Star Trek Online - "Boldly going where Everyone has gone before"

[Murgos]

Eh?  Nothing in there says that creditors weren't paid in full for debts owed.

The argument Kohne is using is that PE maliciously canceled G&H to avoid paying them their incentive money.  Seriously now.

[schild]

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

That's my job, not theirs. PR companies don't create  bad PR for themselves.

[Ghambit]

I've got a question.  Do betatesters have grounds to sue when a company makes it seem like all is well (even enough to open a fresh phase of beta) when in fact they fully intend upon cancelling the game?  I know many testers put in a LOT of hours on that game, only to have the rug pulled w/o warning.  Even if they (the testers) dont, the point I'm making is I'm sure Khonke lost some man-hours (maybe more) on a deal that Perp KNEW was going south.  Perp treated Khonke like they treated the testers basically, blowing smoke up their asses.

Regardless of how much work Khonke did or didnt do, it's still wrong and probably illegal unless it's written otherwise in their contract.  Obviously, testers usually dont have that luxury as they sign their lives away when they test.  But my point is made nonetheless.

I, personally, am on the side of Khonke here.  Even if they get jack from the lawsuit, it sets bad precedent if you let Perp get away with that kind of stuff.  You cant engage folks to spend time and money on something that you fully intend on not making happen, that's fraud.   The moment you can prove intention occurred well before action (and enough occured between the two timeframes), that's fraud... period

[schild]

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

[IainC]

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

He's sort of right if you ignore the bizarre tangent about beta testers. The article does state that PE asked Khonke to prepare some promotional stuff the day before the ABC went down. Clearly PE management knew all about what was about to happen but they blew smoke up the PR agency's ass to the point of asking them to do more work on an already dead project.

Furthermore by transferring the valuable stuff (the ST licence) before winding up the first incarnation of PE, they left it 'more insolvent' which to me implies that it's less able to pay off it's creditors than previously. So the fraud allegations make more sense in that context.

[schild]

Assuming that was the case, which it probably wasn't (I'd be shocked), maybe. MAYBE. HUGE MAYBE. Incredibly likely "not the case" though.

The only thing that bothers me about this is Kohnke is basically saying: WE'LL PROMOTE YOUR SHITTY GAME, HIRE US FOR YOUR SHIT.

And even then, they're not very good at it

[Ghambit]

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

[Venimor]

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.

[Ghambit]

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.

[Venkman]

You could have used numbers. Or gone the classic, "for one", "for another", or "first, second, third"

But on the point though, this isn't an attempt to justify what may or not have been done by PE. It is an attempt to explain what could have happened, why it happened, and from the context of that actually having happened a lot in all industries. "Ethics" is a label that doesn't often survive the million tiny papercuts of compromise and quick decisions made at any point in a company's life, beginning, middle, decline, or end.

It isn't right or wrong. It's just business.

And yes, it screws up a lot of peoples lives along the way.

[Venimor]

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.

The assumption that you're making, which I am objecting to, is that CEO X (or other functionary) was the making the decision to hire vendors to perform certain services WHILE 'knowing' that their project is dead at the precise moment that such services were contracted. What's more likely the case is that Project Manager Y and Office Manager Z were still cutting deals with vendors even as CEO X and CFO W were busy elsewhere in leadership territory, brooding over certain imminent critical events taking shape which were dooming their overall outlook. Between a rock and a hard place, most leaders have fewer options than when things are at their rosiest, and 'buy time' is one of them. If you're having a bad quarter when it comes to investment, it's a perfectly valid ploy to buy as much time as you can and shop around for investment cash. Maybe that boils down to a choice between handing one's ass to their creditors in three months or handing one's ass to the creditors now, but if that funding miraculously does appear, the leadership looks good, the company moves forward, and what was everyone so worried about?

[Montague]

Sounds like this is what the PR firm is accusing Perpetual of doing:

"Parallel Entities: A long-standing company experiences financial problems. Insiders
of the company create a new business in the same industry just prior to or soon after
the bankruptcy filing. In some cases, the debtor sells some of its assets to the new
entity for a fraction of their value just prior to the bankruptcy. The non-debtor entity is
usually not disclosed. The insiders operate the debtor until they have successfully
transferred the debtor's inventory, receivables, customers and goodwill to the new
company. In addition, the insiders may use the debtor to purchase goods and
services for the new company with the intent of never repaying the Chapter 11
administrative creditors. This is usually a lawyer-assisted fraud."

I'm not a lawyer but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[Numtini]

Hasn't Bowman done that twice with Horizons?

[UnSub]

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

Would you charge $1000 for it? 

As for Konkhe, they did okay on bringing some attention to a second-rate MMO. But I can see their motivations being two-fold:

1) Yeah, they probably want the money that was promised them, especially if the game was cancelled so that STO could be the focus. G&H was allegedly 100% feature complete and into polish mode for release. That it was pulled because PE would have to pay Kohnke (and probably SOE and others) for its launch, not because the game was faulty or because the company actually went bankrupt. It would seem unlikely that Kohnke would have launched such action against PE if it was thought they couldn't pay - instead, they must be pretty sure PE has the money in their new form to go after them.

