213374U Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 I think that a Star Wars RPG that limits the player to the Federation is thinking too small.I agree. We need also the Techno Union and the Intergalactic Banking Clan. Awesome! - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Slowtrain Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 Go Bill Shatner GO! He is still totally awesome. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
steelfiredragon Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 you know star trek and star wars are amongst the best known space settings. the difference between them is that its a bit to hard to make a star trek game that does not suck. the best way to do so, is to make one that is squad based mercenary or freighter crew and not do one that makes the pc a member of the military faction( ie star fleet). Strength through Mercy Head Torturor of the Cult of the Anti-gnome
alanschu Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 I think that a Star Wars RPG that limits the player to the Federation is thinking too small.I agree. We need also the Techno Union and the Intergalactic Banking Clan. Awesome! I am clearly filled with so much fail today.... Star TREK! Star TREK!!!
Darth InSidious Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 you know star trek and star wars are amongst the best known space settings. the difference between them is that its a bit to hard to make a star trek game that does not suck. How strange, then, that there were so many good ST games to come out of Interplay in the 1990s/early 2000s, and indeed generally - The 25th Anniversary, Elite Force/2, The Fallen, the Starfleet Command series, Armada/2, etc. This particularly rapid, unintelligible patter isn't generally heard, and if it is, it doesn't matter.
Calax Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 I just don't think that Star Trek lends itself very well to the RPG genre. I don't know, but I guess it's mainly because I can't figure out how they'd throw obsticals in your path when Starfleet seems to be the type where "If you need it you can get it" rather than "Well you gotta jump through these hoops or do something for me". It's hard to explain but basically I feel like if you did do an RPG you'd have to do it rather than as a single party, you were a ship, your HP would be your health etc. Because you wouldn't have to work against internal politics and there aren't many third parties in any war that starts up besides the ferangi. I mean if you look at most of the wars that have popped up in the series, it's usually "Feds + allies vs. Everything else within range". Of course I'm sure they could come up with something that's third party, but *shrugs* I just think there wouldn't be enough conflict for the series to work (given most of the shows plotlines revolve around disasters rather than conflicts and always ends up being a single guy with special tech rather than a large empire or conspiracy.) Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Aristes Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 I think that a Star Wars RPG that limits the player to the Federation is thinking too small.I agree. We need also the Techno Union and the Intergalactic Banking Clan. Awesome! I am clearly filled with so much fail today.... Star TREK! Star TREK!!! I laughed out loud at the whole exchange. To be fair, however, a Star Wars vs Star Trek would be awesome. Kind of like Superman v The Hulk! Let's do it!
Oerwinde Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 you know star trek and star wars are amongst the best known space settings. the difference between them is that its a bit to hard to make a star trek game that does not suck. How strange, then, that there were so many good ST games to come out of Interplay in the 1990s/early 2000s, and indeed generally - The 25th Anniversary, Elite Force/2, The Fallen, the Starfleet Command series, Armada/2, etc. Can anyone tell me how to actually win a space combat in 25th anniversary? It dropped me into the game and I had no idea what to do then I died. The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.
alanschu Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 I just don't think that Star Trek lends itself very well to the RPG genre. I don't know, but I guess it's mainly because I can't figure out how they'd throw obsticals in your path when Starfleet seems to be the type where "If you need it you can get it" rather than "Well you gotta jump through these hoops or do something for me". It's hard to explain but basically I feel like if you did do an RPG you'd have to do it rather than as a single party, you were a ship, your HP would be your health etc. Because you wouldn't have to work against internal politics and there aren't many third parties in any war that starts up besides the ferangi. I mean if you look at most of the wars that have popped up in the series, it's usually "Feds + allies vs. Everything else within range". Of course I'm sure they could come up with something that's third party, but *shrugs* I just think there wouldn't be enough conflict for the series to work (given most of the shows plotlines revolve around disasters rather than conflicts and always ends up being a single guy with special tech rather than a large empire or conspiracy.) I absolutely do not feel as though an RPG requires the player to have to do "jump through hoops or do something for me" to get it. The big thing about RPGs I find is character growth and progression. Even if there's simply a "If you need it you can get it" (which I'm skeptical about....is Starfleet big on giving the top of the line ships and weapons to green captains and crews fresh out of the Academy?), a character that is a member of Starfleet will still be able to take on missions, have this missions go awry and find conflict there, and return to Starfleet with promotions, story progression, and so forth. I'm confused that some definitions seem so rigid (though really I guess I shouldn't be). Why exactly is a communist utopia a restriction on implementing an RPG exactly? Because you can simply ask Starfleet for whatever you need? There's no internal politics (really? Kirk seemed to butt heads with Starfleet Command in the movies. **** he defeated an impossible mission by cheating)? What makes an RPG? The things I like to see in RPGs are character progression, a solid story, good combat (preferably character based, but not a requirement), and the feeling of exploring a world/universe (even if the game is 100% linear). How does a communist utopia restrict these things?
