| Username | fansede |
| Real Name | Doctor Ansede |
| Rank | Advanced Member |
| Joined | June 23, 2003 |
| Gender | Male |
| Age | 40 |
| Location | Raleigh, NC, United States |
| Last Visit | December 2, 2008 |
| Post Count | 503 |
| Biography | |
| Quote | Pain is fear leaving the body.. |
Perpetual received a lot of flack for not investing much time in regards to the starship interiors of the Star Trek ship. Let's hope Cryptic doesn't make the same mistake.
There are a lot of ways Cryptic can approach the Starship Interiors concept, the question always comes down to, what is FUN?
Will the Starship be merely a transport vehicle for groups to travel? And players use them only to fight starship fights by themselves?
Or will Starships be a moving "base of operations" (like City of Villians Instanced base)? Drawing from previous Star Trek games like Bridge Commander, wouldn't it be fun to get an intergration of both concepts?
Let's say our Captain has been comissioned a ship from a Federation Starbase or Earth. The Ship has the basics - a bridge, engineering, sick bay and mess hall. The Captain has been given an assignment from an NPC Admiral. The Admiral tells the captain what officers are required for the task. The Captain can assemble his team or use the City of Heroes style LFG system (Lists players lfg , their rank, their specialty). Players requesting a team get a beep on their badge and a message..
Once the team is assembled the Captain assigns them to the ship. Not everyone gets to sit on the bridge. The entire team can explore the ship and interact with it. Sit emotes, eat/ drink, sleep, etc. Bring up a map of the ship schematics, etc..
Going to do away missions are easy, because the ship is merely a transport vessel. It is when ship to ship combat occurs is the real problem.
Perpetual noted that they do not want players staring at consoles during a fight. Understood. I can see that it lacks action pack activity that other MMOs offer. BUT this is Star Trek. It is not Anarachy Online or Star Wars Galaxies for that matter.
I do believe Cryptic can make ship vs. ship combat exciting as a group effort. The roles are already there in the Star Trek Universe. Captains in this case, not only set the mission and its difficulty, they can set NPC behavior of the crew. Maybe he could not find an Engineer for his mission. Well he "buys" one from the Starfleet manifest and sets it behavior. The Captain also receives reports from his players and the game translates it into statistics of his ship. For example the Captain wants to know his Shield status. He does not know it always. He must receive a report from his tactical officer. A good officer updates this regularly and it shows up to the captain as a blue bar surrounding the ship. The status bar remains that way until updated again. So teamwork is essential. An AFK Tactical Officer would mean he is literally asleep at the post and may mean defeat for the team.
Captains have other roles but I will go into that some other time.
Each team member has a role on the ship during space combat. Give the Captain reports and keep the area you are in charge of in peak performance. I would then propose to throw a wrinkle into the system..
Mini instances. What? We are in the middle of a battle and I am off doing an instance? Hear me out..
These could be mini scenarios that may turn the tide of battle or provide unique "buffs" for the team. An example , Suppose the Ship is in combat with a Romulan. The Lieutennant is stationed at the Conn and is charge of navigation. Normally he has a host of abiltites, combat manuevers to aid the ship in this fight. The game throws a curveball to the team and it seems the Romulan ship has blasted the Lieutennants station. The team sees the player is down and the bridge is on fire. Instead of the game continuing its space fight, the mini instance has started. Save the player, save the bridge in 10 minutes or the Ship suffers. The lieutennant has to be carried to sick bay through the ship interior map. All the while the ship trembles in the heat of combat. Someone has to stop the fire and repair the console to a workable condition. A Doctor has to heal the fallen member or he is out of the fight. The captain has the option of skipping the scenario and suffer the ship movement and combat debuff or go through the scenario and keep functioning systems...
Would that be feasible for a game?
A MMORPG forum discussing economic policy = priceless
Anyway you may not like the subscription system model but it has worked for over a decade. World of Warcraft which pulled the MMO genre into the limelight embraces this system and is reaping the rewards.
That is not to say the Free to Play and Item Malls are inferior. It works and we will see more of it.
The bottom line is the game that provides the most entertainment for the most people every day wins. The beauty of MMO games is that they are dynamic. You log in and the virtual world is active. You play with others possibly across the globe. A single player game does not provide that unless they have a multiplayer feature added to it. The MMO is generally larger and has much more content than a single player game. There is always something you can do. In single player games, after you finish it, the replayability declines.
Remember some of these MMOs are Still alive and well and they are over 10 years old ( Ultima Online, Runescape, Everquest) , how many single player games can boast such enthusiasm?
Originally posted by craynlon
Originally posted by Joibest
Where is Chronicles of Spellborn fighting system?
I wanted to vote for that
it seems that mmorpg.com sees spellborne as a 2009 game (see 1st page also) even tough some of us lucky europeans alreaddy play it.
i posted once that tcos should be 2008 and aion should be 2009 but no1 listens to me ![]()
Yea, I thought Chronicles was a 2009 game and you were playing Beta. Oh my bad..
Good point on adding the Turn based combat system(Atlantica Online) in MMOs. For MMOs it is different.
Diplomacy is another one that should be on the list. I don't know of any other game that implemented card duels into the MMO game. I would not have voted for it being the most innovative, but it deserves an honorable mention.
When was DDO released? The implementation of voice chat in the game itself may deserve a mention, only because no other game decided to do it. Most avid players use 3rd party programs like Ventrilo/Teamspeak. On a personal level, I shunned away from voice chat until DDO because I felt it ruined my immersion, but I soon learned it wasn't bad after all.
(edit: DDO released in 2006 DOH
Vanguard released in 2007!)
Reason I chose WARs PQ system over AoC Cobat system ( though it was close):
The PQ experience was a game wide experience. All players could enjoy the feature when logged in. In Age of Conan, if I played a pure caster (PoM, ToS, Necro, Demonologist), the combo system is worthless to me. ( Nitpicking yes, I know)
I also believe future MMO games will emulate Public Quests in their worlds one form or another. They will learn a lot from Mythics implementation and improve upon it. Age of Conans combo system will be harder to emulate. Might require too much effort that would be worth it. Why go through all the troubles of a combo when you can chain buttons together or do a heroic opportunity like in EQ2 for a special effect?
Public quests are fair on most levels. Everyone gets a shot for loot, though the scales are tipped for those who contribute more. Even if you don't have time to stay to the end or dont have enough people to do it, you can still get a reward from an influence vendor. It is a casual MMO players blessing. And casual players outnumber the hardcore ones.
So this is why I feel Public quests are so innovative for MMOs.
Here is an interesting question for you all veterans : Which MMO has the best pet system?
Yes this game is falling quickly into vaproware status.
Or maybe it is using the Darkfall strategy of marekting..
What characteristics of an MMORPG do you look at most?