Topic: So whats the hold up with SFC G.A.W (Read 18292 times)

Davey E · « **on:** March 20, 2004, 10:08:05 am »

Hey all
Just thought i,d ask all you guys a few questions (if ya know the answers lol)

What is the problem with producing SFC G.A.W with the Tholians, Seltorians etc thrown in,
Yes a whole new game using the best of SFC2/OP/3

and

How much would it cost ?

I,m just curious - seems to me that there is a stack of peeps who would invest in this - I WOULD

So in general what are the problems in making G.A.W from 1-99 ???

Thanx all in advance for answers

Pestalence · « **Reply #1 on:** March 20, 2004, 10:56:55 am »

Well to develope and produce a game is roughly about 3 to 5 Million US give or take a couple hundred thousand, not counting the price for the licenses.. as far as the Tholians and other races go.. it is a matter of Rights and Liscencing and whether or not the race is available...

then there is a time factor for for production: the publishing costs, packaging, advertising, burining costs.. etc...

this is of course not counting the personal time involved for developing a new game engine, conceptual incorporation of ideas into the enviroment.. etc.. it would be a lot of work... but the problem is not just that cost (3 to 5 million plus production).. but also the post release cost of support...

I think the project for GAW could be done for say around 9 or 10 million or so (Liscense and development and production cost) give or take post release support cost... that is if Taldren is willing to undertake the project ....

People just don't realize how much it costs to develope a game....

now imagine investing that much into a game... how many copies would you have to sell in order to break even??? let's say at $70 a copy.... then people demand support..... now consider the wages of those working, the overtime, testing, debugging time, etc... it is a lot of manpower hours...

but if you are willing to help in a good portion of $10 million for the development of GAW.. then I think it could be acomplished...

let's see there are 3200 members on this forum...

so 10 million devided by 3200 people...

everyone would have to contribute $3275 up front so the project could be worked on for the next year and a half....

I'm game, but I am sure that a vast majority of members on this board would either say no, or say that they couldn't afford that ammount.. as such... the cost would increase to those who are willing to pay for it.

this is just a simple look at the numbers on cost....

FFZ · « **Reply #2 on:** March 20, 2004, 11:17:21 am »

Not to be obtuse, but three to five million to produce a game?

I think that number is just a tad high, no?

Why so expensive?

Pestalence · « **Reply #3 on:** March 20, 2004, 11:41:32 am »

3 to 5 million.. no not too high...

consider Coprorate pricing on software..

hardware costs for the newest equipment to develope a game for the cutting edge tech to be able to support

the man hours of say 50 people hacking away at coding at 8 hours a day 5 days a week at $15 to $20 an hour lets go with $15 and hour x 40 hours a week.. that is $600 a week per person times 50 people that is $30000 a week.. times 52 weeks for 1 year of development.. that comes to $1,560,000 per year.. then the over time at 1.5 times hourly rate per hour overtime.... say an average of 5 hours overtime for half the employees per week..

so that is 1.5 * $15 = $22.5 per hour * 5 Hours = $112.5 per person per week * 25 employees (half the workforce) = $2812.5 per week * 52 weeks per year = $146,250 in overtime pay...

so now just in wages based off $15 an hour you are spending $1,706,250 for 1 year in development.. this is not counting those with higher paying positions.. this is just entry level coders...

Now add in the taxes for the Corp.. Insurance, govn't regulated requirements like workman's comp pay in.. etc...

then the electricity and water bills.. cost of office supplies.... then add in the employees who are making $20 or even $30 an hour....

Wow... that number just jumped...

so yes it does cost a lot to develope a game.. and the numbers are not exaggerated.. as my initial posting stated.. I said a year and a half.. however my numbers here.. though not complete.. only represent 1 year for entry level position...

and this in no way represents the advertising costs, printing costs of the cover, printing costs and binding costs for manuals, burning times for CD's, Distribution costs, stocking costs.. building rent.. etc..

not does it include permissions or licensing costs for the material to be used... and usually in Trek.. Licenses usually run in the million dollar mark or higher.. why do you think Activision sued Paramount????

the costs add up fast... I can keep adding things on, but I think I have shown the point..

Teeth_03 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 20, 2004, 01:30:03 pm »

If money wasn't an issue,would we still be able to get the licenses? The next game,if there was one,would prolly have TNG in it,and if i'm correct,the license for that is screwed up cuz of our favorite company,Activision.

Davey E · « **Reply #5 on:** March 20, 2004, 02:04:31 pm »

Quote:

3 to 5 million.. no not too high...

consider Coprorate pricing on software..

hardware costs for the newest equipment to develope a game for the cutting edge tech to be able to support

the man hours of say 50 people hacking away at coding at 8 hours a day 5 days a week at $15 to $20 an hour lets go with $15 and hour x 40 hours a week.. that is $600 a week per person times 50 people that is $30000 a week.. times 52 weeks for 1 year of development.. that comes to $1,560,000 per year.. then the over time at 1.5 times hourly rate per hour overtime.... say an average of 5 hours overtime for half the employees per week..

so that is 1.5 * $15 = $22.5 per hour * 5 Hours = $112.5 per person per week * 25 employees (half the workforce) = $2812.5 per week * 52 weeks per year = $146,250 in overtime pay...

so now just in wages based off $15 an hour you are spending $1,706,250 for 1 year in development.. this is not counting those with higher paying positions.. this is just entry level coders...

Now add in the taxes for the Corp.. Insurance, govn't regulated requirements like workman's comp pay in.. etc...

then the electricity and water bills.. cost of office supplies.... then add in the employees who are making $20 or even $30 an hour....

Wow... that number just jumped...

so yes it does cost a lot to develope a game.. and the numbers are not exaggerated.. as my initial posting stated.. I said a year and a half.. however my numbers here.. though not complete.. only represent 1 year for entry level position...

and this in no way represents the advertising costs, printing costs of the cover, printing costs and binding costs for manuals, burning times for CD's, Distribution costs, stocking costs.. building rent.. etc..

not does it include permissions or licensing costs for the material to be used... and usually in Trek.. Licenses usually run in the million dollar mark or higher.. why do you think Activision sued Paramount????

the costs add up fast... I can keep adding things on, but I think I have shown the point.

Great reply Pestalence

Thanx

Now lets say some mystery benefactor who loves SFB comes along, He,s got say $12-15 mil spare

and he,s prepared to "Go For It"

Now the problems with going ahead IMHO just reduced 90%

What else could hold G.A.W up ?

Pestalence · « **Reply #6 on:** March 20, 2004, 02:09:56 pm »

Actually all liscenses are up in the air.. but to my last understanding.. because of the litigation between Activision (who previouly leased all Trek gaming liscenses) and Paramount/Viacom (who Owns the Trek license) the license is on hold until either Activisions original contract runs out, or when the court makes a decision in the case.. Activision has publically announced giving up the license due to breach of contract.. but that claim goes both ways.. so the license for the time being is frozen... Activision had bought all the licenses for 5 years.. this is now going into year 3 of them holding the license contract (supposedly now voided).. so if the litigation continues.. then the license will remain frozen for the rest of this fiscal year plus 2 more years.

Hopefully the courts will free the license up for others to use soon.. if they haven't already...

FFZ · « **Reply #8 on:** March 20, 2004, 03:19:16 pm »

That is quite interesting, all those costs. It is no wonder so many game companies fold.