Aristes Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 There are better settings than Star Trek, even though I've long said that good writers could create a solid tv series or rpg from the setting. The fact that it's a communist utopia simply makes the entire premise a lie. Once viewers, readers, or players buy into the setting, however, it really doesn't matter. I can watch a Star Trek show or movie and enjoy it. I haven't played a Star Trek game I've enjoyed, but then again I haven't played a Star Trek game that I can remember. The problem with the idea behind Star Trek's utopian setting is that the entire premise relies on humanity not acting like humans. However, as folks have rightly noted, there is internal conflict and external threat in the Star Trek universe. Humans in the Star Trek setting act like humanity as we know it now, so it really doesn't matter that the setting is a pie in the sky utopian crapfest. What really matters is that it can still come to good use. If the discussion amounts to 'they should make a Star Trek game,' then I'm going to be dismissive, but I'll still follow the title and buy it if it looks good. That's exactly what I did with KotOR, and I was quite happy to play it. If the discussion is 'they should make a Star Trek game, what do you think?' then I'm going to suggest alternatives that appeal to me personally. That's how I took Calax' comments. His underlying reasoning might be uneven, but I tend to agree with his thinking overall even if I don't feel quite as strongly about it as he does. Yes, the communist utopia concept of Star Trek is inherently flawed, but you rightly say that it can still serve as the basis for a great game. That's because a good design team can take a popular setting and do wonderful things with it. I'm not going to let my views on the system stop me from playing a game I would enjoy. I would, however, prefer a game set in a different universe. Like Cthulu.
213374U Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 What makes an RPG? The things I like to see in RPGs are character progression, a solid story, good combat (preferably character based, but not a requirement), and the feeling of exploring a world/universe (even if the game is 100% linear).But are those the elements of a true Scots..., er, RPG, alanschu? Really, I don't see the setting as especially problematic to make an RPG. Even if the commie utopia is such (debatable), the player would still need something to trade with other races who may not be as appreciative of smiles and handshakes as currency as humanity is. That could be very interesting if handled well too, allowing the devs to design an economy which isn't based on GP disguised as credits or w/e. How about trading shipboard systems, dilithium crystals, or other stuff that has actual value for the player and can't be hoarded as GP can. This would probably rule out a "ph4t l00t" system altogether, but I tend to see that more as a good thing... A Romulan Star Empire RPG would be bliss. And suicidal from a marketing standpoint. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Calax Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 I just don't think that Star Trek lends itself very well to the RPG genre. I don't know, but I guess it's mainly because I can't figure out how they'd throw obsticals in your path when Starfleet seems to be the type where "If you need it you can get it" rather than "Well you gotta jump through these hoops or do something for me". It's hard to explain but basically I feel like if you did do an RPG you'd have to do it rather than as a single party, you were a ship, your HP would be your health etc. Because you wouldn't have to work against internal politics and there aren't many third parties in any war that starts up besides the ferangi. I mean if you look at most of the wars that have popped up in the series, it's usually "Feds + allies vs. Everything else within range". Of course I'm sure they could come up with something that's third party, but *shrugs* I just think there wouldn't be enough conflict for the series to work (given most of the shows plotlines revolve around disasters rather than conflicts and always ends up being a single guy with special tech rather than a large empire or conspiracy.) I absolutely do not feel as though an RPG requires the player to have to do "jump through hoops or do something for me" to get it. The big thing about RPGs I find is character growth and progression. Even if there's simply a "If you need it you can get it" (which I'm skeptical about....is Starfleet big on giving the top of the line ships and weapons to green captains and crews fresh out of the Academy?), a character that is a member of Starfleet will still be able to take on missions, have this missions go awry and find conflict there, and return to Starfleet with promotions, story progression, and so forth. I'm confused that some definitions seem so rigid (though really I guess I shouldn't be). Why exactly is a communist utopia a restriction on implementing an RPG exactly? Because you can simply ask Starfleet for whatever you need? There's no internal politics (really? Kirk seemed to butt heads with Starfleet Command in the movies. **** he defeated an impossible mission by cheating)? What makes an RPG? The things I like to see in RPGs are character progression, a solid story, good combat (preferably character based, but not a requirement), and the feeling of exploring a world/universe (even if the game is 100% linear). How does a communist utopia restrict these things? It's hard to describe how I feel about RPG's when you add them to star trek. It could be just because I haven't gotten that deep, but it seems like Star Trek is less about interstellar conflict, and more about finding ways around fighting. Also humanity in Star Trek is (generally) goody too shoes where there is no "bad stuff" (murder, hunger, greed, sloth etc) and we're all fighting for the same cause and don't hate eachother etc etc. There isn't much internal politiking or power grabs within the faction which just makes it too GOOD for me to believe that I'm a part of (mainly because I don't consider myself to be a paragon of humanity) It feels like if you were to play it the ability to play a jackass would be removed (well you could do it like mass Effect but even then it feels like if you were to really do that in Trek you'd either be shipped off to the secret police or imprisoned). The episodes of trek that I've seen show the Federation rarely using force to get their point across. They ALWAYS use diplomacy unless shot at, and even if they're shot at they generally try to use diplomacy rather than force. This, to me, is inhuman in terms of how they'd react, and in game terms I usually am pretty quick to pull the trigger. Basically the biggest reason I object to the Trek franchise being RPG'd is that you'd be put into a JRPG made by americans rather than a RPG. You wouldn't have branching paths (well, good and angelic) because the "dark" side would be totally closed off to you due to Fleets code of conduct. Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Aristes Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 I don't know. Star Trek is pretty conventional in how it approaches conflict. Sure, it can be didactic, but members of the federation still have petty jealousies and rivalries and the like. Sure, they're played out on a smaller scale while the larger scale touts society as the pinnacle of urbanity. Nevertheless, no matter what Star Fleet says, there are still murderers and thieves and the like abounding.
