Topic: Paramount hath spoken

[FPF-DieHard]

Harry, I am truly impressed that you have spent so much time in this forum.  You doubtlessly have some idea of the history of SFC, so you must have an idea of what we are holding out for.

I don't want to start a flame war with Nannerslug, but he wants a new and completely different game.  Something in SFC3 appeals to him.  If that were what you were alluding to in projects on the horizon, I doubt you would bother with this form.

The fact that you are here demonstrates that negotiations along the lines of a successor to the SFC series are ongoing.  I am trying not to read too much into this, but you definitely have my attention.

hell yeah!  I bought EF and Armada as well and will buy more.  I bought 2 copies of SFC3 and i don't even play it.

If you build it, they will come.

I do have some history with the SFC series being involved with it since the very first pitch meeting.

But I think you are reading too much in to it...I posted to clarify a few things on my interview.  And then answer a few quesitons.  My hope is you guys are open to anything that is going to push Trek gaming forward, not if it's only SFC related.

[EmeraldEdge]

I do have some history with the SFC series being involved with it since the very first pitch meeting.

But I think you are reading too much in to it...I posted to clarify a few things on my interview.  And then answer a few quesitons.  My hope is you guys are open to anything that is going to push Trek gaming forward, not if it's only SFC related.

My opinion has always been that it doesn't have to be SFB, but having the depth of SFB (or SFC since the total depth of SFB would take a lifetime to code probably) is a must.   You really need a well rounded system.   The thing about using SFB as a starting point was that a lot of that work was done for you, but if you want to do the work on your own in coming up with an adequate system, more power to you.

There are a lot of games that I would like to see.   I didn't have the chance to buy Bridgecommander (I was strapped for cash and just didn't get around to it) but I played the demo a LOT.   I think that given a little more punch in several places that could have been an incredible game (and I played it mostly in 3rd person mode so it was more like sfc, heh).  The beauty of that game was that you could let the crew handle a lot of stuff, but if you really wanted to get into more detail you could control more aspects.   I think is a great concept for a game like SFC where people complain too much about the learning curve.   If you have automated features to help the newbs and casual players get up to speed (like crew members doing their jobs on their own with minor instructions from you) but allow the hardcore guys to get in there and take control of it all at once (even shutting off the automated officers by individual stations, so if I want to control the weapons, but would rather have the computer take care of teh science station or something then i could) that would rock.  Combine that with a Dynaverse type setting (online multiplayer environment where you can take territory for your empire, and I think you'd have a winner.   I'm a big Dynaverse guy, if Bridgecommander had had one of those I would have bought it the day it came out (I would have found the money somewhere) but I had heard of it's lacking multiplayer end so...

Beyond that I can see a lot of things that would have nothing to do with SFB.   You could make some really cool FPS games (think more BF1942 than Quake or some crack/speed fest FPS game).   Have shuttles and stuff you can hop into, go to different planets invade buildings (Romulus or something cool like that, maybe Starfleet headquarters)   Have some space battles maybe.   The main thing is the thought process behind these games.   Really think "How can we make this game a Trek game" and by that I mean make guys feel like they are really living in the Trek universe.   Levels and environments should look like they are from Trek,  EF 2 didn't accomplish that for me.   Also, does this style of play reflect a Starfleet universe.   I don't recall seeing starfleet personall charging Klingons (everyone is bunny hopping) and just shooting as fast as they can.   It's a bit slower paced (doesn't have to be a hardcore tactical shooter, but shouldn't be something that can only be played by running around willy nilly as fast as you can and firing blindly) hiding behind boxes and shooting and stuff.   There is really so many possabilities.   RTS, RPG's you name it.   I would LOVE to see a trek game in the mold of Knights of the Old Republic.  How cool would that be?  Pretty darn cool and that's not SFB.