Pestalence · « **Reply #9 on:** March 20, 2004, 03:54:33 pm »

Exactly.. considering that if you are just being the developer and you have a separate publisher footing the bill for developement and production and distribution.. just to cover the developing costs at say 5 million.. the game would have to sell 71,429 copies at $70 a piece....

double that to cover the publication oand other costs involved.. so 114,258 copies at $70 a copy... to break even.. roughly... and only if the ammount went streight to the publisher.. but there is the 20% markup in the stores to make the title $70.. so let's look at how many copies actually have to sell to break even

$70 * 80% = $56 actual ammount back to publisher

so $10 Mil / $56 = 178,572 copies before a profit could be made.. the majority of profits after breaking even goes to the Publisher then royalties to the developer and the license holders out of that...

it is from the royalties which the developer pays for the patches to be made.. as such... most companies try to shoot for 1 or even 2 patches... Taldren has had a long history of 3 to 7 patches for a game when permitted to release the patches...

so in essence Taldren has taken a loss from SFC game support, but they are still here fighting for the gamers...

things look differently when you consider the cost involved don't it...

Pestalence · « **Reply #10 on:** March 20, 2004, 04:01:01 pm »

BTW.. these are just my numbers in general.. I have no Idea what Taldren's actual budget is.. but my numbers cover several different gaming developers and not any 1 company.. I just use Taldren's name as an example since we are on their boards and is the easiest for me to reference to... although i couldn't imagine Taldren's budget being much different than oulined above... the majority of the cost is the manhours spent.. same goes for any profession....

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #11 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:12:04 am »

Didn't Taldren do SFC3 for $300,000.00? I seem to remember that figure.

Age · « **Reply #12 on:** March 21, 2004, 03:55:54 am »

That is unless they were to make it over seas.Where there is cheaper labour costs and benifits.There is another reason publishers lose money they just only sell the game for a short time it seeems to me 8 months and after that they stop publishing if they kept on publishing the games they would still be making money off them.Just Imagine if your computer was stolen along with the disks to your games or destroyed in fire.The computer you can replace the disk of the games you can not.It is not like your audio and video cd and vhs or dvd collection they can be replaced aswell.What is someone were to do if this happened you cannot buy these game in a store anymore so what is some to do?

This is why the publishers should never stop publishing them in maybe 5 or 6 years then yes or possibly 10.What is someone who saving up to buy a game considering they aren't as cheap as cds and when they have a enough saved up an find out the game is no longer in publication then what are they suppose to do?I guess anyone who loses thier game or can not buy it can always go to E-BAY and see if it is in there and put a bid on it but the asking bid could be to much in case of fire or theft the insurance company will only but out so much.I know my place was break and entered and they took all the electronic stuff 2 ,25 inch tv sets vcrs my stereo is almost 30 thirty old and they won't get much fot it they didn't bother with that and my jeans do you see what I am trying to say and a computer with all the software buy it is an easy target to B&E person.

This is why they should never stop puplishing Games you never what my happen.I hope you understand what I am saying.

NannerSlug · « **Reply #16 on:** March 21, 2004, 03:02:09 pm »

taldren LOST over $300,000 on sfc3 if memory serves me correctly.

what pestelance wrote is right.

TheSatyr · « **Reply #17 on:** March 21, 2004, 04:35:28 pm »

It would also help if there was a publisher that wanted an SFC GAW. Taldren can't fund it on their own.

Unfortunately,since the SFC series isn't much of a moneymaker I really don't see another SFC ever being made,regardless of which publisher eventually ends up with the license. Why put up 5-6 mil (at least) to fund a game that might not even sell 100,000 copies?

And even if a publisher decided to continue with SFC there is no guarantee that Taldren would be asked to develop the game.

NannerSlug · « **Reply #18 on:** March 21, 2004, 04:54:40 pm »

unfortunately that is another truism.

SFC series made money - but its strength was longitivity in sales (which will never happen with sfc3 - looks like activision is pulling copies/RMAing them from stores - for what reason i do not know). sfc (with the exception of SFC1) was never a strong hard-hitting title.

i still believe there is a market for a Trek-Oriented game - especially maybe an MMORPG type. or maybe just sorta like a NWN type except instead of people - you have ships (and you can get more detailed from there).

i think one of the main lessons learned more recently is to put more polish and detail into things to produce a good package.

will it happen? i dont know because of the lawsuits and the decreasing numbers of people watching trek.

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #19 on:** March 21, 2004, 09:04:00 pm »

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant was didn't Taldren charge Activision 300k to develope SFC3? That figure could very well be incorrect, I'm not certain. I'm not trying to stick my nose into anyone elses business or insinuate anything. That's not the reason that I mention it. I was only thinking this, What does it cost to get someone to develope a game? Not necessarily from scratch either, as from what I understand SFC3 used a lot of the code from the previous SFC titles. What would Taldren need to be paid to "complete" SFC2_OP? Add the Tholians, Andros, etc... and some new missions for them. Not to market and license it. Can anyone figure out where I'm going with this?

Pestalence · « **Reply #20 on:** March 21, 2004, 10:23:47 pm »

Well, like I stated above.. just the labor alone for coding, model rendering, gaining permissions and licenses.. roughly about 3 or 4 million for 1 year development... the weapons would have to be coded in.. extensive testing for balance, reworking the entire code to incorporate the new races into the game.. and so forth..

basically you are asking them to redevelope the entire game just to add a couple of races and weapons, to test against every race in every mission with every ship just for balance (if tested correctly)... I mean you are basically asking for a new game... even with source code available.. it would have to be seriously rewritten .. almost be better to start from scratch...

SFC 3 stripped previous code from OP.. however, there is hardly any of the Original OP code in SFC 3 because of all the changes Activision forced them to do.. so now you have in essence a New game engine with Kudos to OP enging...

Rod.. I know how bad you want things added.. but unless someone has 1 or 2 million for the time it will take to develope it properly.. I seriously doubt it will ever be done..

as for SFC 3.. your $300,000 you keep mentioning is -$300,000.. that is how much Taldren LOST on SFC 3... More than likely Taldren was given $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 for SFC 3 developement and with all the changes and Overtime, they wound up ~ $300,000 in the hole.. now if sales made that up in royalties.. i don't know....

Try researching on the net for the cost to develope a game... imagine you have a team of say 60 people.. 50 are paid $15 an hour, 7 Paid $20 an hour.. and 2 make salary that works out to ~ $25 an hour...

Now figure out the cost of labor based on a 40 hour work week where 50 employees get 1.5 times regular pay for overtime after 40 hours.. now figure roughly 8 hours a week overtime for 25 employees....

what is your labor for 1 year...

and this is not considering anything else, only labor costs...

where ever you are getting your numbers from Rod.. you need to re-read it again slowly and carefully...

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #21 on:** March 21, 2004, 11:14:02 pm »

OK. So the answer to my question is, "No Rod. Taldren didn't get paid 300,000 to develope SFC3. That's how much they lost."

As I stated I thought that I had read that was what they got paid, but I wasn't sure. I appreciate the answer to my question.

Age · « **Reply #22 on:** March 22, 2004, 02:27:08 am »

Please look up at my first post in this thread and read it very slowly aswell as those in Admin.

Age · « **Reply #24 on:** March 22, 2004, 01:27:18 pm »

Check my posting on page one !!!!!!! Check my posting on page one !!!!!

