Author Topic: Star Trek Online thread  (Read 409014 times)

Offline Nebula

  • BC elder / BCC Vice Admin
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 5500
  • Cookies: 1129
  • KM - Mod Team Member & BC - Elder (2002)
    • 9th fleet HQ
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #500 on: August 01, 2009, 01:06:56 PM »
I think the only 2 ships they did very well on are the cardie galor and Fed Miranda....
Canon is what people argue exists on ships that don't exist.

Offline CyAn1d3

  • MacDill Shipyards Design Team
  • Posts: 1656
  • Cookies: 420
  • RETIRED
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #501 on: August 01, 2009, 01:20:19 PM »
I've gotta put my two cents in on this.  I think these ships look terrible.  The federation designs are not balanced or aesthetically pleasing, they look primitive and cartoonish.  The Klingon BOP is especially disappointing.  They have clearly not concerned themselves with making it look accurate.  They should see LC's work on ST:Excalibur.  The ship they've built simply doesn't compare.  And while we're talking about Excalibur, the STO version of the ship is just atrocious.  There is an obvious design lineage/pattern that all star trek ships follow, and they don't go for a "retro" look.  Starfleet is not about "retro".

When I look at these screenshots I am struck by a single thought.  These people are not Star Trek fans, and they don't understand it.

they were put in a room and told to create a game.
if they wanted some real talent and care for this game, they should have looked around on the internet at least to SOME degree,
its amazing the quality, diffrence and care that work comes out when a payroll is or ISNT involved.
WE do work because were passionate about it and we care of the details and the authenticity of our work
THEY do the work because theyr paid to do so, not that im saying the ships look like crap in general and that the quality is bad, but the cannonocity ( i think i just made up a word XD) faulters when you have ppl working on a project that could be given to $hits less about by the ppl doing the work, i dont blame them tho, they were hired to do a job, and they did it... very well, but when its not appealing to the "genre", you may as well have not even bothered to begin with.

excalibur is going to ANNIHILATE ST:O, for many reasons but mainly one, the care to DETAIL.
the excal crew is busting their asses to produce something for a community of fans. NOT a product to sell.
and in my opinion, the free-lance, non contracted "modders" and "creators", will ALWAYS exceed a paid professionals care to detail and accuracy, why?
one is working for money to pay the bills and what not, the prior works for PRIDE.
and in my eyes, pride and self satisfaction will ALWAYS, ALWAYS, outweigh monetary gains.

ask this, and be honest with yourselves, if we as modders were collecting a paycheck for EVERY ship, script, bridge, and mod, whilst having a deadline and a boss who wants what THEY want and not what WE want breathing down our backs, would our work suffer as a result?
the answer isnt a simple yes or no, but to some degree i do so beleive that yes, our work would suffer.
im not defending the ST:O crew, nor am i slamming them entirely, like i said, they were paid to do a job, and they did it to the best that they could under circumstance.

ok, my rant is over XD
I came, i saw, i added a Sig.
Later gents, i have Youtube to take over.
Cy - 1-12-15

Offline Barihawk

  • Ninth Fleet STO Commanding Officer
  • Posts: 766
  • Cookies: 225
  • BC: The Aftermath Member
    • My Released Work
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #502 on: August 01, 2009, 03:20:45 PM »
Why are we comparing a fan-made story-driven game with an MMO created by a third party company (which by the way all ships can be customized nearly infinitely and as such are not done justice by screenshots alone).

I mean seriously, it's not a competition. I don't understand why people are trashing our work. If someone posted these ships on these boards as a BC mod, people would be tossing them cookies left and right for being creative and doing something new. Certainly not trashing them like this. They are trying to create something different, and their creativity is being pissed on just for the sake of it.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm kind of disappointed in your reactions. There is nothing wrong with these ships. They may not be uber-poly or super-res or whatever, and that's because they are being built for an MMO. A system where you can have hundreds, maybe even thousands (as seen in EVE) in one spot at the same time. Sacrifices have to be made to accomodate that.

Excalibur and STO have completely different visions. Just because someone gets paid to do this kind of work does not mean that they are doing it for the money. Look at Rick Knox's work.

I mean seriously. Are some of you so jaded by your fanaticism for this franchise that you viciously attack people for not following "design lineages" and "Roddenberry's vision?" If you don't like their models or ships, don't dish out the money for their game. Simple as that. It's not necessary to trash on their designers because you don't agree with their vision. If you did that to someone on these boards, you'd have action taken upon you by the staff.

