×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Visual Look of Star Trek Online

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the corridor-after-corridor dept.

Role Playing (Games) 92

Gamasutra has a piece on the development of the visual look of Star Trek Online. From the article: "We set out to reproduce the interior of a starship from the television show, so we began by examining shots of the sets. Looking over the images, we made a few observations. There are many light sources. The lighting is diffuse. Shadows are soft. There are several types of material with different reflectivity and specularity. These were the features we wanted to reproduce in game. We thought they were the key to the look."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

92 comments

Gnnnf (1)

Helen Keller (842669) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771770)

First post! From a spacker too. You ablies totally FAIL IT!

Re:Gnnnf (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14774052)

mlkmplk'[pojupojl;m/.mpojpopopojkpokpok;k

I just put that into my Perl interpreter and saw god.

STNG Interactive Technical manual (2, Interesting)

Grendel32 (818105) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771789)

They just need to take a look at that. I think I may even still have mine.

Re:STNG Interactive Technical manual (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772301)

Just be careful when referencing the blueprint set for the Enterprise-D: the regular bridge crew's quarters are rotated 180 degress so that the doors that should lead into them intead lead into the crawlspaces behind them. Either that, or the doors should be on the other side of the next hallway.

Re:STNG Interactive Technical manual (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14773760)

ST:NG U.S.S Enterprise NCC-D Blueprints ISBN 0-671-50093-7

Hah! I'm a bigger nerd. :)

Why are they focused on the look? (3, Insightful)

Random Utinni (208410) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771815)

Forget replicating the look of the TV show... focus on building a decent game. It's not like if they get the lighting in the game world 'just so', they'll have a smash hit that people want to play... or these days, maybe they will.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (3, Informative)

MrShaggy (683273) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771852)

I am a lighting guy.. and it is important. It has to go with the feel of what is around you. The problem is that you need a hook for the fanbois, so you get a reasonably passing grade. But they have an uphil climb. SW:Galaxies bombed even though it looked good. However I still havent checkked the pictures.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (2, Informative)

badasscat (563442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772273)

I am a lighting guy.. and it is important. It has to go with the feel of what is around you. The problem is that you need a hook for the fanbois, so you get a reasonably passing grade.

The thing is, and I'm not sure if these guys realize it or not, the lighting schemes in ST:TNG (which they're using for reference) were changed in about season two or season three. It's obvious if you watch the shows - the first couple seasons had a much darker, hard-edged look. That worked well later in Enterprise and it works well for new series like Battlestar Galactica, but ST:TNG never had the dark content to go with the somewhat muddy visuals. So they ended up brightening up the lighting and softening the shadows; even the makeup seemed to change in order to reflect less of the lighting off characters' faces. The end result was that ultra-bright, ultra-low contrast look that the series is known for.

I bring this up because the observation lounge/conference room that they're using as a reference appears to be from the first or second season, before they brightened up the lighting. Later seasons had that room evenly lit. The hallway, on the other hand, is from the later seasons. So they are doing a bit of mix and match and not being as careful as they think they are. Which isn't going to please the fanbois.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

PhoenixOne (674466) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772989)

The fact that you can bring something like this up shows exactly how hard it is going to be to please the Star Trek audience. I can't think of another group of "fanbois" that obsess so much about a fictional universe (and I hang out with Firefly fans ;)).

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (2, Insightful)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773557)

I'll be happy no matter what it looks like as long as I don't have to grind for 3 days just to get Academy approval to set my phaser on "2 shots to kill a rat" from the original "5 shots to kill a rat".

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 8 years ago | (#14775433)

I'll be happy no matter what it looks like as long as I don't have to grind for 3 days just to get Academy approval to set my phaser on "2 shots to kill a rat" from the original "5 shots to kill a rat".

In United Federation of the Planets the rats kill you !

At least until you learn to reverse their polarities.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

Atlantis-Rising (857278) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772996)

Plus, any star trek fan will tell you that the corridors are way too tall. They should end just above the doors, not way up there.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773592)

I wonder if the body design slider will let you make a human 6'6". I had no idea Riker was actually that tall, and Worf only a little shorter (and looking equal thanks to the headridge.)