Age · « **Reply #26 on:** March 22, 2004, 02:24:43 pm »

I am not trying to highjack it.I am just pointing out of they made it over seas the labour would cost would be less.Just think if you lost your computer in fire or theft along with your games disks.How would you ever get it back
considering they do not make these games anymore and If somebody was saving up to buy them and found out they were no longer in publication what are they to do ?What I am trying to say is that if kept on publishing them even today all the series that the publishers aswell as Taldren would be making money and there are more people playing these games than users in this forum they just do not want to be in here.

I ask you agian how would you replace your game disks if they were stolen.destroyed or even damaged.What is someone to do to replace the game disk if they no longer in publication.I can only say that someones Star Fleet Cammand gaming days are over.I do agree with Pestalence if the made a new game in the USA but I don't think that is going to happen haven't you been keeping up with Taldrens news.What other flag is on Taldrens home page beside the US flag ?to the right .

TheSatyr · « **Reply #30 on:** March 23, 2004, 02:35:15 am »

Why do you think so many publishers are turning to East European Dev Companies? Lower costs.

Granted some of those companies have put out some good games,but alot of them were pure garbage.

Outsourcing may save money,but there's no gaurantee that the quality will be all that great.

Age · « **Reply #31 on:** March 23, 2004, 02:35:56 am »

Sorry for that misunderstanding.I really don't know to much of the game devlopement business but I do know about marketing and supply side economics.I will have to look into this I will talk to the game devlopement company here called X.
.There is another possiblity that is if This company went puplic and went on the Nasdaq.This is just a thought though to bring in some investors.

Pestalence · « **Reply #35 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:28:56 pm »

Taldren is working on some projects that they are not at liberty to talk about....

Age · « **Reply #36 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:07:31 am »

Yes that is the way it is with companies that produce products they just like to keep us in suspenders.It to bad it not like the auto business where you will get a taste of whats tomorrow.

TheSatyr · « **Reply #37 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:35:55 am »

Ever heard of NDAs?

Taldren can't say what they are working on till the publishers either give them the ok,or announce it themselves.

Age · « **Reply #38 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:53:15 am »

The Truth is out there somewhere ( I figured out your NDA saying No Dummies Allowed right)

Pestalence · « **Reply #39 on:** March 24, 2004, 03:04:38 am »

NDA stands for Non Disclosure Agreement.. it is a legal contract where the signer is not permitted to talk about a project or any aspect of a project unless given specific permission from the person or company that is owning or in charge of the project...

as such, I am under NDA with Taldren.. If Taldren told me what was going on.. then I could not pass on that information... and I am subject to a lawsuit if i violate my NDA...

If Taldren is working on a project and are under NDA.. they can't talk about the project until they recieve permission to do so... If they did talk about it before permission was given, then Taldren would be facing a lawsuit.. i don't think any of us wants that.

Age · « **Reply #40 on:** March 24, 2004, 12:35:55 pm »

I do have a good Knowledge of the law and do know what a Non Disclosure Agreement is if the Satyr worded like you did I word of understood him better .I know that if all of you moderators signed an agreement with this company and leak out any informatin you could face a law suite aswell as company if they said anything.Yes I do know of the legality of all of this.Pestalence can you please reply ro some of my PMs Thank You

PS Sometimes I think most of you with exception of Pestalence are joking around if you are going to say something do not use acronyms or just word just type the hole thing out so we know when you are being serious and aren't joking around.It is not a goood idea to use acronyms around the puplic or especialy in these forums.

Age · « **Reply #42 on:** March 24, 2004, 01:27:13 pm »

I don't think I will be able to.

STFU yuo aren't sating anything bad are you ???

Age · « **Reply #44 on:** March 24, 2004, 01:52:41 pm »

What I meant was saying anything bad I am not a touch typest I do have to look at the key board but I do where that Z key is though aswell as the a and the s aswell as 1,2,3, and 4 is.

Please Kroma_BaSyl tell me what that acronym stands for I do not want to play these head games

Age · « **Reply #46 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:26:15 pm »

I still don't get it you could PM me on this ?

Pestalence · « **Reply #49 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:36:12 pm »

Kroma.. this is a new person to the boards.. Play nice...

Kroma is one of our biggest jokesters on the boards.. but he gives jokes and recieves jokes very well..

can't you tell with that functified TUTU of his???

Ok now that I said that.. Keep passing the jokes around..

Kroma_BaSyl · « **Reply #50 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:38:09 pm »

Come on guys, give me a little credit. I did PM him.

Pestalence · « **Reply #51 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:39:55 pm »

tis OK Kroma.. I'm just picking on you..

Nothing intended

Besides.. I earned the right to pick on you after you destroyed my ship on GW 1 server.

Pestalence · « **Reply #54 on:** March 24, 2004, 03:16:24 pm »

OOOOOOOOOOH Yeah.. that's right.. I need to find a good OWN3D pic to mess with ya...

lol

Well.. I hope to see ya on RDSL.. I'm the one in the Fed ship of Death.. I'll be in full Terminator Persona on that campaign.. Feds are my specialty...

Age · « **Reply #58 on:** March 24, 2004, 05:34:11 pm »

No not That can say I have but I bet it a lot of though .erg erg We are dead in space I love when they say that.

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #59 on:** March 28, 2004, 11:43:35 pm »

OK, 1st, i want to say I'm a complete idiot when it comes to development. I've dabbled in C++ in my spare time, but I have no clue as to how you develop a game, my statements are pure guesswork. OK, I'm ready to look like an idiot. Here we go.

Why whould it take a year? I mean, you've got good source code on file. all you really need to do is take OP, add the SFC3 reverse and warp code, add some new race slots, program new weapons and make some models.

I can see how this is a big undertaking, this is not nearly as small as I make it out to be, but I don't see the need for a brand-new engine, just maybe an expansion(ala EAW or Tales of the Sword Coast if you know Baldur's Gate) to the existing OP engine.

What I'm trying to say is this: New games take at least a year. Some take MUCH MUCH longer(see Morrowind) but Expansions take only about six months, because 3/4ths of the work is already done, all you need to do is throw in some new stuff and you've got a new product. Maybe they could even do a stand-alone expansion.

This is by NO MEANS a critisisim of Taldren, I'm ready to kiss their feet for patching OP YEARS after it's relese. It's just that I know iI'm not smarter than everybody who's posted here, I know i'm missing something, I'd just like to know what.

Thank you for your understanding,

Merlin

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #60 on:** March 28, 2004, 11:51:02 pm »

btw, it's not suprising how many games are out, consitering that most are identicle to each other--no risk.

Age · « **Reply #61 on:** March 29, 2004, 01:53:52 am »

This is about the devlopment of the Galaxies at War the next series in the SFC. series that was supposed to be but didn't and then the Lawsuit agianst Paramount that Activision launched because they lost money on no.3 and the whole Trek franchis is going down hill the ratings for Enterpise is down.The movie Nemesis did poorly at the box office that is why the trek franchise is doing poorly and that is the reason for the lawsuit.

The reason for the devlopment is that Activision holds the licence to puplish or they might not have now.but it all has to do with licenceing and who going to pubish it once it is ready.This is more just making a game it involes a lawsuit and licenseing which Taldren does not have and all the costs associated with it.This is a complicated issue with all the parties involed primarily Activision and Paramount and if there is a big enough market for another trek game but one will be out evetually.