So, I guess my whole point in saying all of this is that I believe there are a lot of us out here who would very much like a lot of Trek games, but are a little harder to please.   We want more from games than what appears to be a quick mod (if I want Quake with Trek in it, I'd go buy Quake and throw together a mod so I can have all the other mods out there and way more people to play with than just those who bought went out and bought that one Trek game).   I just stand here waiting for the next Star Trek game that will WOW me.  (In a good way, I've had the negative WOW reaction far too many times with Trek games, half the time It's more like work even getting through the single player aspects and don't get me started on multiplayer... ) I hope it's coming.

[Death_Merchant]

Harry,

Welcome back. Good to hear from you.

You may not remember me. I joined this community ages ago originally for one reason only: To voice a desire for Macintosh OS support for Star Trek gaming.

Let's hope Spock's silly little IDIC pendant extends to Mac OS.

Thanks,
Death "lives in SoCal, sips lattes, but drives no Beemer" Merchant

[Victor1st]

One last thing.. Victor - I do not think it is right for you to speak for harry. He is a grown man who can talk for him self. 

The one thing I do agree with you about Victor is that if and when the next big (and i do mean successful/decent) trek sim comes out, sfc will be gone. In the end it is all about game play.

I aint speaking for Harry, if i was would ya think he would have agreed to the interview?

Also, about the next trek game.  It wont just be the SFC series that will see the slow decline, they all will.  Just as SFA delined when SFC came out.  Just as Armada 1 declined when Elite Force came out.

Natural progression is the course that game's take, the older games will die off eventually even if there wasnt any new trek games coming out, it just means that if new games do come out they will die off quicker.  Some of the trek games are already in there death throes, if you ask me they need a nudge to finally die off and the trek gamers can move on.  Course i'll probably get slammed for saying that now.  LMAO

[FVA_C_ Blade_ XC]

One last thing.. Victor - I do not think it is right for you to speak for harry. He is a grown man who can talk for him self. 

The one thing I do agree with you about Victor is that if and when the next big (and i do mean successful/decent) trek sim comes out, sfc will be gone. In the end it is all about game play.

I aint speaking for Harry, if i was would ya think he would have agreed to the interview?

Also, about the next trek game.  It wont just be the SFC series that will see the slow decline, they all will.  Just as SFA delined when SFC came out.  Just as Armada 1 declined when Elite Force came out.

Natural progression is the course that game's take, the older games will die off eventually even if there wasnt any new trek games coming out, it just means that if new games do come out they will die off quicker.  Some of the trek games are already in there death throes, if you ask me they need a nudge to finally die off and the trek gamers can move on.  Course i'll probably get slammed for saying that now.  LMAO

Not from me I agree with you,but there are still diehard people who still play those old games.

[NannerSlug]

good post emerald edge.. you are on the money (andi think very much so with the bridge commander thing - i did the same thing you did to play it. ) and yes harry.. i know a lot of us are interested in trek gaming in general.. i have everything from SFA and KA to SFC3.

[AdmWaterTiger-11thFleet-]

I recently signed into the Bridge Commander forums -- THAT place is busy. Wow! What a community they have there. CJ recommended it.

http://dynamic3.gamespy.com/~bridgecommander/phpBB/

I never got the game, but it's on my list now.

<S>

WaterTiger

[Tulwar]

I do have some history with the SFC series being involved with it since the very first pitch meeting.

But I think you are reading too much in to it...I posted to clarify a few things on my interview.  And then answer a few questions.  My hope is you guys are open to anything that is going to push Trek gaming forward, not if it's only SFC related.

My opinion has always been that it doesn't have to be SFB, but having the depth of SFB (or SFC since the total depth of SFB would take a lifetime to code probably) is a must.   You really need a well rounded system.   The thing about using SFB as a starting point was that a lot of that work was done for you, but if you want to do the work on your own in coming up with an adequate system, more power to you.

