Topic: Trekless Galaxies at War!? Why not?

[Mr. Hypergol]

Well since Activision seems to have mutilated and destroyed the SFC series for their own profit I propose the following:

Since Taldren owns the SFC code why can't they make a deal with Amarillo Design Bureau to use the Star Fleet Battle rules set and give us our Galaxies at War (no longer called SFC) but without the Trek.

The SFB rules are not the property of Paramount or Activision........sooooo why not just RENAME and CHANGE THE SHIP MODELS for everything that relates to Trek.  For example rename or replace the Trek based races, ships, weapons, and systems to something else but still use Star Fleet Battles rules and ship designs under the hood?  Some races like Hydrans and Andromedans for example that were totally inventions of Amarillo Design Bureau would not need to be changed at all.

As long as the game is made sufficiently moddable, we can add all our Trek models and names back in after we buy the game.

It comes down to this:  I love Star Fleet Battles not for the Trek, but for the game itself.  Activision seems to have lost sight of this fact with SFC3 (which I bought and played by the way....where the hell is that patch DAN!!!!).

I want computerized Star Fleet Battles dammit.....why can't somebody deliver!!!

P.S. - SFBonline ain't good enough....so don't recommend it!!!!  Thank you.  

[Dash Jones]

Quote:
Well since Activision seems to have mutilated and destroyed the SFC series for their own profit I propose the following:

Since Taldren owns the SFC code why can't they make a deal with Amarillo Design Bureau to use the Star Fleet Battle rules set and give us our Galaxies at War (no longer called SFC) but without the Trek.

The SFB rules are not the property of Paramount or Activision........sooooo why not just RENAME everything that relates to Trek.  For example rename the Trek based races, weapons, and systems to something else but still use Star Fleet Battles rules and ship designs under the hood?  Some races like Hydrans and Andromedans for example that were totally inventions of Amarillo Design Bureau would not need to be changed at all.

As long as the game is made sufficiently moddable, we can add all our Trek models and names back in after we buy the game.

It comes down to this:  I love Star Fleet Battles not for the Trek, but for the game itself.

I want computerized Star Fleet Battles dammit.....why can't somebody deliver!!!

P.S. - SFBonline ain't good enough....so don't recommend it!!!!  Thank you.    

Well, if they copied the direct wording of the weapons from SFB, if SFB owns those rights, couldn't Taldren Use them.  Taldren could design new models after the metal minatures used in SFB and use those in game, since I would surmise those would also be under SFB copyright...and to make sure it was cosher, they could ask for Paramount's blessing?  Even though they could do it without the big P's consent (hey, it's good to play nice sometimes).  I think that would be kicking!  though there would be some things I would want.  The Pirates still in there, but this time perhaps letting them have partial modifiable hulls within reason?  And the Andromedans and Tholians perhaps, and all other things SFB!  Wow, I'm actually getting quite excited by this idea...

[hobbesmaster]

Rat Boy... can you say "Omega"?  

[Dash Jones]

Yeah, I think Omega could be doable...I mean, except for stretching somethings quite a bit, it seems Omega is distanced enough from the Trek universe itself...whilst still be SFB, to be approachable...and it has..12? races.  Is this correct?

[Dash Jones]

Quote:
Foxed.  All they have to do is get the ball rolling on a "Cease and desist" and it'll scare them off.  What puts the Omegaverse over the intellectual property edge is the Aurora colony (am I right?) and its backstory as a member of the UFP.  

I'm not certain.  It is related to the UFP, but perhaps they could tweak it a little to make it unprosecutable?  Something like they did with the Mirak?

[CynicForever]

Babylon 5 Command, maybe? StarWars Command? Farscape Command? Or maybe something completely new.  

[Robb Stark]

Quote:

It comes down to this:  I love Star Fleet Battles not for the Trek, but for the game itself.  Activision seems to have lost sight of this fact with SFC3 (which I bought and played by the way....where the hell is that patch DAN!!!!).

I want computerized Star Fleet Battles dammit.....why can't somebody deliver!!!

P.S. - SFBonline ain't good enough....so don't recommend it!!!!  Thank you.    

It comes down to this: there are not enough like you out there to make it worth the risk.

"A game system which is like Starfleet Battles but with totally different ships!" is not a tagline that will inspire many people to fork over their loot.  Perhaps it could be a monster hit - anything is possible.  But the odds are against it.  Starfleet Battles is a niche-type game, and would be considerably more obscure if it wasn't based on Trek.  

Besides, I get the feeling that Taldren is ready for a genuine clean slate.  They seem to have their own visions and ideas they want to explore and realize.  Perhaps they're tired of trying to bring to life someone else's concept for a fan base that will never really be satisfied.  Whether they fail or succeed is something only time will tell, but I applaud them for doing their own thing.  
 

[Admiral_CRS]

I think I speak for the majority of "cash cow" buyers when I say: "I bought this game and the others because of two words----Star Trek."

No sfb game would sell well enough without the Trek license to merit production.  Star Wars fans generally want more action compared with trek fans.