I would read most of the posting in here to find out more as I said before this is a complicated issue just this thread.I hope I answered your question as you can see this is bigger than making a new game.I would have to quote everyones posting in this thread to really spell it out.That would take me most of a day do that.I wouldn't say anything bad about yourself and the games you mentioned were put out by different devlopers and possiply different publishers i don't know to much about those games to draw a comparison.We would all Kiss Taldrens feet if they came out with more StarFleet Cammand games as we really enjoy all of them and would like to see more they are our favourites.I hope this answers it.You might want to think of doing some modding you seem to know what you are talking about.

Let me know if I can help you out some more non technical I am not a computer guru ask some of the others for that.

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #62 on:** March 29, 2004, 11:49:52 pm »

So the real problem is liscensing, and finding a publisher.

Any hope if this being fixed?

Age · « **Reply #63 on:** March 30, 2004, 02:00:20 am »

Yes that is the real problem eventually when everything is settled but it will.

Maxillius · « **Reply #70 on:** April 01, 2004, 09:08:14 am »

I'm sorry if this offends you, I really am, but it's time for a new PC when they start making games that need more grunt that your system can offer. On the bright side, there are new systems that are cheaper than the cost to upgrade your current system. Plus, you could build one yourself for even less! That being said, I realize that not everyone has the cash onhand to go out and get the uber PC they'd like to have. Personally, I should've bought a car instead of my computers but I live at home and my parents let me use their cars so there's really no pressure.

Back to the topic, I realize that coding that nightmare would take a good chunk of forever, but by that time the majority of gamers will have systems that spec over 1 GHz. I'm willing to wait for a truly intensive and all-inclusive Trek game.

If it's any consolation to you, my girlfriend's machine needs a new video card because although the rest of it will run Morrowind just fine (800MHz/256MB), the video card is only capable of 24bit color, and Morrowind needs 32

FFZ · « **Reply #72 on:** April 01, 2004, 11:49:37 am »

I believe the support is there.

I for one, would love to see the Tholians and Andromedans finally arrive, as well as more stuff from the TNG era Trek.

Maybe an all-new game isn't the way to go, maybe an add-on, expansion, is the way. Not like OP, which was self-contained, but a game that required that you already have OP or SFC 3 to play, using the existing engine and simply adding some new ships and weapons/defenses for the new races, as well as a series of new missions and campaigns.

For example, I would love a general war campaign, seperate from the ISC war, that used and high-lighted the earlier ships.

There is plenty of room to do things and not let costs spiral out of control.

Fedman · « **Reply #78 on:** April 03, 2004, 04:47:09 pm »

[If you are going to place plame or insinuate blame to development of a game.. make sure you inplicate the proper company(s) that are resopnsible.... Taldren wanted more time to work on SFC 3.. Activision refused and pushed the title out because they wanted to meed the prime sales time 1 month before the Nemisis movie release...

Always follow the money trail for the answers

ghostcamel · « **Reply #79 on:** April 03, 2004, 09:49:34 pm »

GAW shouldnt be made if the situation is going to be a repeat of SFC2s or SFC3s production cuts and publisher cheapskating.

It needs to have enough developtment time to get things right, or else theres no real reason to do it. Going the cheap route will just limit sales of what could be a masterpiece.

Other strategy niche games get this treatment. They get the time to do things right.

If it cant be GUARANTEED that you will receive the needed time to make a real GAW, then dont do it.

Im tired of the compromises.

Unfortunately, that probably means working 2-5, or more, years on other projects. But, i know it would be worth it.

Somewhat on the same subject, id love to see Paramount do a new cartoon Trek series. If you check out the "Bring back Kirk!" trailer, it gives yiou a rough sketch of what the look of such a series should be. Shatner seems to still have interest in Trek, he could his own voicework. No need for him to lose weight

We could see some of the old cartoon races, we could get the bravado of TOS Kirk. Theres no limits with such a design. They could bring SFB back into the fold and consolidate the shrinking fanbase, and regrow it from there.

I know none of this stuff will come to pass. Exectuvies cant find their own asses, let alone good ideas.

The_Infiltrator · « **Reply #80 on:** April 03, 2004, 11:04:02 pm »

Problem is that it's Paramount's de facto position to attempt to drive SFB/ADB into the ground. The only reason that they can operate now as is is that they have a licence and Paramount can't do anything to get around that. It's ironic that for a long time there was nothing past TOS but the universe that ADB created, and now that it's a post TNG era for Paramount, they look at ADB something like a leper colony.

Age · « **Reply #81 on:** April 04, 2004, 01:40:13 am »

What does ADB stand for .I agree they need they time to get it right and who has the license?

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #82 on:** April 04, 2004, 11:37:04 am »

Amarillo Design Bureau, they hold the rights to Starfleet Battles, which Viacom has been trying to recover since the early 80's. However Viacom counters it buy holding the rights to the images of StarTrek, so Starfleet Command was only possible because they "cooperated" to make it.

FFZ · « **Reply #83 on:** April 04, 2004, 12:03:20 pm »

It really is a shame that ADB is so hated by the powers-that-be, SFB actually helped keep Trek alive for a time.

Back after ST The Motion Picture flopped, Trek looked as dead as disco, the only thing keeping it alive was SFB and legions of dedicated fans at cons, which were still strong even as the 1980s began.

Paramount had to be dragged kicking and screaming to make Wraith of Khan, and they were adament that it wasn't going over budget, if it did, they would fold the production and scrap it (this was because of the masive budget overflow of TMP.)

Khan was a big hit, and instead of rewarding ADB, Paramount gave the contract to Fasa Games.

Now, we seem to have come full circle, we are back to ADB still putting out TOS type material.

Unbeliavable.

Age · « **Reply #84 on:** April 04, 2004, 02:58:30 pm »

What is Fasa games please explian?I guess the powers that be don't see the logic in all of this ? I guess Viacom and Paramount Excutives don't watch the shows or movies they just waiting for the big bucks to come in they don't care about quality just the money they can expliot off of Trek.They could do this with PC games aswell just tell the publishers
how much they want which they already do so why not expliot it some more.I would give this Company the license to develope and puplish the games them selves that way they can do a better jop on it and just cut the middle person.Viacom and Paramont would love to expliot Trek some more and this is a good way to do it just keep milking it for all its worth we keep buying it why not we are big fools after all.

FFZ · « **Reply #85 on:** April 04, 2004, 03:16:52 pm »

Fasa games produced games of tactical Starship combat, similar to SFB, but using the movie Enterprise and ships from this era, instaed of ToS era ships.

Fasa came out with minature ships for this, and even did role playing adventure games of Trek, but all of these games, although pretty good, where nowhere near as detailed and interesting as SFB.

The_Infiltrator · « **Reply #86 on:** April 04, 2004, 03:24:56 pm »

FASA while it was around was a pretty good wargame company, though they did things differently than ADB. Personally I think ADB's product in this area is superior, but that may be personal preference. No one can deny though that Battletech was a great game - and this is another reason for confusion. At no time could it ever be said that FASA thought of their star trek game as the "flagship" game of their company. That has, and always was, Battletech. Why would Paramount therefore want to give them rights when they knew that it would never be their main focus? Personally, I've never understood the facination in trek quarters for Paramount. They're just a TV/movie studio. And sometimes not a very good one at that.

FFZ · « **Reply #87 on:** April 04, 2004, 03:30:14 pm »

It's somewhat ironic Paramount owns Trek because Lucelle Ball broke up with Desi Arnez.

Age · « **Reply #88 on:** April 04, 2004, 04:06:39 pm »

They own it and have been milking it for what it's worth and there is nothing Majal Roddenberry can't do but Paramount does other things projscts has well but Trek is thier Flag Ship of any it is to bad they are not reading all this then they would waken up.

Davey E · « **Reply #89 on:** March 20, 2004, 10:08:05 am »

Hey all
Just thought i,d ask all you guys a few questions (if ya know the answers lol)

What is the problem with producing SFC G.A.W with the Tholians, Seltorians etc thrown in,
Yes a whole new game using the best of SFC2/OP/3

and

How much would it cost ?

I,m just curious - seems to me that there is a stack of peeps who would invest in this - I WOULD

So in general what are the problems in making G.A.W from 1-99 ???

Thanx all in advance for answers

Pestalence · « **Reply #90 on:** March 20, 2004, 10:56:55 am »

Well to develope and produce a game is roughly about 3 to 5 Million US give or take a couple hundred thousand, not counting the price for the licenses.. as far as the Tholians and other races go.. it is a matter of Rights and Liscencing and whether or not the race is available...

then there is a time factor for for production: the publishing costs, packaging, advertising, burining costs.. etc...

this is of course not counting the personal time involved for developing a new game engine, conceptual incorporation of ideas into the enviroment.. etc.. it would be a lot of work... but the problem is not just that cost (3 to 5 million plus production).. but also the post release cost of support...

I think the project for GAW could be done for say around 9 or 10 million or so (Liscense and development and production cost) give or take post release support cost... that is if Taldren is willing to undertake the project ....

People just don't realize how much it costs to develope a game....

now imagine investing that much into a game... how many copies would you have to sell in order to break even??? let's say at $70 a copy.... then people demand support..... now consider the wages of those working, the overtime, testing, debugging time, etc... it is a lot of manpower hours...

but if you are willing to help in a good portion of $10 million for the development of GAW.. then I think it could be acomplished...

let's see there are 3200 members on this forum...

so 10 million devided by 3200 people...

everyone would have to contribute $3275 up front so the project could be worked on for the next year and a half....

I'm game, but I am sure that a vast majority of members on this board would either say no, or say that they couldn't afford that ammount.. as such... the cost would increase to those who are willing to pay for it.

this is just a simple look at the numbers on cost....

FFZ · « **Reply #91 on:** March 20, 2004, 11:17:21 am »

Not to be obtuse, but three to five million to produce a game?

I think that number is just a tad high, no?

Why so expensive?

Pestalence · « **Reply #92 on:** March 20, 2004, 11:41:32 am »

3 to 5 million.. no not too high...

consider Coprorate pricing on software..

hardware costs for the newest equipment to develope a game for the cutting edge tech to be able to support

the man hours of say 50 people hacking away at coding at 8 hours a day 5 days a week at $15 to $20 an hour lets go with $15 and hour x 40 hours a week.. that is $600 a week per person times 50 people that is $30000 a week.. times 52 weeks for 1 year of development.. that comes to $1,560,000 per year.. then the over time at 1.5 times hourly rate per hour overtime.... say an average of 5 hours overtime for half the employees per week..

so that is 1.5 * $15 = $22.5 per hour * 5 Hours = $112.5 per person per week * 25 employees (half the workforce) = $2812.5 per week * 52 weeks per year = $146,250 in overtime pay...

so now just in wages based off $15 an hour you are spending $1,706,250 for 1 year in development.. this is not counting those with higher paying positions.. this is just entry level coders...

Now add in the taxes for the Corp.. Insurance, govn't regulated requirements like workman's comp pay in.. etc...

then the electricity and water bills.. cost of office supplies.... then add in the employees who are making $20 or even $30 an hour....

Wow... that number just jumped...

so yes it does cost a lot to develope a game.. and the numbers are not exaggerated.. as my initial posting stated.. I said a year and a half.. however my numbers here.. though not complete.. only represent 1 year for entry level position...

and this in no way represents the advertising costs, printing costs of the cover, printing costs and binding costs for manuals, burning times for CD's, Distribution costs, stocking costs.. building rent.. etc..

not does it include permissions or licensing costs for the material to be used... and usually in Trek.. Licenses usually run in the million dollar mark or higher.. why do you think Activision sued Paramount????

the costs add up fast... I can keep adding things on, but I think I have shown the point..

Teeth_03 · « **Reply #93 on:** March 20, 2004, 01:30:03 pm »

If money wasn't an issue,would we still be able to get the licenses? The next game,if there was one,would prolly have TNG in it,and if i'm correct,the license for that is screwed up cuz of our favorite company,Activision.

Pestalence · « **Reply #95 on:** March 20, 2004, 02:09:56 pm »

Actually all liscenses are up in the air.. but to my last understanding.. because of the litigation between Activision (who previouly leased all Trek gaming liscenses) and Paramount/Viacom (who Owns the Trek license) the license is on hold until either Activisions original contract runs out, or when the court makes a decision in the case.. Activision has publically announced giving up the license due to breach of contract.. but that claim goes both ways.. so the license for the time being is frozen... Activision had bought all the licenses for 5 years.. this is now going into year 3 of them holding the license contract (supposedly now voided).. so if the litigation continues.. then the license will remain frozen for the rest of this fiscal year plus 2 more years.

Hopefully the courts will free the license up for others to use soon.. if they haven't already...

FFZ · « **Reply #97 on:** March 20, 2004, 03:19:16 pm »

That is quite interesting, all those costs. It is no wonder so many game companies fold.

Pestalence · « **Reply #98 on:** March 20, 2004, 03:54:33 pm »

Exactly.. considering that if you are just being the developer and you have a separate publisher footing the bill for developement and production and distribution.. just to cover the developing costs at say 5 million.. the game would have to sell 71,429 copies at $70 a piece....

double that to cover the publication oand other costs involved.. so 114,258 copies at $70 a copy... to break even.. roughly... and only if the ammount went streight to the publisher.. but there is the 20% markup in the stores to make the title $70.. so let's look at how many copies actually have to sell to break even

$70 * 80% = $56 actual ammount back to publisher

so $10 Mil / $56 = 178,572 copies before a profit could be made.. the majority of profits after breaking even goes to the Publisher then royalties to the developer and the license holders out of that...

it is from the royalties which the developer pays for the patches to be made.. as such... most companies try to shoot for 1 or even 2 patches... Taldren has had a long history of 3 to 7 patches for a game when permitted to release the patches...

so in essence Taldren has taken a loss from SFC game support, but they are still here fighting for the gamers...

things look differently when you consider the cost involved don't it...

Pestalence · « **Reply #99 on:** March 20, 2004, 04:01:01 pm »

BTW.. these are just my numbers in general.. I have no Idea what Taldren's actual budget is.. but my numbers cover several different gaming developers and not any 1 company.. I just use Taldren's name as an example since we are on their boards and is the easiest for me to reference to... although i couldn't imagine Taldren's budget being much different than oulined above... the majority of the cost is the manhours spent.. same goes for any profession....

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #100 on:** March 21, 2004, 12:12:04 am »

Didn't Taldren do SFC3 for $300,000.00? I seem to remember that figure.