Not that a 3 foot tall human wouldn't be just as strong, or be able to take the same 72 shots from a phaser before dying, er, becoming stunned.

And I can't wait to play a Vulcan and their "streakbreaker" random number generator code makes first attempts at neck pinches fail 85% of the time. Woo hoo!

Yeah, I'm pissed. My dancer in Star Wars can't use her sliced Naboobian pistol anymore.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

MrShaggy (683273) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773046)

I think that there will be many forum posts about those elements of the content. As long as they make the game plausible. Many of the problems with the galaxies game were thematic. There was a great post makng suggestions.. such as having bounthunters and smugglers start on Tatooine. Have all the 'legend' characters actually involved. Instead of taking the easy way out, and turinging everyone into a jedi. I think the major part of these games, you need to maintain some sense of continuity. If this took place at the beginning of TNG/.. there shouldnt be any BORG. No matter what. They werent introduced yet. A little later, and that would be cool. Maybe the Main Characters from the show should be played by the devs, or given an AI. Is there some sort of Roddenberry over-searer? I played some Starwars and some trek games, and i always felt let down by the trek games. Too boring. Maybe an immersive GTA-VC/SA style game, might be what will do it for a single player.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (2, Informative)

djSpinMonkey (816614) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771942)

Forget replicating the look of the TV show... focus on building a decent game.

While I certainly agree with this sentiment when considering high-level game design decisions, TFA was specifically talking about the art department's initial set design process for a game that comes from a very specific, very recognizable pre-existing setting. Gameplay and overall experience are going to be the most important factors for me when the final product comes out, but from this department, at this stage, for this game, performance and "replicating the look of the TV show" are exactly what they should be focusing on.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772118)

Follow the trends: MMOs are the new golf [1up.com] . Sure, there are people who will log in and actually want to play, and in time they'll be viewed with the same cocked eyebrows and muttered, gentle admonishment about 'some people having too much time on their hands.' The majority of the people will log in because the course is well-groomed and the clubhouse is nicely appointed, er, the screen-candy is choice and the sounds make the most of the user's tricked-out dolby 7.1.

Why Star Trek? It's the Old School of SF/Fantasy Universes. The guys who followed along with TOS -- and even TNG -- are the captains of industry now. It's a natural.

How long before all those empty inn rooms in EQ start filling up with virtual conventioneers? Hmmm?

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (5, Insightful)

tfinniga (555989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772250)

Meh. I'm sure the gameplay people are focused on gameplay. The developers are focused on development. But this article was written by the artists, which are focused on the art.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14772411)

Mod UP UP UP

Great example of this is Katamari Damacey, the graphics are so low end, but the game is awesome and I can't stop playing!

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (4, Funny)

vertinox (846076) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772738)

Forget replicating the look of the TV show... focus on building a decent game.

That would be kind of like releasing an MMOG about Star Wars without the space battles... Oh wait...

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773214)

"It's not like if they get the lighting in the game world 'just so', they'll have a smash hit that people want to play..."

Um, right, but that's the bit the artists know how to handle. Throwing them into game development isn't going to positively help the game much, either.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

JordanL (886154) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773249)

Forget replicating the look of the TV show... focus on building a decent game. It's not like if they get the lighting in the game world 'just so', they'll have a smash hit that people want to play... or these days, maybe they will.

So under your software model its a moral imperative that you get all of the game mechanics coded before you start to consider the UI?

Why that's brilliant! I mean its not as the users interface with the user inter... oh, wait.

Re:Why are they focused on the look? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 8 years ago | (#14778695)

Article was about art. If you think UI design = art, then you're probably not an an artist, and I hope you're not a UI designer.

Looks great. (3, Insightful)

Nightspark (938372) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771830)

While the two screenshots they showed might look relatively simple, they definitely look like the Enterprise D -- and that may be the most important thing.

