Topic: How much money would it take for Taldren to make SFC4: Galaxies at War? (Read 10077 times)

David Ferrell · « **Reply #20 on:** August 12, 2003, 02:00:46 pm »

The official answer:

A b*tt load.

A mapless SFC has been discussed as recently as the planning for SFC:TNG(3).
It was quickly disguarded as we didn't have time to complete such a game on
our given time-table.

Thanks,

Dave

RazalYllib · « **Reply #21 on:** August 12, 2003, 06:41:39 pm »

Short list for GaW:

Andro, Tholian- must haves, to include all relavent systems..Displacement Device, PA Panel (and modules to be ejected), Web and Web caster, TR beams of course with nifty art.

Federation and Empire-Like Order of Battle(programable?), Command and Control (think Command Ratings) etc..

Scout Sensor functions would also be very nice.

Realistic Economic Model to include development of assets and inter-empire trading.

Programable AI behavior.

Friendly fire.

Model assignment not check at CRC level.

Full SQL with all the bells and whistles.

any others ideas I havent covered

Demandred · « **Reply #22 on:** August 12, 2003, 06:55:55 pm »

Quote:

The official answer:

A b*tt load.

A mapless SFC has been discussed as recently as the planning for SFC:TNG(3).
It was quickly disguarded as we didn't have time to complete such a game on
our given time-table.

Thanks,

Dave

Hey Dave. I remember a while ago that Erik was considering the option of making an SFC-like game, but with Taldren's own ideas rather than basing it off SFB. Was anything ever decided about that idea?

3dot14 · « **Reply #23 on:** August 12, 2003, 07:47:58 pm »

I am not so sure about friendly fire. (and I will be outright against an ESG friendly-fire options...)

More PF/Fighters (start with giving every race both).
And Plasma Bolts...

ActiveX. I don't mean your Capital-C-continous Capital-S-space. I mean the concept in general, which has already been used in games in many genres. And it's been proposed in SFC as well way back, as crim says.

RazalYllib · « **Reply #24 on:** August 12, 2003, 08:47:48 pm »

IMVHO...

A friendly fire would add yet another layer to the gameplay, be careful who you target, it may shoot back.

EmeraldEdge · « **Reply #25 on:** August 12, 2003, 08:55:05 pm »

I've always been pro-friendly fire, as an option, myself.

TarMinyatur · « **Reply #26 on:** August 12, 2003, 09:17:27 pm »

I'd be happy with more patches for EAW/OP. It's fantastic software which has been extraordinarily tested. Just add a bit more to it, please.

How much would it cost to hire two qualified people (like Magnum and Khoros) to write new code for 3 months? Heck, many of us would do it for FREE. I'm sure we could have Andros, Tholians, and scout functions by then. $5 million for Andros and Tholians and scouts seems insane to me.

I hope that patching has ended because Taldren is too busy with Black9 and another unnamed game to do it without monetary compensation, which is totally understandable!

Suppose the SFC community came up with $10,000 to fund a patch? Would Taldren think about it?

Has Activision/Paramount/SVC said "Thou shalt not patch SFC2 anymore!"?

Adding features to Interplay's product might reduce future revenues for a theoretical Activision/Paramount/SVC product in the future. Activision is the party who wants SFC2 to be sealed. Their lawyers want us to buy SFC 4, which will likely never be made.

Paramount just wants to gouge people to use the Star Trek theme. Paramount might own the word "Tholian" but they don't own the SFB intellectual property. I'm sure they'd try to stop any unlicensed use of Star Trek, no matter how insignificant it is.

I don't see any resistance from SVC. SFC has surely increased sales of SFB.

The question is "How much can be added to SFC2 without paying Paramount?"

Mr. Hypergol · « **Reply #27 on:** August 12, 2003, 11:21:15 pm »

I have to wonder......

Dave Ferrell has hinted that it is a myth that SFC3 did not sell well. He also implied that the game made a tidy profit for Activision. Erik Bethke implied in another thread that Taldren actually lost money on SFC3.

Given these are facts.......

Why would Activision not want to fund a new Starfleet Command game....or at least an expansion to "the evil" SFC3? Are they in trouble? Or perhaps is it Taldren that is no longer interested in making another SFC game?

I have to wonder.........

Star Trek Starfleet Command 4: Galaxies at War..............what a nice name.

It would be a shame if it never happens.

3dot14 · « **Reply #28 on:** August 12, 2003, 11:29:39 pm »

Reality check:
there is a lawsuit between ATVI and VIACOM.

Activision is effectively out of the picture. the future of trek licence is unknown.

BTW I agree with Tar, the most likely chance we have would be a "patch" for OP... A new game would be immensely costly not to mention a gamble financially.

ActiveX · « **Reply #29 on:** August 12, 2003, 11:41:18 pm »

Go straight to Paramount and sweet talk the Olsen twins...

DONOTDELETE · « **Reply #30 on:** August 12, 2003, 11:54:09 pm »

50,000 bought games @ $ 100 ea = 5 million....

considering the sales numbers we've seen in the past...this doesnt seem out of the question....

Better yet.....how about 100,000 shares of Taldren for $50 ea......

When we have enough investors...the game goes into production....I would probably buy 5 to 10 shares myself....

TheSatyr · « **Reply #32 on:** August 13, 2003, 02:51:40 am »

David has made absolutely clear that EAW and OP are now finished products...the patching is over and done with...period.

TarMinyatur · « **Reply #33 on:** August 13, 2003, 09:53:15 am »

How many times did Michael Jordan retire for good?

Policies change if there is incentive. I believe that free patches for EAW and OP are indeed done. If Taldren could make some money on a patch then things might change.

David Ferrell · « **Reply #34 on:** August 13, 2003, 11:47:26 am »

Activision and Paramount would be on us like white on rice, if we
tried to make money on a patch.

Thanks,

Dave

Tulwar · « **Reply #36 on:** August 13, 2003, 06:55:37 pm »

I hear that the main manufacturing plant for cordrazine is located in Amarillo, Texas.

HAND!

Hehe!

The simple fact is with this lawsuit, Activision has really taken a dump on the franchise. Unless you can buy Activision, this series is dead until 2008. Then again, if the FTC investigation uncovers some really slimy buisness practices on part of Activision.... We can only hope.

Hopefully, with the decline of the populatity of ST, Viacom might start catering to the fans, rather than simply exploit them. I with Matt Jeffries were still around, making the models. SF should always have cool spaceships, and that is one thing ST seems to try to make up with quantity rather than quality. With the exception of the new Romulan War Bird, models in SFC 2/OP are better than anything produced for ST since TOS/TMP.

Why didn't the Reliant have a defector dish? Where did it go on the T'Kinga? Whatever happened to consistancy? I digress. It seems the people making ST are not into ST. This is a recipe for decline. Maybe this is a good thing.

ActiveX · « **Reply #37 on:** August 13, 2003, 07:20:15 pm »

The Galaxy is the most beautiful ship in trek...

News:

Topic: How much money would it take for Taldren to make SFC4: Galaxies at War? (Read 10077 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

David Ferrell

RazalYllib

Demandred

3dot14

RazalYllib

EmeraldEdge

TarMinyatur

Mr. Hypergol

3dot14

ActiveX

**DONOTDELETE**

Mr. Hypergol

TheSatyr

TarMinyatur

David Ferrell

**DONOTDELETE**

Tulwar

ActiveX

TarMinyatur

**DONOTDELETE**

Topic: How much money would it take for Taldren to make SFC4: Galaxies at War? (Read 10077 times)

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE