SFC/Tactical Assault makes a better MMO than Bridge Commander or Excalibur or whatever hardcore singleplayer game you guys seem to expect.
If you really wanna know why I dislike STO (in it's current shape), here goes:
- Engine trails (can be disabled, but should still have no place on Star Trek ships)
- Everyone is captain (advancing through the ranks is part of life within Starfleet/KDF)
- No interior exploration (going from the bridge to engineering, "Ten Forward" etc)
- No space based missions with replaceable NPCs for Human players
- Combat, combat, conflict and more combat
Point #1: No engine trails in Star Trek, period. If there has been any "engine emissions" visible, it's only been a minimal amount. No engine trails hanging behind the ship and it's engines.
Point #2: I have no wish for STO to become a "WoW in space", but part of the experience in Star Trek is advancing through the ranks of Cadet all the way up to Captain, and in some cases even Admiralty. Having everyone as captain, you leave out that possibility for advancement.
Point #3: Even if you have "everyone as Captain", the captains of Star Trek does occasionally leave the bridge of their ship, either to visit other key areas of the ship such as Engineering, or even for recreational purposes such as the Holodeck.
Point #4: Cryptic has decided that you can have a team of ~5 members with you as a leader, and 4 NPCs (bridge officers) on the ground based away missions. These 4 NPCs can be replaced by 4 human players. While space based missions only allow players to fly solo in their own ship, or together with other ships. There is no space based variant where you have yourself + 4 human players controlling a single ship. Yes, while I can agree that manning the sensors 24/7, or helm 24/7 could become tedious, it would've been nice to atleast allow the OPTION to group together with other players to control a single ship.
Point #5: Star Trek is not
ALL about combat and all-out conflict. There have only been a handful of wars during the 200+ years of Star Trek history. Certain conflicts such as the Klingon Civil War, and the war between the Klingons and Cardassians I would consider more as "skirmishes" rather than actual wars. The only all-out war that has involved multiple participants is the Dominion War, and it was the Dominion that started the conflict. The Federation was defending themselves, and were allied with the Klingons and eventually the Romulans.
To expand on #5, is that the game should involve
ALOT more exploration, diplomacy, politics, and less focus on the actual combat. I'm sure theres plenty of people who would love to "blow shit up", but that's not what Star Trek is all about. The sooner some people realize this, the better imho.
Now in conclusion Barihawk, you may question my reasonings for disliking STO. But I have stated my opinions on the subject, and at current I don't see my opinions being changed to be more favourable towards STO. There needs to be plenty of changes involved in the STO development, before it could be considered a "Star Trek game" imho. Flying around space pew pew fighing ships in Star Trek "kitbashes", does not make it a Star Trek game.