[Stormbringer]

I don't know...
In my gaming group using West Ends Games version of Starwars RPG, We spent a great deal of time designing our own ships and then simulating battles in them.  Eventually we adapted them to SFB rules/WEG hybridized rules. We liked the more "realistic" damage allocation, targeting, and movement rules in SFB's baby but used WEG's stuff a lot as well.  We thought the ship design logic and technology details in SW were inferior drivel. No engineer in his right mind would design a ship like the millenium falcon.The tech was infinitely less believable too.  It just don't make sense. The trek stuff looked logically consistant. But we like swarming fighter battles and naval egagements reminiscent of WW2 broadside battles which were more present in WEG. We developed (cones of steel) hydra flechette anti-fighter defence rockets, refractive armor, density differential refractive shielding, ion cannon defeating chaff, tractor defeating ion cannon shots, laser defeating reflective paint (good up to X-ray wavelengths), fire control scanners (manual targeting has been ineffective since about 4 decades ago)

Anyway the point is we used SW ships with trek rules. There were no Fed Klink, Rom or any other ST ships, though we used similar tech minus transporters. It was a blast.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Bah....Taldren could do a "strategic starship combat simulator...contstruction set"..and create totally new Intellectual property to fill in the game with.....

Would it sell?

add:

The general ideas allready proposed umpteen times (tm)

The abilty to use and see others custom models....*cough* we'll add our own...

The abilty to join a mission in progress.....my own pet most wanted feature...

A diverse and balanced ruleset...


Yeah...it would definetly sell......

Galaxies at War is a general working title formed by community opinion and freely usable by taldren should they so wish....

But I would assume they would come up with a title of their own....



 

[FPF_TraceyG]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Starfleet Battles, and the 'Starfleet Universe' wholly copyrighted by Amarillo design bureau, and that that Paramount can do nothing about its Star Trek content? (something which really annoys Paramount, so I've heard)
If ADB owns Starfleet Battles wholly, and they own the rights to it, why then is any license required from Paramount at all to create a computer based version of Starfleet Battles. Taldren own the game engine to SFC (they wrote it after all), why should Paramount be involved at all?? Perhaps I'm just being naive here.

[SSCF Hooch]

Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt Starfleet Battles, and the 'Starfleet Universe' wholly copyrighted by Amarillo design bureau, and that that Paramount can do nothing about its Star Trek content? (something which really annoys Paramount, so I've heard)
If ADB owns Starfleet Battles wholly, and they own the rights to it, why then is any license required from Paramount at all to create a computer based version of Starfleet Battles. Taldren own the game engine to SFC (they wrote it after all), why should Paramount be involved at all?? Perhaps I'm just being naive here.  

You do make a good point.

Hooch

[Rod O'neal]

ADB wanted to make a computer version of SFB years ago. Paramount says their license doesn't cover video games, only the board game. ADB dissagreed with it but didn't/doesn't have the resources to fight Paramount. They either didn't want to or couldn't afford to pay additional licensing for a computer game. So, it never happenned.  

[**DONOTDELETE**]

And here is where I'd like to point out that Harry Lang...the Parmount representative....is a straight shooter....I've had several conversations with Harry unrelated to ST and have allways found him to be open minded and frank in his answers.....

From every indication Harry and Erik have a good relationship....and I dont think the *cough* "enterprise era is licensed yet ....who knows what can happen a couple of projects down the pike

[Mr. Hypergol]

Quote:
"I bought this game and the others because of two words----Star Trek."

I understand this view very well.  I love Star Trek too.  But the problem with this is that Star Trek is a great show but this doesn't mean it makes for a great game.  Starfleet Command bucked this problem because it used the appeal of Star Trek for marketing but the core of the game was a well developed system that has been play tested for close to 20 years.  That's what made the difference here.

Star Fleet Battles and Starfleet Command gameplay can stand on their own merits even without Trek in my opinion.  That's the point I'm trying to make here.  For many who bought this series, all the Star Trek name did was get you to buy the game.  After you started playing the game, it was the "gameplay" that kept you hooked...not the name Star Trek.

My point with this thread is to propose ideas for getting more of what we love about Starfleet Command.  If Activision is not interested in providing this, then there has to be another way.  

[FireSoul]

I'll be brief:

.. I don't think SFB would be SFB without Trek in it.
-- Luc

[Rod O'neal]

Quote:
I'll be brief:

.. I don't think SFB would be SFB without Trek in it.
-- Luc  

Right again!
So many of the systems, and how they operate and interact, come directly out of trek. If you tried to make an SFB based game that just changed the names and faces in order to get around licensing, you'd be sued in a heartbeat! Especially since you'd have to tie the two together in order to successfully market it.
As far as the Enterprise era goes, Harry said on these forums that ATVI's license covers ALL Trek.  

[Mr. Hypergol]

Quote:
I don't think SFB would be SFB without Trek in it.

I totally agree....I for one would put the Trek right back in as soon as I loaded up my Trekless GAW.

However, I'm just looking for a way to get Galaxies at War without going through Activision as a publisher or violate any Trek liscenses.

Perhaps a joint project between ADB and Taldren?  A subscription service?  Just wondering what is possible beyond admitting defeat?  

[Mr. Hypergol]

 

Quote:
So many of the systems, and how they operate and interact, come directly out of trek. If you tried to make an SFB based game that just changed the names and faces in order to get around licensing, you'd be sued in a heartbeat!

I don't see this.  Just how does a phaser damage table from SFB have anything to do with Trek.  If you call it a laser table it's the same thing but no longer Trek.  I never heard Kirk say ahead speed 32.  Do you see what I'm saying?

ADB has the sole rights to the SFB ruleset.  Including the mechanics of it.  I don't see why a non-Trek game could not be exactly SFB under the hood.  

[FireSoul]

well.. uhm..

.. if it isn't Trek.. and it isn't SFB.. (both).. I won't be buying it,,

.. yeah.. it's easy to deduce from the above that I didn't buy SFC3 either.
Strafer did buy it, and I actually finished the single-player campaigns, but having doine that I quickly lost interest. Span of interest I had in it? .. 1 week.

-- Luc