That's the whole thing.  I cannot imagine anyone developing a ship to ship, group, or even fleet level strategy game without something to build on.  Harpoon is the most complicated board game ever created; SFB ranks second.  What has us so enamoured with SFC is not so much the ST content, but a level of complexity and strategy that approaches modern warfare.

I've played the computer version of Harpoon.  With simple Icons defining units, I was amazed by the suspension of disbelief I experienced.  I mension this because I know that the SFC engine is not the only way to build a complex strategy game.

The simple fact is, SFC fans may not be interested in ST in general.  SFC is a quality Sci-Fi strategy game, even if limited to ship level tactics.  Personally, I sometimes watch ST in reruns, but lost interest with Voyager and Enterprize.  I did give the first season of Enterprize a chance.  I enjoyed the first season, but found the 9/11 parallel patently offensive.  The series may be played-out.

SFB kept me interested in ST.  If a strategy game of that depth is in the future of ST gaming, I'm all for it.

[FPF-DieHard]

Natural progression is the course that game's take, the older games will die off eventually even if there wasnt any new trek games coming out, it just means that if new games do come out they will die off quicker.  Some of the trek games are already in there death throes, if you ask me they need a nudge to finally die off and the trek gamers can move on.  Course i'll probably get slammed for saying that now.  LMAO

When they release a game better than OP for it's genre, I will play it.  That has not happened.

[EmeraldEdge]

When they release a game better than OP for it's genre, I will play it.  That has not happened.

EXACTLY!  but it could happen and I hope it does, because we'll all have a really killer game (or several killer games) to play for a long time to come.   The good thing about making a really killer game is that you can keep folks coming back for more too.

[FPF-DieHard]

When they release a game better than OP for it's genre, I will play it.  That has not happened.

EXACTLY!  but it could happen and I hope it does, because we'll all have a really killer game (or several killer games) to play for a long time to come.   The good thing about making a really killer game is that you can keep folks coming back for more too.

Oh, and IMHO, it doesn't have to be based on the SFB rules set.   A really good 3d game could do it to.   i just beleive that the SFB system is so rich that most of the work has already been done for you, you might as well take advantage of that.

[Harry]

I do have some history with the SFC series being involved with it since the very first pitch meeting.

But I think you are reading too much in to it...I posted to clarify a few things on my interview.  And then answer a few questions.  My hope is you guys are open to anything that is going to push Trek gaming forward, not if it's only SFC related.

My opinion has always been that it doesn't have to be SFB, but having the depth of SFB (or SFC since the total depth of SFB would take a lifetime to code probably) is a must.   You really need a well rounded system.   The thing about using SFB as a starting point was that a lot of that work was done for you, but if you want to do the work on your own in coming up with an adequate system, more power to you.

That's the whole thing.  I cannot imagine anyone developing a ship to ship, group, or even fleet level strategy game without something to build on.  Harpoon is the most complicated board game ever created; SFB ranks second.  What has us so enamoured with SFC is not so much the ST content, but a level of complexity and strategy that approaches modern warfare.

I've played the computer version of Harpoon.  With simple Icons defining units, I was amazed by the suspension of disbelief I experienced.  I mension this because I know that the SFC engine is not the only way to build a complex strategy game.

The simple fact is, SFC fans may not be interested in ST in general.  SFC is a quality Sci-Fi strategy game, even if limited to ship level tactics.  Personally, I sometimes watch ST in reruns, but lost interest with Voyager and Enterprize.  I did give the first season of Enterprize a chance.  I enjoyed the first season, but found the 9/11 parallel patently offensive.  The series may be played-out.

SFB kept me interested in ST.  If a strategy game of that depth is in the future of ST gaming, I'm all for it.

Just a little footnote...most of the first season episodes were written and many shot prior to 9/11.

[EmeraldEdge]

Yeah, I think he's talking about the Expanse stuff of Season 3 (and finale season 2) though, because it's a parallel to 9/11 with a massive terrorist attack and then the Federation going in to find those who did it, although they don't know exactly where to find them, etc.  I know a lot of folks were a bit turned off by that.  Unless your talking about "the first season episodes" of the 1 season long expanse storyline.  I would be shocked if it had been written as is before that.

