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

[Ghambit]

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.

If you listened to the artists for Assassin's Creed you'd hear them say exactly what I just said,  that a LARGE part of how they made their game was the improved workflow enabled by better apps (check the Zbrush website yourself if u'd like proof).  It allowed them to execute their talents fully w/o spending days on something that should take a few hours, or worrying about how optimized it should be.   

The game engine itself serves as the tool to make all this great artwork display properly w/o breaking the system.  No matter how good your art, if it's served on a crappy engine (like most MMO engines these days) it'll look like shyt and/or is unplayable at worthwhile settings.

In THIS day and age where money is king, improved workflow is everything... w/o the tools, you'll get left behind.

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

[tmp]

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.

In other words software is "lagging horribly" because short of few bleeding edge fanatics there's no widespread interest in spending hundreds and thousands of dollars on new hardware every 6 months. It's not rubbish, but rather the reality one has to live with.

[UnSub]

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

Dear poster child for system hardware creep,

If you really want to see innovation in gaming software, freeze PC system specs in place for 3 years. Currently software doesn't have to really be that optimised because the devs can let the next generation of hardware pick up their slack. However, if the devs couldn't rely on the next Nvidia card to pick up their slack, they'd be forced to get the best from their software in order to be competitive. I've seen this with Amiga games (where the only hardware expansion of note you could get was an extra 512kb of RAM) and I've seen this in console games - the games that exist at the end of a system's life look immensely better than the games that kicked off the system because devs have had time to familiarise themselves with the system capabilities and work out how to get the best from it.

Forcing players to buy new RAM, new processors, an extra video card etc in order to see a game's graphics on the High setting is not innovation and is not the fault of "corporate bigwigs" denying innovation or devs not using the best software. It's because the hardware industry is driving the PC gaming industry (particularly FPS games) with the focus being on how pretty the game should be because that is what sells boxes.

Unless of course you also want to argue that we should all upgrade to Vista because that is where the best graphics are. Hopefully, you aren't that insane and don't.

With regards,

 - UnSub

[schild]

Ghambit's post makes absolutely no sense to me.

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

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.

am i stupid?

[Venimor]

Ghambit's post makes absolutely no sense to me.

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

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.

am i stupid?

Nah. You're fine. I think I know what he means, but I'll need to re-engineer the sentence:

"A good artist can often get more done if given the right tools to complete his assigned tasks in a timely manner. Newer games like UT3, Crysis, GoW, AC, etc. show off some pretty interesting artwork, in part because they use newer tech."

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. If you've got an artist on the team who's 'expressing himself', chances are he's working on portfolio pieces to show to his next potential employer and you might as well hand him his walking papers so he can devote more time to that instead of collecting a paycheck to turn in work that wasn't what was called for.

The designer of Space Invaders didn't have jack-shit for tools, he had to design the aliens on graph paper and program each pixel in by hand. Somehow he was able to get creative without decent art implementation tools.

[tmp]

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)

[Venimor]

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). 

[Mrbloodworth]

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). 

That would be my point. No tool automatically creates "awesome", but every tool can automatically create crap. In my opinion, simple and precision is much better than wizz-bang tools and engines. I also own Z-brush and am aware of what it can do, again most AAA 3d tools can do just what it does, the methodologies is just different (arguably better). Good art will carry your game more than high end tech any day, for a number of reasons (IE: Performance, time, optimization, and look, acessability).

[Moosehands]

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

[Baldrake]

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.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

[tmp]

It's dead, Jim.

[Nebu]

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

Nice to see someone come to their senses. 

[waylander]

Yeah license but no code..wtf?

This game is a good title, but the drama is definitely going to kill it if a reputable dev studio doesn't pick it up.

[Mrbloodworth]

Cant say i didn't see it coming.

I guess its time to bet who picked it up.

I think its Level 5.

[SnakeCharmer]

SOE San Diego

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

[Yoru]

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

http://maps.google.com

[Montague]

"Transferred", not sold.

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

[UnSub]

"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.

[Signe]

You HAD to have seen this coming!  HAD TO!

[Venkman]

Yea, but it's always good to get confirmation I suppose they had to wait for the end of their fiscal year (assuming it ended in December).

Content without code though... yea, quite a bargain, but it is typical. Only in a pay-for-service arrangement do you typically get to own the code too, though even then it might be tied to a system you can't own.

I really did feel this was going to be the outcome, from day one when they announced they secured the license and then hired people to design a game. Wrong order of events for this IP.

It really doesn't matter the ultimate reason they killed it. Could have been they had nothing at all. Could have been nothing more than getting some funding to finish their engine in the first place. Whatever it was, we're all better off for it. Star Trek needed to go dark, and this rumoured/vapor MMO was just about the only thing keeping it going aside from JJ Abrams side project. Either that movie revives it first and then we get an MMO, or it then truly goes dark as it has needed to for some time.