Age · « **Reply #101 on:** March 21, 2004, 03:55:54 am »

That is unless they were to make it over seas.Where there is cheaper labour costs and benifits.There is another reason publishers lose money they just only sell the game for a short time it seeems to me 8 months and after that they stop publishing if they kept on publishing the games they would still be making money off them.Just Imagine if your computer was stolen along with the disks to your games or destroyed in fire.The computer you can replace the disk of the games you can not.It is not like your audio and video cd and vhs or dvd collection they can be replaced aswell.What is someone were to do if this happened you cannot buy these game in a store anymore so what is some to do?

This is why the publishers should never stop publishing them in maybe 5 or 6 years then yes or possibly 10.What is someone who saving up to buy a game considering they aren't as cheap as cds and when they have a enough saved up an find out the game is no longer in publication then what are they suppose to do?I guess anyone who loses thier game or can not buy it can always go to E-BAY and see if it is in there and put a bid on it but the asking bid could be to much in case of fire or theft the insurance company will only but out so much.I know my place was break and entered and they took all the electronic stuff 2 ,25 inch tv sets vcrs my stereo is almost 30 thirty old and they won't get much fot it they didn't bother with that and my jeans do you see what I am trying to say and a computer with all the software buy it is an easy target to B&E person.

This is why they should never stop puplishing Games you never what my happen.I hope you understand what I am saying.

NannerSlug · « **Reply #105 on:** March 21, 2004, 03:02:09 pm »

taldren LOST over $300,000 on sfc3 if memory serves me correctly.

what pestelance wrote is right.

TheSatyr · « **Reply #106 on:** March 21, 2004, 04:35:28 pm »

It would also help if there was a publisher that wanted an SFC GAW. Taldren can't fund it on their own.

Unfortunately,since the SFC series isn't much of a moneymaker I really don't see another SFC ever being made,regardless of which publisher eventually ends up with the license. Why put up 5-6 mil (at least) to fund a game that might not even sell 100,000 copies?

And even if a publisher decided to continue with SFC there is no guarantee that Taldren would be asked to develop the game.

NannerSlug · « **Reply #107 on:** March 21, 2004, 04:54:40 pm »

unfortunately that is another truism.

SFC series made money - but its strength was longitivity in sales (which will never happen with sfc3 - looks like activision is pulling copies/RMAing them from stores - for what reason i do not know). sfc (with the exception of SFC1) was never a strong hard-hitting title.

i still believe there is a market for a Trek-Oriented game - especially maybe an MMORPG type. or maybe just sorta like a NWN type except instead of people - you have ships (and you can get more detailed from there).

i think one of the main lessons learned more recently is to put more polish and detail into things to produce a good package.

will it happen? i dont know because of the lawsuits and the decreasing numbers of people watching trek.

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #108 on:** March 21, 2004, 09:04:00 pm »

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant was didn't Taldren charge Activision 300k to develope SFC3? That figure could very well be incorrect, I'm not certain. I'm not trying to stick my nose into anyone elses business or insinuate anything. That's not the reason that I mention it. I was only thinking this, What does it cost to get someone to develope a game? Not necessarily from scratch either, as from what I understand SFC3 used a lot of the code from the previous SFC titles. What would Taldren need to be paid to "complete" SFC2_OP? Add the Tholians, Andros, etc... and some new missions for them. Not to market and license it. Can anyone figure out where I'm going with this?

Pestalence · « **Reply #109 on:** March 21, 2004, 10:23:47 pm »

Well, like I stated above.. just the labor alone for coding, model rendering, gaining permissions and licenses.. roughly about 3 or 4 million for 1 year development... the weapons would have to be coded in.. extensive testing for balance, reworking the entire code to incorporate the new races into the game.. and so forth..

basically you are asking them to redevelope the entire game just to add a couple of races and weapons, to test against every race in every mission with every ship just for balance (if tested correctly)... I mean you are basically asking for a new game... even with source code available.. it would have to be seriously rewritten .. almost be better to start from scratch...

SFC 3 stripped previous code from OP.. however, there is hardly any of the Original OP code in SFC 3 because of all the changes Activision forced them to do.. so now you have in essence a New game engine with Kudos to OP enging...

Rod.. I know how bad you want things added.. but unless someone has 1 or 2 million for the time it will take to develope it properly.. I seriously doubt it will ever be done..

as for SFC 3.. your $300,000 you keep mentioning is -$300,000.. that is how much Taldren LOST on SFC 3... More than likely Taldren was given $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 for SFC 3 developement and with all the changes and Overtime, they wound up ~ $300,000 in the hole.. now if sales made that up in royalties.. i don't know....

Try researching on the net for the cost to develope a game... imagine you have a team of say 60 people.. 50 are paid $15 an hour, 7 Paid $20 an hour.. and 2 make salary that works out to ~ $25 an hour...

Now figure out the cost of labor based on a 40 hour work week where 50 employees get 1.5 times regular pay for overtime after 40 hours.. now figure roughly 8 hours a week overtime for 25 employees....

what is your labor for 1 year...

and this is not considering anything else, only labor costs...

where ever you are getting your numbers from Rod.. you need to re-read it again slowly and carefully...

Rod O'neal · « **Reply #110 on:** March 21, 2004, 11:14:02 pm »

OK. So the answer to my question is, "No Rod. Taldren didn't get paid 300,000 to develope SFC3. That's how much they lost."

As I stated I thought that I had read that was what they got paid, but I wasn't sure. I appreciate the answer to my question.

Age · « **Reply #111 on:** March 22, 2004, 02:27:08 am »

Please look up at my first post in this thread and read it very slowly aswell as those in Admin.

Age · « **Reply #113 on:** March 22, 2004, 01:27:18 pm »

Check my posting on page one !!!!!!! Check my posting on page one !!!!!

Age · « **Reply #115 on:** March 22, 2004, 02:24:43 pm »

I am not trying to highjack it.I am just pointing out of they made it over seas the labour would cost would be less.Just think if you lost your computer in fire or theft along with your games disks.How would you ever get it back
considering they do not make these games anymore and If somebody was saving up to buy them and found out they were no longer in publication what are they to do ?What I am trying to say is that if kept on publishing them even today all the series that the publishers aswell as Taldren would be making money and there are more people playing these games than users in this forum they just do not want to be in here.

I ask you agian how would you replace your game disks if they were stolen.destroyed or even damaged.What is someone to do to replace the game disk if they no longer in publication.I can only say that someones Star Fleet Cammand gaming days are over.I do agree with Pestalence if the made a new game in the USA but I don't think that is going to happen haven't you been keeping up with Taldrens news.What other flag is on Taldrens home page beside the US flag ?to the right .

TheSatyr · « **Reply #119 on:** March 23, 2004, 02:35:15 am »

Why do you think so many publishers are turning to East European Dev Companies? Lower costs.

Granted some of those companies have put out some good games,but alot of them were pure garbage.

Outsourcing may save money,but there's no gaurantee that the quality will be all that great.

Age · « **Reply #120 on:** March 23, 2004, 02:35:56 am »

Sorry for that misunderstanding.I really don't know to much of the game devlopement business but I do know about marketing and supply side economics.I will have to look into this I will talk to the game devlopement company here called X.
.There is another possiblity that is if This company went puplic and went on the Nasdaq.This is just a thought though to bring in some investors.

Pestalence · « **Reply #124 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:28:56 pm »

Taldren is working on some projects that they are not at liberty to talk about....