[MBDay]

Try this one for a game folks.
You take the parts of SFC3 that every one likes. I.E. the ablety to refit your ship. Beening able to fleet up. Beening able to see who is in a hex and beening able to attack them.
Then added in the parts of SFC1, 2EAW $ 2OP. I.E. power manmagent, the 6 sided shields, some more of the wepons as well as more then 4 races that are play able. Also have mult-era time lines with ships and all that.
Then add to that the 3d playablety of BC, KA, SFA, and Free lancer.
Take it all and add in to a server that has no map but you are in if you will mission all the time you are on the server.
Then add in parts from other games like EF, EF2 and the like.
I think this would be a great game and if it was done right I know I would pay a little not much to play it on a set of server that would keep running 24/7.
This I feel woud be a game that every one would like and have fun on. It would have something for every one.

[SkyFlyer]

That would be very hard to make all of that work together Day...

[EmeraldEdge]

Try this one for a game folks.
You take the parts of SFC3 that every one likes. I.E. the ablety to refit your ship.

Bzzzz. wrong.   I personally don't like SFC3's refit option.  It totally blows my suspension of disbelief.   SFC1's refit option, maybe, but the whole mix and match however you want I just don't like at all, especially given the slapdash way it was implemented in SFC3, perhaps if each hardpoint had a mass limit or something, as a bare minimum, and a lot more limitations on what can be put in certain combinations, and they needed more variety of parts (meaning how they are used not just 10 or more of the same weapon like it is).   I know a whole lot of folks who feel the same way, so I know I'm not the only one.

[3dot14]

Day, I think it should be noted that the features in SFC3 are not "original" by any means. Many of them were sugegsted during the brain storming posts for Dynaverse 2. (Taldren just never implemented them until III)

But with that said, Welcome back among us, Harry. We kept  the flame warm waiting.

I will not spent any more thoughts on the future of Trek, come what may. At least I had SFC, that was enough.

[Khalee]

Well if I could have a say in the next star Trek game I would say A game editor would be top priority. Plus

no hard codeing of anything, total modablity

more than 4 races.

No porting of ships from any of the other games, as some of them are ugly. Start fresh for crying out loud

Up the Poly count 4500 to 5000 seems about right

A stable and working on line play.
 
The ability to have more than three ships in your fleet. I want to field a compleat ISC fleet, which is about 11 ships.

If you include them working scouts.

Maybe Include the compleate Fasa starship constrution manual from pre tos to tng. I had fun playing with that book, and still mess with it now and then.

NO BORG, Borg are boring and dull.

 And if I think of anything else Ill post it.

[J. Carney]

Khalee-

Let's drop the poly count down to about 1000 or 1500. That way a lot more people could buy it without upgrading their comps.

I don't know anything about FASA, so I won't remark on it. I just like SFB.

All the other points I like- especially the NO BORG one.

And here are my add ons-

Refit capibility like in SFC1.

Officers like in SFC1.

[Bonk]

Up the Poly count 4500 to 5000 seems about right

I'm with Carney, that seems like a bit much... what if you have four players each with a three ship fleet and fighters as well... if the polycount was that high for all ships that would likely bring most systems to their knees. Myself I'm always a few years behind on video cards - I refuse to shell out more than $250 Canadian for a video card... and I put the priority on 2-D quality before 3-D acceleration (read Matrox - not Nvidia or ATI...)

Now if you're talking about a 3-D space shooter joystick enabled dogfight game well perhaps that level of graphic detail would be accceptable... (again, SFB simulation vs Trek movie simulation seems to be the issue...)

I understand your perspective as a modeler though, you want people to see the best versions of the models possible. (I like high poly models too but my system just chokes up on 12 or more of them... PIII-1000, 640MB RAM, 32MB Matrox G450)