We also don't know the shape of PE's and Kohnke's billing arrangment. The incentive amount may have been off-set by lower daily costs that Kohnke charged PE for their work.

2) This is a warning that they won't stand for this kind of thing. Whether a company is engaged in ethical behaviour is one thing; whether they have engaged in illegal behaviour is another.

As for the third, completely off-base reason:

3) Kohnke is staffed to the brim with Trekkies and Trekkers and seeing that screenshot was the final straw - they must stop STO at all costs. 

[UnSub]

A bit more on why Kohnke is going after PE - the payment was the sum total of an accumulated amount for its PR work for G&H.

In short, Kohnke was being nice (well, as nice as $15k a month gets you) and waiting until after G&H had shipped to charge PE fully for their services. This isn't an incentive - it's payment due for work already executed.

EDIT - I r dum. It was $10k withheld per month for 7 months plus up to a 400% incentive as a performance bonus to Kohnke based on the number of subscribers G&H had 90 days after launch. So at minimum, Kohnke would seem entitled to the $80k base they filed for. That's what happens when you skim read, then post.

[stray]

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?

[Ghambit]

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?

Paramount wont come to the aid of PE that's for sure.  However, didnt they get "rescued" already this year when their old investor was liquidated and a new one stepped in?
It's this "new investor" that's causing all the issues here, 1st with the cancellation of GnH, and then the restructuring of STO.  Of course, this is another one of my gross assumptions, but as usual he who has the money calls the shots.

[schild]

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

Would you charge $1000 for it? 

Apparently I should charge $80,000.

[Venimor]

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

Would you charge $1000 for it? 

Apparently I should charge $80,000.

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.

[Venimor]

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?

Having a Star Trek property to work on, means you've probably underbid for the project (either intentionally or because you didn't have a clue what you were getting into), and are spending too much time and money on things that don't add to your project. I've worked on four of them (PC and PS2) and they were *all* in financial deep shit during development, for a variety of reasons.

Except for Klingon Academy, which Interplay generously shed its warchest on for three years, but I wasn't actually there when that happened. I just heard the horror stories about $500k outlays to get a single veteran actor in for some crappy FMV sequences (for example), and spending three full months of dev time getting the planets in each solar system to move incrementally in their orbits, in case you were one of the 0.15% of the OCD'ed player monkeymass who actually went to the same solar system more than once AND marked down the locations of the planets and how they had changed over time (for another example).

There's just something about producing a Star Trek title that makes producers, executives, designers, etc. so excited that it becomes a kind of mass lunacy.

It's a cursed license.

[Venkman]

Remember too that PE didn't even start staffing up until they secured the license to make the game. Including some of the job offerings they had right after the announcement, they didn't even have any idea of what sort of game they would make.

[Mrbloodworth]

zSource

No, i did not make this one.

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.

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

[Ghambit]

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.

[Mrbloodworth]

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.

You talking about this?

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.

I dunno, but technically, its only earth thats a money less society, however... they do trade with other worlds with in, and outside of the federation.

[Nevermore]

Why use something mundane like 'credits' when you can use 'gold-pressed latinum'! 

[Street Cleaner]

I was pretty excited about this game thinking it would be a guild or group of friends man a ship each doing a specific job say one is an engineer, one works @ tactical station, one is pilot etc. But after reading that I'm very disappointed what a bunch of bullshit they couldn't come up with anything more interesting then 1 ship is a tank 1 is a healer etc etc. Star-trek games really are cursed the last Star-trek game I ever played and will hopefully have wasted my money on was Star-Trek Legacy and it could have been a good game but the controls were horrendous  the voice acting was annoying and the missions were boring. I don't know why it's so damn hard for them to make a decent Star-Trek game...

[UnSub]

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

Would you charge $1000 for it? 

Apparently I should charge $80,000.

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.

The PR / marketing was being used for G&H, not STO. I get the impression the PR company (who has also worked for other MMO companies) was setting up exclusives with certain sites and making sure the game was promoted in the right places. It's not uncommon, just often uncommented on, for game studios to hire third parties to promote them if they can't afford to have an in-house person / department performing that same role.

Plus, when your overall budget is in the tens of millions, $80k doesn't seem so bad.

[schild]

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

[tmp]

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

It just looks this way; he's actually interacting with NPC in intuitive manner.

[Venimor]

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

Analogous to a situation at one of my previous employers, when we had our company picnic, they went to an outside contractor to organize the entertainment and festivities.

Because setting up fun and interesting things for people to do was not something a group of game designers were deemed to be good at, I suppose.  

[stray]

[screenshot]

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

[Ghambit]

[screenshot]

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

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

And another thing I realized, how does someone in Starfleet actually "grind mobs?"   Starfleet = Hirogen now? 

God, this is like scratching a nail on the world's largest chalkboard..  gaaaaah!

[Mrbloodworth]

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.


Tatical Display:



Warp Core Management:



EDIT: Added lables, and keep in mind, most of the text ETC was just a place holder.

[stray]

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

[schild]

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