Re:Looks great. (1)

MagicDude (727944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14774831)

There's no evidence that it's the Enterprise D. More likely it's just a galaxy class vessel, and even then there's no reason to believe that hallways and observation lounges aren't modular structures that can be inserted into any class of vessel. As well, the uniform the crewman is wearing wasn't typical of the Enterprise D. In Generations, it looked like they were transitioning to that style of duty uniform (though use of it was inconsistant among the officers), but then the Enterprise D was destroyed, and by the time the Enterprise E came around they were all using the next style of uniform with the grey shoulders.

Re:Looks great. (1)

Jaruzel (804522) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777073)

As I understnad it, the grey-shoulder uniforms came about off the back of the dominion war, where it was decided that rank or class be less obvious in the heat of battle. ie. less red on your ensign shirt, may, just may, result in you surviving long enough to be in the end credits ;)

-Jar.

Re:Looks great. (1)

MagicDude (727944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14777168)

An interesting idea, but the collar pip rank insignia stayed the same through all the uniform iterations. Something I had seen was that the TNG style uniforms (Mostly colored with black shoulders) were the standard duty uniforms while the other style uniforms (Mostly black with colored shoulders and then later with grey shoulders) were some kind of battle uniform, akin to today's military BDU. As such the personell on the front would be wearing the battle fatigues, and then as seen when Sisko visited earth during the starfleet coup, he would change back to the TNG style uniform, which is what everyone else on earth was wearing.

Re:Looks great. (1)

Triv (181010) | more than 8 years ago | (#14781239)

I can't believe I'm responding to this, but...

The way it was originally envisioned, colored uniforms with black shoulders were for starship personnel and black uniforms with colored shoulders were for starbase/support personnel - that's why the crew of the Odyssey (DS9, "The Search, Part 2") were shown in the next-gen style uniforms.

...And then they all went to grey. THAT, I can't help you with.

Re:Looks great. (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 8 years ago | (#14778723)

less red on your ensign shirt, may, just may, result in you surviving long enough to be in the end credits ;)
Us limeys may be a bit slow and traditional, but we figured that out some time between 1776 and 1900.

Redundancy... (3, Funny)

softspokenrevolution (644206) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771851)

I'm sorry, but after they work on the visual look are they going to fix the auditory sound?

Re:Redundancy... (1)

kevin.fowler (915964) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771951)

or the inertial movement?

Well, I'm out of cash. I'm off to the ATM Machine.

Re:Redundancy... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14772033)

Any new originality in the game?

Would've posted my question sooner, but had some trouble with my NIC card.

ObNitpick (5, Informative)

Stephen Williams (23750) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771859)

Those shots captioned "ready room" are actually of the observation lounge, not the ready room.

-Stephen (yes, I'm single; no, this doesn't surprise me)

Re:ObNitpick (1)

tukkayoot (528280) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772064)

Also, in the reference shot of the corridor, the first observation is about the black reflective paneling, saying they don't know whether it has LCARs and if it's an info pane. The answer is that it is, as I recall one episode where crewman demonstrates to a visitor that they can ask the ship for directions, and the corridor panels will light up showing you how to get to your destination.

You know it wouldn't be difficult for them to hire a Trek nerd consultant to relentlessly correct and inform them of all of these little details. But then I guess it's okay for them to show a little Trek ignorance in this article, which seems more geared towards gamer/developer geeks than Trek geeks.

Re:ObNitpick (1)

cpt kangarooski (3773) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772423)

That would be the pilot episode. The visitor is Riker, who had just come aboard (and wasn't terribly familiar with Enterprise's features, I guess) and was looking for Data.

Re:ObNitpick (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14774367)

What the fuck is an LCAR or what the fuck are LCARs ? "Lake Cities Association of Realtors" ? "Ligature Caret Table" ?

Re:ObNitpick (2, Informative)

PhotoBoy (684898) | more than 8 years ago | (#14775934)

LCARS = Library Computer Access and Retrieval System

It's the name of the OS (or possibly the UI) of the computer system you see on Federation starships during the TNG/DS9/VOY era.

