for all to see, he was contacted by a legal representative with the following:



Following this was a debate whether or not this message was true, as well as some other legal items. However, once the name of the legal representative was made known, Timothy J. Harris of Morrison & Foerster, I (Dracus) did some investigative work, and found that Mr. Harris is the legal representative of Cryptic Studios.

I don't believe that rumour for a second, because unless NCsoft are in real financial trouble

Rumour-watch, Part II: Apparently NCsoft was going to publish STO, but cancelled it, leaving PS2 to swing in the breeze until they had to shut down (http://www.hailingfrequency.co.uk/boards/index.php?topic=457.msg1857).

I don't believe that rumour for a second, because unless NCsoft are in real financial trouble, STO wouldn't be a license to let go of.

Whoever has this license (and a lot of people think that Cryptic does) is doing the right thing by shutting up about having it. If you had the STO license, you need to build it in near secrecy and just announce closed beta when you are ready. There is no point building up hype for it because all you are going to do is attract people to tell you how you're doing it wrong. They can do that during closed beta just fine as well.

If any game would market itself that would be it. I'm not an expert on the software industry but I don't see why even though there was a restructuring that NCSoft would essentially turn down free money.

Whoever has this license (and a lot of people think that Cryptic does) is doing the right thing by shutting up about having it. If you had the STO license, you need to build it in near secrecy and just announce closed beta when you are ready

Nah, you don't tell anyone you're doing it until maybe open beta, preferably launch. In the meantime, you treat this like the Manhatten Project, with a few dozen or hundred people working on bits and pieces with only a core few full-timers (who's livelihoods are tied to not talking about it) who know what's going on. You can test a lot of functionality without the full-on theme and graphics because let's face it, IP-based games are what you throw been-there/done-that derivation at.

But you'd need to be serious about this and not just see it as a quick until-contract-is-terminated PR cash grab.