That being said, I think the models look fairly unique and interesting, and it will be an experience to see how individuals tailor each ship to their own liking. 

Offline Darkthunder

  • Vice Administrator
  • Posts: 2323
  • Cookies: 1527
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #503 on: August 01, 2009, 03:51:35 PM »
You make some interesting arguements Barihawk. However, you kinda fail in regards to comparing STO to Eve Online: Eve's ships are a hundred times more attractive than the stuff we've seen from Cryptic. And both games are meant to handle "hundreds if not thousands" of ships in one area at the same time.

I see no reason for Cryptic to have to sacrifice detail and quality, in favour of quantity, when CCP Games (creators of Eve Online), are able to successfully make both highly detailed and high quality ships, as well as being able to run hundreds of ships at the same time.

Onto the next arguement: "If you don't like it, don't pay for it". Ofcourse while this is true, some of us have atleast SOME interest in actually playing a Star Trek MMO, but it should be possible to both play a game AND have high quality ships to fly around in. Obviously Eve Online have proved this again and again. Cryptic Studios is a larger company than CCP Games, and they've had more experience in game development. If they are unable to EQUAL Eve Online's level of quality, if not surpass it, than I think we are in our full rights to lodge a number of complaints.

Yes, STO is an MMO and pretty much all MMOs have a certain degree of customization involved for the players characters/ships. However I think I speak for a lot of people, when I say that I don't want to see Federation starships named "USS Pimp My Ride", and looking like it was created at the height of Woodstock. There are certain "design ethics" involved when it comes to how things should look within Star Trek.

For example: STO uses what is known as "engine trails" to assist the players in knowing which orientation the ship currently has. There is not a single Star Trek game to date that has needed to rely on "engine trails" for orientation, and for good reason: It's not part of Star Trek. I see no reason to include engine trails in the first Star Trek MMO, when you should be aiming to make a game that appeals to "a vast majority" of the Star Trek fans, as well as making it accessable to the common casual gamer.
Official BCC Discord · https://discord.gg/nJAx4HNQ2G
Ad Astra Per Aspera

Offline Dalek

  • Posts: 1529
  • Cookies: 206
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #504 on: August 01, 2009, 03:54:36 PM »
I mean seriously. Are some of you so jaded by your fanaticism for this franchise that you viciously attack people for not following "design lineages" and "Roddenberry's vision?" If you don't like their models or ships, don't dish out the money for their game. Simple as that. It's not necessary to trash on their designers because you don't agree with their vision. If you did that to someone on these boards, you'd have action taken upon you by the staff.

Well not really no. Humans are capable of being able to decide whether we like something or not. For example:

The Excal/Connie thing, I really don't like. Not as a 25th Century Connie, but as a ship itself.

The ship in the first attached image, I think it's quite cute and I'd love to fly that thing around.

The ship in the second attached image is a bit like the JJPrise. Looks good at some angles, could look better at others.

I thought the BoP, Valdore, Warbird and Cardie Galor looked fantastic and the Miranda looks suitably refitted for the 25th Century. Lets hope it lasts a lot longer than Mirandas seen in DS9 :P
"To live on as we have is to leave behind joy, and love, and companionship, because we know it to be transitory, of the moment. We know it will turn to ash. Only those whose lives are brief can imagine that love is eternal. You should embrace that remarkable illusion. It may be the greatest gift your race has ever received."

 - Lorien

Offline Barihawk

  • Ninth Fleet STO Commanding Officer
  • Posts: 766
  • Cookies: 225
  • BC: The Aftermath Member
    • My Released Work
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #505 on: August 01, 2009, 04:02:38 PM »
I mean seriously. Are some of you so jaded by your fanaticism for this franchise that you viciously attack people for not following "design lineages" and "Roddenberry's vision?" If you don't like their models or ships, don't dish out the money for their game. Simple as that. It's not necessary to trash on their designers because you don't agree with their vision. If you did that to someone on these boards, you'd have action taken upon you by the staff.

Well not really no. Humans are capable of being able to decide whether we like something or not. For example:

The Excal/Connie thing, I really don't like. Not as a 25th Century Connie, but as a ship itself.

The ship in the first attached image, I think it's quite cute and I'd love to fly that thing around.

The ship in the second attached image is a bit like the JJPrise. Looks good at some angles, could look better at others.

I thought the BoP, Valdore, Warbird and Cardie Galor looked fantastic and the Miranda looks suitably refitted for the 25th Century. Lets hope it lasts a lot longer than Mirandas seen in DS9 :P

See, that's perfectly fine. I'm not trying to harp on people's opinions. I personally think that while the Excalibur is a good model and a lineage ship, it's nothing new in terms of creativity.