Re:ObNitpick (1)

psychonaut (65759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14779129)

Federation Starships, yes, but most of the action on DS9 took place on a Cardassian-built space station. Hence most of the computer graphics on that show were not LCARS.

Re:ObNitpick (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14775681)

You know, they have Michael Okuda working for them: http://startrek.perpetual.com/2005/08/perpetual_an nounces_addition_o.html [perpetual.com] For the uninitiated, he's the original designer of LCARS, technical consultant for all the series post TNG & the last 7 movies, and the author of numerous Star Trek reference books. He might be able to help with issues like Ready Room vs. Observation Lounge and where exactly LCARS panels are housed a little better than a random trekkie.

Re:ObNitpick (1, Insightful)

Triv (181010) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772770)

Those shots captioned "ready room" are actually of the observation lounge, not the ready room.

the thing is, I don't want the people who are designing this game to make those kinds of mistakes - keeping the thing consistent with the Star Trek universe is what's gonna make or break this, and goofs like this are really going to irritate people.

NX-01 Interior? (1)

pdbogen (596723) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771899)

Say what you will about the show itself, but I really liked the interior design of the NX-01 from Enterprise.

Re:NX-01 Interior? (1)

msbsod (574856) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772807)

The interior looks good, but the uniforms look like sewn side gusseted sacks. And were are the dresses and skirts. That's not my Enterprise.

Re:NX-01 Interior? (1)

CMiYC (6473) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773396)

I agree. The NX-01 has a gritty, real interior. The other ST TV shows all had sterile interiors.

Re:NX-01 Interior? (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773515)

The thing I like about the NX-01 is that if you remove all the "trek" tech like the warp drive and the photon torpedos and the transporters and so on, all the other stuff (the consoles, the displays, the living quarters, the cargo storage, the doors and so on) are all items that could exist in the real world. For example, the display monitors that are all over the ship can be bought from just about any computer/electronics store (even the software could be written if you took the time to do it) and the doors exist too (the automatic doors on the front of the building I work in are fairly close, just replace the glass with metal and the automatic opening thing with a button to open it.

Re:NX-01 Interior? (1)

munpfazy (694689) | more than 8 years ago | (#14775029)

. . . (the consoles, the displays, the living quarters, the cargo storage, the doors and so on) are all items that could exist in the real world.


I don't disagree with you, but I do wonder if in thirty years they'll look as dated as the TOS toggle switches and goosneck viewers. (Don't get me wrong - I love TOS - but it does require a rather sympathetic viewing to accept their gizmos as the very best of 23rd century technology.)

So far, the TNG environment seems to have held up pretty well. Granted, they have the advantage of being much more recent and the luxury of a huge budget and top notch film crew. But, now coming up on almost twenty years since the pilot, the beautiful flat panel displays and miniaturized gizmos still work well.

If they had restricted themselves to available corner-store tech, I doubt that would be true. cm-thick tablet computers with touchscreens may not have been a revolutionary idea in 1987, but with six years before the Apple Newton hit the market, it wasn't quite off-the-shelf material.

When our children watch the NX-01 screens on their wall-sized high definition displays, or when their children watch them on their neural implants, they may not be so convincing.

Re:NX-01 Interior? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 8 years ago | (#14774238)

Say what you will about the show itself, but I really liked the interior design of the NX-01 from Enterprise.

I would argue that the NX-01 makes for the better game.

The technology is immature. But perhaps more accessible. Star Trek idealizes the military. But there must have been others out there with very different values and objectives.

Contact with other "races" in Enterprise should have been tentative and fragile.

I would welcome the chance to jettison The Prime Directive.

ST:TNG was nortorious for creating a patently false dilemma and resolving it in an emotionally satisfying way only through sheer dumb luck.

You have a small, untested, ship and crew with very limited resources...

Cubicle style is futile... (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771905)

It's not hard to reproduce the bland Federation look since it's really one step above 21st century cubicle design. The Borg techno-look is much, much better.