213374U Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 (edited) Also humanity in Star Trek is (generally) goody too shoes where there is no "bad stuff" (murder, hunger, greed, sloth etc) and we're all fighting for the same cause and don't hate eachother etc etc.Yeah. Not even good ol' lust ( after all, Kirk only wanted to get in her pants so he could WIN! ). Really man, I don't think humanity is depicted to be nearly as perfect as you say. There's plenty of examples of Starfleet dudes going bad. Not everyone is like him. edit: lawl Edited June 15, 2009 by 213374U - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Monte Carlo Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 Alanschu's point about us not thinking big is disingenuous. Does anyone, honestly, think that a developer given the Star Trek licence to play with would be allowed to craft a deep, rich CRPG that allowed the player to have much fun as a Klingon or Romulan as it would a pointy-eared Star Fleet tech officer? Would they hell. It would be all set 'phasers to stun', running around the deck to simulate explosions, 'tha engines'll nae tek it cap'n' and the inevitabel tribute to Tribbles. Not to mention the countless hours spent getting the 'swishing' noise the doors make just so, much to the delight of the utter hordes of canon-obsessed trekkies such a title would attract. :: Yawn :: Honestly, Star Trek as a gaming franchise has got more baggage than Paris Hilton on a private jet. Anything else. Anything. 80's cheese Galactica for chrissakes, with Dirk Benedict in a plastic space fighter. Cheers MC
Hell Kitty Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 Kinda reminds me of that Warhammer 40K FPS, Fire Warrior. My knowledge of the Warhammer world was limited to old White Dwarf magazines, but before this game I didn't know or care about the Tau. And I still don't care.
Calax Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 Like I said, my experience had little of the usual flavors of life (I only ever really saw TNG with any consistency). I mean I'm sure they can pull it off I just don't think I'd be able to do it convincingly. Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Darth InSidious Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 you know star trek and star wars are amongst the best known space settings. the difference between them is that its a bit to hard to make a star trek game that does not suck. How strange, then, that there were so many good ST games to come out of Interplay in the 1990s/early 2000s, and indeed generally - The 25th Anniversary, Elite Force/2, The Fallen, the Starfleet Command series, Armada/2, etc. Can anyone tell me how to actually win a space combat in 25th anniversary? It dropped me into the game and I had no idea what to do then I died. IIRC, with difficulty. I haven't played it in years, though, and never beat the final mission's extended combat sequence... don't think I even managed to destroy a single ship... Going on what I remember, though, moving the cursor moves the ship's direction, and I think various consoles on the bridge cause you to raise shields etc. But it's been so long this could all be total BS... This particularly rapid, unintelligible patter isn't generally heard, and if it is, it doesn't matter.
Aristes Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 edit: lawl The first one was funny but the second one never loaded. Maybe my internet connection.
213374U Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 Like I said, my experience had little of the usual flavors of life (I only ever really saw TNG with any consistency). I mean I'm sure they can pull it off I just don't think I'd be able to do it convincingly. http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Matthew_Dougherty http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Erik_Pressman http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Michael_Eddington http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Luther_Sloan Those are just off the top of my head. The last one is probably one of the darkest human characters in all of ST, and a personal favorite of mine. You need to watch more Trek my friend... - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Oner Posted June 15, 2009 Posted June 15, 2009 You dare forget about Garak? And Quark, Sisko and last but not least, The Doctor? Oh and: Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
alanschu Posted June 16, 2009 Posted June 16, 2009 (edited) Does anyone, honestly, think that a developer given the Star Trek licence to play with would be allowed to craft a deep, rich CRPG that allowed the player to have much fun as a Klingon or Romulan as it would a pointy-eared Star Fleet tech officer? Clearly it wasn't disingenuous. If you think my comments lacked sincerity then I'm not sure what to think. Edited June 16, 2009 by alanschu
Aristes Posted June 16, 2009 Posted June 16, 2009 Yeah. I usually balk at literally saying other members are lying.
Gromnir Posted June 16, 2009 Posted June 16, 2009 am wanting a star trek crpg 'bout as much as we is looking forward to a serious case of jock itch. ... guy in the red shirt dies... can we all go home now? HA! Good Fun! "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now