But there's a big difference between having an opinion, and dumping on individuals. Hate the ship, not the designers.

Offline DJ Curtis

  • Ship Builder
  • Posts: 1967
  • Cookies: 1412
  • I make ships.
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #506 on: August 01, 2009, 11:04:39 PM »
There's no attempt to make the ships look beautiful.  It's more than looking cool or customizable.  It's about the flow.  The way the ship's lines curve and move as the eye desires them to.  It's about having components that fit the overall aesthetic of the ship.  Not round NX style nacelles on a Sovereign body with a Miranda's roll bar.

These ships are all about the science of ships, and not the art.

Offline Nebula

  • BC elder / BCC Vice Admin
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 5500
  • Cookies: 1129
  • KM - Mod Team Member & BC - Elder (2002)
    • 9th fleet HQ
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #507 on: August 02, 2009, 12:29:56 AM »
Quote
round NX style nacelles on a Sovereign body with a Miranda's roll bar.

that's a bit extreme, and I haven't seen them goof and make one like that yet....
Canon is what people argue exists on ships that don't exist.

Offline Phaser

  • Star Trek Canon Authority
  • Posts: 387
  • Cookies: 231
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #508 on: August 02, 2009, 12:38:37 AM »
Whats with all of the 22nd century ships in a 25th century game? I just don't get it.
Since when can people not go retro? :P Just cos it looks ENT doesn't mean its as low powered. Also, its the only thing approaching a design "ethic" for the Klingons. Considering how different each Klingon TNG ship looks to each other...
Guys, the reason those ships look like what was seen in 'ENTERPRISE' is because those ships, like virtually everything in what ended up being a non-canon show, didn't properly take into account the design aesthetics of TOS--the ships in 'ENTERPRISE' looked even more futuristic than the ships in TNG!

(Sidebar/Rant: While the detail level of the sets would have to have been greater than those in TOS, the ships themselves should have been much more basic in shape and had fewer greebles.  The details should have been in the hues and weathering of the ship, just like with all the ships seen in TOS.  The fantastic job the remastering team has done with the Enterprise is an excellent example of how to keep in line with this design ethic and still maintain a futuristic appearance.)

With this in mind, it should be no surprise that the ships from STO have a simliar level of detail as those seen in 'ENTERPRISE'.  That's the direction the entire industry has taken in terms of starship design.

Quote
round NX style nacelles on a Sovereign body with a Miranda's roll bar.

that's a bit extreme, and I haven't seen them goof and make one like that yet....
Looks to me like he's right on the money.

Offline Darkthunder

  • Vice Administrator
  • Posts: 2323
  • Cookies: 1527
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #509 on: August 02, 2009, 09:15:55 AM »
what was seen in 'ENTERPRISE' is because those ships, like virtually everything in what ended up being a non-canon show

We've had this discussion before, and whether or not you 'choose' to consider Enterprise as canon or not, it's still very much a part of canon. It was also referenced to in the new movie (Admiral Archer's prized beagle).

Real-life reason for why ENTERPRISE looked more advanced than TOS and TNG: Money and production designs. Able to afford more detailed designs, that sort of thing.

In regards to "in-canon" explanations: The effects of Picard and the Enterprise being involved during First Contact MAY have influenced the timeline to take a technologial leap forward, mostly due to that Cochrane (who was a very influental man when he wasnt drunk), had knowledge about an "advanced society of cyborgs whose intent was to enslave the human race". It's quite possible that Earth (and Starfleet) decided to develop ships at a much more advanced rate. The same explanation goes for the new JJEnterprise since the USS Kelvin was destroyed to a then-unknown and powerful new enemy.
Official BCC Discord · https://discord.gg/nJAx4HNQ2G
Ad Astra Per Aspera

Offline Dalek

  • Posts: 1529
  • Cookies: 206
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #510 on: August 02, 2009, 09:20:23 AM »
Moving on...

http://www.startrekonline.com/ships/unknown

Looks like a Valdore to me in that pic.
"To live on as we have is to leave behind joy, and love, and companionship, because we know it to be transitory, of the moment. We know it will turn to ash. Only those whose lives are brief can imagine that love is eternal. You should embrace that remarkable illusion. It may be the greatest gift your race has ever received."