Age · « **Reply #125 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:07:31 am »

Yes that is the way it is with companies that produce products they just like to keep us in suspenders.It to bad it not like the auto business where you will get a taste of whats tomorrow.

TheSatyr · « **Reply #126 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:35:55 am »

Ever heard of NDAs?

Taldren can't say what they are working on till the publishers either give them the ok,or announce it themselves.

Age · « **Reply #127 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:53:15 am »

The Truth is out there somewhere ( I figured out your NDA saying No Dummies Allowed right)

Pestalence · « **Reply #128 on:** March 24, 2004, 03:04:38 am »

NDA stands for Non Disclosure Agreement.. it is a legal contract where the signer is not permitted to talk about a project or any aspect of a project unless given specific permission from the person or company that is owning or in charge of the project...

as such, I am under NDA with Taldren.. If Taldren told me what was going on.. then I could not pass on that information... and I am subject to a lawsuit if i violate my NDA...

If Taldren is working on a project and are under NDA.. they can't talk about the project until they recieve permission to do so... If they did talk about it before permission was given, then Taldren would be facing a lawsuit.. i don't think any of us wants that.

Age · « **Reply #129 on:** March 24, 2004, 12:35:55 pm »

I do have a good Knowledge of the law and do know what a Non Disclosure Agreement is if the Satyr worded like you did I word of understood him better .I know that if all of you moderators signed an agreement with this company and leak out any informatin you could face a law suite aswell as company if they said anything.Yes I do know of the legality of all of this.Pestalence can you please reply ro some of my PMs Thank You

PS Sometimes I think most of you with exception of Pestalence are joking around if you are going to say something do not use acronyms or just word just type the hole thing out so we know when you are being serious and aren't joking around.It is not a goood idea to use acronyms around the puplic or especialy in these forums.

Age · « **Reply #131 on:** March 24, 2004, 01:27:13 pm »

I don't think I will be able to.

STFU yuo aren't sating anything bad are you ???

Age · « **Reply #133 on:** March 24, 2004, 01:52:41 pm »

What I meant was saying anything bad I am not a touch typest I do have to look at the key board but I do where that Z key is though aswell as the a and the s aswell as 1,2,3, and 4 is.

Please Kroma_BaSyl tell me what that acronym stands for I do not want to play these head games

Age · « **Reply #135 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:26:15 pm »

I still don't get it you could PM me on this ?

Pestalence · « **Reply #138 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:36:12 pm »

Kroma.. this is a new person to the boards.. Play nice...

Kroma is one of our biggest jokesters on the boards.. but he gives jokes and recieves jokes very well..

can't you tell with that functified TUTU of his???

Ok now that I said that.. Keep passing the jokes around..

Kroma_BaSyl · « **Reply #139 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:38:09 pm »

Come on guys, give me a little credit. I did PM him.

Pestalence · « **Reply #140 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:39:55 pm »

tis OK Kroma.. I'm just picking on you..

Nothing intended

Besides.. I earned the right to pick on you after you destroyed my ship on GW 1 server.

Pestalence · « **Reply #143 on:** March 24, 2004, 03:16:24 pm »

OOOOOOOOOOH Yeah.. that's right.. I need to find a good OWN3D pic to mess with ya...

lol

Well.. I hope to see ya on RDSL.. I'm the one in the Fed ship of Death.. I'll be in full Terminator Persona on that campaign.. Feds are my specialty...

Age · « **Reply #147 on:** March 24, 2004, 05:34:11 pm »

No not That can say I have but I bet it a lot of though .erg erg We are dead in space I love when they say that.

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #148 on:** March 28, 2004, 11:43:35 pm »

OK, 1st, i want to say I'm a complete idiot when it comes to development. I've dabbled in C++ in my spare time, but I have no clue as to how you develop a game, my statements are pure guesswork. OK, I'm ready to look like an idiot. Here we go.

Why whould it take a year? I mean, you've got good source code on file. all you really need to do is take OP, add the SFC3 reverse and warp code, add some new race slots, program new weapons and make some models.

I can see how this is a big undertaking, this is not nearly as small as I make it out to be, but I don't see the need for a brand-new engine, just maybe an expansion(ala EAW or Tales of the Sword Coast if you know Baldur's Gate) to the existing OP engine.

What I'm trying to say is this: New games take at least a year. Some take MUCH MUCH longer(see Morrowind) but Expansions take only about six months, because 3/4ths of the work is already done, all you need to do is throw in some new stuff and you've got a new product. Maybe they could even do a stand-alone expansion.

This is by NO MEANS a critisisim of Taldren, I'm ready to kiss their feet for patching OP YEARS after it's relese. It's just that I know iI'm not smarter than everybody who's posted here, I know i'm missing something, I'd just like to know what.

Thank you for your understanding,

Merlin

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #149 on:** March 28, 2004, 11:51:02 pm »

btw, it's not suprising how many games are out, consitering that most are identicle to each other--no risk.

Age · « **Reply #150 on:** March 29, 2004, 01:53:52 am »

This is about the devlopment of the Galaxies at War the next series in the SFC. series that was supposed to be but didn't and then the Lawsuit agianst Paramount that Activision launched because they lost money on no.3 and the whole Trek franchis is going down hill the ratings for Enterpise is down.The movie Nemesis did poorly at the box office that is why the trek franchise is doing poorly and that is the reason for the lawsuit.

The reason for the devlopment is that Activision holds the licence to puplish or they might not have now.but it all has to do with licenceing and who going to pubish it once it is ready.This is more just making a game it involes a lawsuit and licenseing which Taldren does not have and all the costs associated with it.This is a complicated issue with all the parties involed primarily Activision and Paramount and if there is a big enough market for another trek game but one will be out evetually.

I would read most of the posting in here to find out more as I said before this is a complicated issue just this thread.I hope I answered your question as you can see this is bigger than making a new game.I would have to quote everyones posting in this thread to really spell it out.That would take me most of a day do that.I wouldn't say anything bad about yourself and the games you mentioned were put out by different devlopers and possiply different publishers i don't know to much about those games to draw a comparison.We would all Kiss Taldrens feet if they came out with more StarFleet Cammand games as we really enjoy all of them and would like to see more they are our favourites.I hope this answers it.You might want to think of doing some modding you seem to know what you are talking about.

Let me know if I can help you out some more non technical I am not a computer guru ask some of the others for that.

Merlinfmct87 · « **Reply #151 on:** March 29, 2004, 11:49:52 pm »

So the real problem is liscensing, and finding a publisher.

Any hope if this being fixed?

Age · « **Reply #152 on:** March 30, 2004, 02:00:20 am »

Yes that is the real problem eventually when everything is settled but it will.

Maxillius · « **Reply #159 on:** April 01, 2004, 09:08:14 am »

I'm sorry if this offends you, I really am, but it's time for a new PC when they start making games that need more grunt that your system can offer. On the bright side, there are new systems that are cheaper than the cost to upgrade your current system. Plus, you could build one yourself for even less! That being said, I realize that not everyone has the cash onhand to go out and get the uber PC they'd like to have. Personally, I should've bought a car instead of my computers but I live at home and my parents let me use their cars so there's really no pressure.

Back to the topic, I realize that coding that nightmare would take a good chunk of forever, but by that time the majority of gamers will have systems that spec over 1 GHz. I'm willing to wait for a truly intensive and all-inclusive Trek game.

