Star Trek Online Battle

posted on February 20th, 2011, 2:01 am

There might not be enough atmosphere in a normal ship to sustain a full explosion, though a rather brief and relativly small one may work. The presence of explosions on shots that don't penetrate the hull aren't so easy to justify, though.

or in STO plasma grenade explodes beneath you and you are just like.. "hmm warm.. tingling"

Portable shields would protect them, though it's hardly a STO-exclusive thing.

posted on February 20th, 2011, 6:25 am

But no common in canon either of course the whole "if you get shot stay out of sight for 5 seconds and you will be good as new" that COD uses isnt very realistic either.

posted on February 20th, 2011, 10:20 am

yuk, so many complaints.

[list type=decimal]
[*]Why do STO ships have space contrails? i think that stupid effect sums up the game quite well. i cant believe they randomly decided that all ships should leave visible trails.
[*]It looks more like star wars than star trek. BC was way too slow and not enough pew pew, Legacy upped it a bit, but weapons were too weak. STO totally went the other way with lazor spam, PEW PEW PEW PEW KABOOM. it looks like jj trek and star wars. galaxies never fired loads of phasers at once, they put power into a small number of beams usually.
[*]You could fit a runabout in those bridges. why so cavernous?
[*]I think that horrible circle around ships is pointless. its orientation purpose could easily be done better by a box at the top.
[/list]

1. Simple Gameplay reason... Graphicswise, so it is easier to see the ships... you can get lost with that type of graphics really fast, when the ship is too dark... view it as a visual representation of Sensordata regarding the ships position and trajectory...
2. That is just taste...
3. Gameplay/Camera Reasons... try to make a "real" room and you'll get problems with the camera very fast... most 3rd Person Games have bigger rooms... and even then you can get Cam Problems (I curse you Fallout 3!)
4. The Circle is not for orientation but the shieldindicator

And for having "low" Graphics... it's not the server load that is the problem but the users PC...
While a PC might handle a few high poly ships it can get problems with more... which is bad for an MMOG that is supposed to have more people playing it...

And as long there are enough people with ancient PC wanting to play, graphics will stay low...
It's not like a single player game that get's all the money from sold boxes and having only little to no expenses afterwards...

posted on February 20th, 2011, 10:52 am

1. Simple Gameplay reason... Graphicswise, so it is easier to see the ships... you can get lost with that type of graphics really fast, when the ship is too dark... view it as a visual representation of Sensordata regarding the ships position and trajectory...

i never got lost in BC or legacy. ever. a orientation box could have done the same job at the top of the screen. the contrails are plain ugly.

2. That is just taste...

if u like that sort of stuff then you shouldnt be watching star trek, you should be watching star wars or jj trek. thats fine, people who like star wars are people too i guess. but they shouldnt mix with star trek people and star trek shouldnt get star wars stuff.

3. Gameplay/Camera Reasons... try to make a "real" room and you'll get problems with the camera very fast... most 3rd Person Games have bigger rooms... and even then you can get Cam Problems (I curse you Fallout 3!)

a) dunno why it had to be 3rd person, 1st person could have worked.
b) doesnt excuse stupid rooms either, i have played 3rd person games that didnt have those problems, rainbow six did it well.

4. The Circle is not for orientation but the shieldindicator

that could have been done somewhere else on the screen and not looked so stupid.

posted on February 21st, 2011, 4:19 am

The Uniforms in STO are pretty cool well at least i like them.

posted on February 21st, 2011, 2:36 pm

i never got lost in BC or legacy. ever. a orientation box could have done the same job at the top of the screen. the contrails are plain ugly.

I just see them as a visual gimmik like the FO engine glows, mostly there for looks. A 'love it or hate it' thing.

that could have been done somewhere else on the screen and not looked so stupid.

BC shield indicator was a good one. STO does have that box from what I see, the ship-side one is just an alternate indicator.

Maybe they should just have made it a toggle?

posted on February 21st, 2011, 2:43 pm

toggle is ok, at least that way u can turn off annoying things.

[Atlantisbase]

posted on February 21st, 2011, 4:22 pm

Last edited by Atlantisbase on February 21st, 2011, 4:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I just see them as a visual gimmik like the FO engine glows, mostly there for looks. A 'love it or hate it' thing.

Difference is, FO engine glows are not so way over done and are actually plausible visually. The only way you would get contrails is if a) your eyes worked like a camera with its shutter held open, or b) if the ships gave off exhaust like an 18-wheeler, which they don't.

a) dunno why it had to be 3rd person, 1st person could have worked.
b) doesnt excuse stupid rooms either, i have played 3rd person games that didnt have those problems, rainbow six did it well.

Well, if you do it in 1st person, it becomes difficult to see the surrondings and others in them since now you have to "look around", but they probably could have come up with some side bar listing those around you, etc.

But you're right, there's no real reason to have the rooms that big. I remember playing that DS9 based game, I can't remember the name right now, that was 3rd person and everything was normal sized. So 3rd person really has nothing to do with it, it's just a poor design choice of the designers.

posted on February 21st, 2011, 4:52 pm

ds9 the fallen? That game was awful

So incredibly sloooooooooow i thought my computer was lagging. Run around and pick up random keycards eurgh. it could have been so much better.

you are correct it had 3d done better though. At least they didnt fail at everything.

posted on February 21st, 2011, 5:36 pm

Yeah, that's it. Although I didn't think it was that bad; the three different perspectives got a little old though. And it didn't run slow for me at all.

As I recall that game used transparent walls/ceilings/etc. to maintain a clear sight on the character. I'm not sure what's so wrong with that from a stylistic stand point that STO would favor huge sets over such a method. Huge sets just make it look stupid and unrealistic.

posted on February 21st, 2011, 7:47 pm

i dont mean it ran slow, i meant it was slow. as in it was a slow paced game. took ages to play. got seriously boring after a few missions. i would have liked the 3 points of view if the overall experience was better.

posted on February 21st, 2011, 10:34 pm

Oh, yes, I see. Yeah, it was a little slow paced.

posted on February 22nd, 2011, 2:17 pm

yh, the naturally slow pace was made slower by the jumping between people.

And the puzzles were too long, u could go ages without shooting anyone.

posted on February 23rd, 2011, 5:45 am

So Myles you mean it was too realistic?? heh

posted on February 23rd, 2011, 2:50 pm

So Myles you mean it was too realistic?? heh

no, how is it realistic to search around for ages on boring puzzles that only have exactly 1 solution. thats not realistic at all. not in trek style or normal style. 1 keycard for a door, only 1, never more than 1 key.....

i just found i spent way to much time walking around in that game, and not enough time killing everything that moved.