In any case, 2007 was the worst year for MMOs ever. This just capped it.

[Venimor]

"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.

[Archimedian]

"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.

Considering the many plot tools Star Trek used I'm pretty sure beyond the basic race lore and alliances, it's pretty wide open.  You are talking about one of the most recognizable IPs out there.  If you do make it, it better not suck.

Personally I think it would be an easy game to "design".  I'd think something akin to DDO (meaning central hub, private away missions.  Create minigames with each of the "classes" on the ship.  You know navigation, doc and so on so if you do group up and those positions are actually filled by non NPCs the minigames within are entertaining.  I would probably say it is the one game ripe for being a non standard modern day MMO.  Sure if you need to toss in XP and levels you can do that but I would think the group dynamic would be pretty cool.  Hell you want to toss a dragon in, you have the holodeck, which to me seems like you could create some pretty random and awesome content.

Granted any one who's even looked at it has gone belly up, as to why they haven't been able to deliver something?  My guess is most people are unimaginative hacks.  The IP just needs to fall into some ones lap that's going to be willing to take a chance on typical MMO concepts.

[Moosehands]

Having never actually played ATiTD, I always thought a Star Trek MMO might work if it were in (what I understand to be) that sort of a model.

Make each server 1 galaxy class ship, let people work together to figure out weapons and navigation and science and medicine, have a set of pre-defined goals, and once they're reached reset everything and change the puzzles and start again.  Have a team of decent writers constantly working on new encounters, puzzles, and locations and don't ever put everything you've got into the game world on any one iteration.  Hell, go nuts with it and have different servers focus on different series timelines.

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.

[tazelbain]

STO really needs a design outside of the Diku format.

[Venimor]

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.

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. I'm playing four of the most critically-acclaimed and popular 360 games these days (Mass Effect, Bioshock, Prey, and Halo3) and all four of them involve killing the shit out of non-humans=aliens=monsters to a large extent. I guess that reveals something about our modern society and the current state of the art in interactive storytelling.

I once got to take a peek inside the box that held the remains of "Star Trek: The Secret of Vulcan Fury" and it would have been an interesting interactive adventure game. The script read a lot like an Agatha Christie mystery, revolving around a murder that took place on Vulcan over an artifact that caused the original schism between Romulans and Vulcans, with Kirk having to uncover a conspiracy of silence and discover the truth before the Federation unraveled. The project was shit-canned because it didn't have enough action, so they went with Klingon Academy instead.

 

[Mrbloodworth]

Ok, so the most solid rumor, (If indeed a rumor can be solid) is that the new developers will be Cryptic studios.

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.

[Simond]

STO really needs a design outside of the Diku format.

Star Fleet Battles/Starfleet Command the MMO. 

[HaemishM]

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.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

We're in ur base, stealing ur art assets and quest writingz.

Perpetual is obviously a company that should never have been given such a big name license in the first place.

[Trippy]

Ok, so the most solid rumor, (If indeed a rumor can be solid) is that the new developers will be Cryptic studios.

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.

They could just looking the hire some of the soon-to-be-out-of-work developers.

[Simond]

Can we have a mod change the thread title to "Boldly going where UO2 has gone before" or something similar, please?

[Trippy]

That would imply that it's been cancelled outright.

[HaemishM]

UOX then?

[Moosehands]

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.

I agree.  I also think that has a lot to do with why the IP is famous for turds in a box.  Pure combat Star Trek games fail to engage combat-focused gamers who just don't care enough to be bound by the rules of the IP and also fail to engage a huge chunk of non- or casual- gaming ST fans who like ST for a dozen reasons that have nothing to do with the words "phaser" and "photon torpedo".

[Lum]

STO really needs a design outside of the Diku format.

Star Fleet Battles/Starfleet Command the MMO. 

It's been done.

(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.)

[Venimor]

STO really needs a design outside of the Diku format.

Star Fleet Battles/Starfleet Command the MMO. 

Please God no. SFC was a half-assed implementation of a half-assed board game design, resulting in quarter-assed goodness. Constraining that further for the MMO format and you get one-tenth-assed results.   There is a very tiny segment of the game buying public that goes for late-20th-century naval combat mechanics masquerading as Star Trek cinematic combat, but not enough to keep a stable core of casuals around for long (the casuals in SFC were the sheep who never understood why the SFB geeks were able to kill them every time, since the game had shit for visual feedback on what your weapons and systems actually did, in turn causing the casuals to return the game and spread poor word-of-mouth).