If it's any consolation to you, my girlfriend's machine needs a new video card because although the rest of it will run Morrowind just fine (800MHz/256MB), the video card is only capable of 24bit color, and Morrowind needs 32

FFZ · « **Reply #161 on:** April 01, 2004, 11:49:37 am »

I believe the support is there.

I for one, would love to see the Tholians and Andromedans finally arrive, as well as more stuff from the TNG era Trek.

Maybe an all-new game isn't the way to go, maybe an add-on, expansion, is the way. Not like OP, which was self-contained, but a game that required that you already have OP or SFC 3 to play, using the existing engine and simply adding some new ships and weapons/defenses for the new races, as well as a series of new missions and campaigns.

For example, I would love a general war campaign, seperate from the ISC war, that used and high-lighted the earlier ships.

There is plenty of room to do things and not let costs spiral out of control.

Fedman · « **Reply #167 on:** April 03, 2004, 04:47:09 pm »

[If you are going to place plame or insinuate blame to development of a game.. make sure you inplicate the proper company(s) that are resopnsible.... Taldren wanted more time to work on SFC 3.. Activision refused and pushed the title out because they wanted to meed the prime sales time 1 month before the Nemisis movie release...

Always follow the money trail for the answers

ghostcamel · « **Reply #168 on:** April 03, 2004, 09:49:34 pm »

GAW shouldnt be made if the situation is going to be a repeat of SFC2s or SFC3s production cuts and publisher cheapskating.

It needs to have enough developtment time to get things right, or else theres no real reason to do it. Going the cheap route will just limit sales of what could be a masterpiece.

Other strategy niche games get this treatment. They get the time to do things right.

If it cant be GUARANTEED that you will receive the needed time to make a real GAW, then dont do it.

Im tired of the compromises.

Unfortunately, that probably means working 2-5, or more, years on other projects. But, i know it would be worth it.

Somewhat on the same subject, id love to see Paramount do a new cartoon Trek series. If you check out the "Bring back Kirk!" trailer, it gives yiou a rough sketch of what the look of such a series should be. Shatner seems to still have interest in Trek, he could his own voicework. No need for him to lose weight

We could see some of the old cartoon races, we could get the bravado of TOS Kirk. Theres no limits with such a design. They could bring SFB back into the fold and consolidate the shrinking fanbase, and regrow it from there.

I know none of this stuff will come to pass. Exectuvies cant find their own asses, let alone good ideas.

The_Infiltrator · « **Reply #169 on:** April 03, 2004, 11:04:02 pm »

Problem is that it's Paramount's de facto position to attempt to drive SFB/ADB into the ground. The only reason that they can operate now as is is that they have a licence and Paramount can't do anything to get around that. It's ironic that for a long time there was nothing past TOS but the universe that ADB created, and now that it's a post TNG era for Paramount, they look at ADB something like a leper colony.

Age · « **Reply #170 on:** April 04, 2004, 01:40:13 am »

What does ADB stand for .I agree they need they time to get it right and who has the license?

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #171 on:** April 04, 2004, 11:37:04 am »

Amarillo Design Bureau, they hold the rights to Starfleet Battles, which Viacom has been trying to recover since the early 80's. However Viacom counters it buy holding the rights to the images of StarTrek, so Starfleet Command was only possible because they "cooperated" to make it.

FFZ · « **Reply #172 on:** April 04, 2004, 12:03:20 pm »

It really is a shame that ADB is so hated by the powers-that-be, SFB actually helped keep Trek alive for a time.

Back after ST The Motion Picture flopped, Trek looked as dead as disco, the only thing keeping it alive was SFB and legions of dedicated fans at cons, which were still strong even as the 1980s began.

Paramount had to be dragged kicking and screaming to make Wraith of Khan, and they were adament that it wasn't going over budget, if it did, they would fold the production and scrap it (this was because of the masive budget overflow of TMP.)

Khan was a big hit, and instead of rewarding ADB, Paramount gave the contract to Fasa Games.

Now, we seem to have come full circle, we are back to ADB still putting out TOS type material.

Unbeliavable.

Age · « **Reply #173 on:** April 04, 2004, 02:58:30 pm »

What is Fasa games please explian?I guess the powers that be don't see the logic in all of this ? I guess Viacom and Paramount Excutives don't watch the shows or movies they just waiting for the big bucks to come in they don't care about quality just the money they can expliot off of Trek.They could do this with PC games aswell just tell the publishers
how much they want which they already do so why not expliot it some more.I would give this Company the license to develope and puplish the games them selves that way they can do a better jop on it and just cut the middle person.Viacom and Paramont would love to expliot Trek some more and this is a good way to do it just keep milking it for all its worth we keep buying it why not we are big fools after all.

FFZ · « **Reply #174 on:** April 04, 2004, 03:16:52 pm »

Fasa games produced games of tactical Starship combat, similar to SFB, but using the movie Enterprise and ships from this era, instaed of ToS era ships.

Fasa came out with minature ships for this, and even did role playing adventure games of Trek, but all of these games, although pretty good, where nowhere near as detailed and interesting as SFB.

The_Infiltrator · « **Reply #175 on:** April 04, 2004, 03:24:56 pm »

FASA while it was around was a pretty good wargame company, though they did things differently than ADB. Personally I think ADB's product in this area is superior, but that may be personal preference. No one can deny though that Battletech was a great game - and this is another reason for confusion. At no time could it ever be said that FASA thought of their star trek game as the "flagship" game of their company. That has, and always was, Battletech. Why would Paramount therefore want to give them rights when they knew that it would never be their main focus? Personally, I've never understood the facination in trek quarters for Paramount. They're just a TV/movie studio. And sometimes not a very good one at that.

FFZ · « **Reply #176 on:** April 04, 2004, 03:30:14 pm »

It's somewhat ironic Paramount owns Trek because Lucelle Ball broke up with Desi Arnez.

Age · « **Reply #177 on:** April 04, 2004, 04:06:39 pm »

They own it and have been milking it for what it's worth and there is nothing Majal Roddenberry can't do but Paramount does other things projscts has well but Trek is thier Flag Ship of any it is to bad they are not reading all this then they would waken up.

News:

Topic: So whats the hold up with SFC G.A.W (Read 18292 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Davey E

Pestalence

FFZ

Pestalence

Teeth_03

Davey E

Pestalence

Pestalence

FFZ

Pestalence

Pestalence

Rod O'neal

Age

The_Infiltrator

Pestalence

Crimmy

NannerSlug

TheSatyr

NannerSlug

Rod O'neal

Pestalence

Rod O'neal

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Pestalence

Kroma_BaSyl

TheSatyr

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Kroma_BaSyl

Crimmy

Pestalence

Age

TheSatyr

Age

Pestalence

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Age

Kroma_BaSyl

Sten

Pestalence

Kroma_BaSyl

Pestalence

Kroma_BaSyl

Kroma_BaSyl

Pestalence

Kroma_BaSyl

Dogmatix!

Dogmatix!

Age

Merlinfmct87

Merlinfmct87

Age

Merlinfmct87

Age

Maxillius

Merlinfmct87

Maxillius

Taldren_Admin

Merlinfmct87

Merlinfmct87

Maxillius

Maxillius

FFZ

Age

Topic: So whats the hold up with SFC G.A.W (Read 18292 times)