 - Lorien

Offline 086gf

  • Location: United Socialist States of America!
  • Posts: 1357
  • Cookies: 32
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #511 on: August 03, 2009, 08:26:50 PM »
^Was posted back in June IIRC and yeah from what the article says its a Norexan with the same rommie modified borg tech that they covered the Narada with though obviously they just put a few things on it since most of what they had was on the Narada.
All hail the messiah!

Offline Phaser

  • Star Trek Canon Authority
  • Posts: 387
  • Cookies: 231
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #512 on: August 08, 2009, 05:14:09 PM »
We've had this discussion before, and whether or not you 'choose' to consider Enterprise as canon or not, it's still very much a part of canon. It was also referenced to in the new movie (Admiral Archer's prized beagle).

Real-life reason for why ENTERPRISE looked more advanced than TOS and TNG: Money and production designs. Able to afford more detailed designs, that sort of thing.

In regards to "in-canon" explanations: The effects of Picard and the Enterprise being involved during First Contact MAY have influenced the timeline to take a technologial leap forward, mostly due to that Cochrane (who was a very influental man when he wasnt drunk), had knowledge about an "advanced society of cyborgs whose intent was to enslave the human race". It's quite possible that Earth (and Starfleet) decided to develop ships at a much more advanced rate. The same explanation goes for the new JJEnterprise since the USS Kelvin was destroyed to a then-unknown and powerful new enemy.
Right, dude. Whatever you say. :roll:

^Was posted back in June IIRC and yeah from what the article says its a Norexan with the same rommie modified borg tech that they covered the Narada with though obviously they just put a few things on it since most of what they had was on the Narada.
Yea, that definitely looks like the Norexan to me.

Offline Darkthunder

  • Vice Administrator
  • Posts: 2323
  • Cookies: 1527
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #513 on: August 08, 2009, 08:24:37 PM »
My explanation as to why things are more advanced in ENT/Trek XI is as good as any :P
Official BCC Discord · https://discord.gg/nJAx4HNQ2G
Ad Astra Per Aspera

Offline Tuskin38

  • Posts: 2476
  • Cookies: 111
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #514 on: August 09, 2009, 08:30:08 AM »
I always though the NX-01 look less advanced. I mean, it it has segmented hull plating, the exposed warpcoils on the nacelles. The outside vents. I don't know where people got the "More advanced" look from. While the XI Enterprise and the TOS enterprise looked more advanced, smooth sleek, pristine.

Anyways. This isn't about Xi or ENT.



So far i've liked most of the designs in this game, I'll probably get the trial once they release one.

Offline Nebula

  • BC elder / BCC Vice Admin
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 5500
  • Cookies: 1129
  • KM - Mod Team Member & BC - Elder (2002)
    • 9th fleet HQ
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #515 on: August 15, 2009, 11:48:04 AM »
Vigilant class
Canon is what people argue exists on ships that don't exist.

Offline Tuskin38

  • Posts: 2476
  • Cookies: 111
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #516 on: August 15, 2009, 01:19:33 PM »
get rid of the two spike things in teh front and I'd like it. Wait, I think those are the Pulse Phaser cannons... Hmm, they should Make them shorter then.

Offline majormagna

  • English Idiot
  • Posts: 513
  • Cookies: 5
  • Bail Out!
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #517 on: August 15, 2009, 04:52:59 PM »
It's nice to see a sleek ship for Starfleet; but that's too much. Needs more 'bulk', considering it's a Defiant ripoff evolution.

Hopefully the 'customisability... ation' (Yeah, didn't realy work) will allow me to scrap the 'tusks' and make it less air-smoothed. Although I've just thought; perhaps it's intended to fly in-atmosphere for extended periods, kind of like a troop transport/planetary patrol/(less likely) mobile laboratory function.
Did you know I'm on Twitter?

Offline CyAn1d3

  • MacDill Shipyards Design Team
  • Posts: 1656
  • Cookies: 420
  • RETIRED
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #518 on: August 15, 2009, 06:44:49 PM »
.... considering it's a Defiant ripoff evolution.

you were right the first time
I came, i saw, i added a Sig.
Later gents, i have Youtube to take over.
Cy - 1-12-15

Offline Nebula

  • BC elder / BCC Vice Admin
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 5500
  • Cookies: 1129
  • KM - Mod Team Member & BC - Elder (2002)
    • 9th fleet HQ
Re: Star Trek Online thread
« Reply #519 on: August 15, 2009, 07:49:44 PM »
And what's wrong with that??

There have been plenty of Fan Made Defiant Ripoffs....
Canon is what people argue exists on ships that don't exist.