Re:Cubicle style is futile... (1)

Pfhorrest (545131) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772006)

It's not hard to reproduce the bland Federation look since it's really one step above 21st century cubicle design. The Borg techno-look is much, much better.

The Borg look's not hard to reproduce either. You should see some of the dark workshops I've worked in as a repair tech: whole rooms covered in disassembled machines, miles of assorted cables and wires hanging from the rafters, the green shade of assorted dead circuit boards decorating the walls, isolated hanging lamps illuminating your workspace... not that I had a problem with any of this, mind you, I absolutely loved the decor, but it's not like it's hard to reproduce. Get enough exposed parts around you and you'll easily get the look of a Borg interior (or possibly the Playboy mansion, depending on what kind of 'parts' you've got exposed around you).

Re:Cubicle style is futile... (1)

ReverendLoki (663861) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772014)

I must be the ultimate designer... the inside of my dull, boring cubicle is filled with a frenetic mess of electronics that resembles something Borg-ish...

Re:Cubicle style is futile... (1)

XenoRyet (824514) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772060)

If by better you mean dark, foggy, and generaly representative of a heavy-handed frankenstien motif, then yes the borg look is better.

Not saying it doesn't have it's place. It's just that we already have a game with that look to it, it's called Doom 3, or Quake 4, or any of the recent Unreal games.

The bland Federation look is required for a Star Trek game, and actualy is pretty well suited to the MMO genra. Besides, they no doubt will work in borg, Klingon, Cardasian, Vulcan, and many other visual styles.

Startrek.com development (1)

msbsod (574856) | more than 8 years ago | (#14771960)

Back on Earth, after a 5-year mission on board the USS Weberschiff, I found the official Star Trek website startrek.com invested by the Macromedia Flash Virus. They won't let me in unless I install this junk. Apparently the good old idea of interoperability had to surrender corporate ignorance. Or did the transport malfunction again?

Re:Startrek.com development (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14773245)

Good thing Star Trek Online has nothing to do with startrek.com

Re:Startrek.com development (2, Informative)

msbsod (574856) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773427)

As Star Trek fan you may want to read a bit about a Star Trek product at the official Star Trek web site startrek.com. That is what I tried. Now, if you do not enter startrek.com through the front door, you may find the FAQ for Star Trek Online at startrek.com.

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/gaming/onlin e/article/6632.html [startrek.com]

Re:Startrek.com development (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14777867)

Good job there sherlock! Now lets dig a little deeper you might see things like "Perpetual Entertainment is developing just such a game" in that FAQ. Heck, you might even notice that in the article that this is about! Upon some extreme digging, er I mean googling, you might come across a slightly more official website such as http://www.startrek.perpetual.com/ [perpetual.com] instead of a Star Trek catch-all like startrek.com.
Also, you might even notice at the bottom of startrek.com that it says "This site and its contents TM & © 2005 Paramount Pictures." Now, I understand that the average slashdotter can hardly be asked to read full words, letalone the articles they comment on. So, the fact that Paramount and Perpetual both start with a P is probably reason enough for you to say that they are the same company. However, let me be one to point out that Paramount Pictures is NOT Perpetual Entertainment.

You get all that?

Game Design (3, Funny)

cubicledrone (681598) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772174)

1. There will be a massively powerful race/class combination (Borg Shadow Priest) that can do 350 dps perpetually at extreme ranges against which no other class will have any defense. When the other classes complain, they will be told that PvP isn't balanced for 1 vs 1 (unless you're a Borg Shadow Priest) and that it's Rock Paper Scissors (unless you're a Borg Shadow Priest, which is a block of solid iron)

2. The system of rank will be exactly like World of Queuecraft's pvp system, meaning there will be one Admiral and 175,934 Ensigns on every server.

3. Experience will be the most fun. Since there are no murlocs to fight, grinding will be retuning the deflector dish 150,000 times a day.

Sounds like fun!

Looking good! (2, Insightful)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772534)

Star Trek is one property where the look and feel might possibly outshine the actual gameplay. There are many fans out there who would gladly subscribe to just hang out on a virtual Federation Starship, never mnd the actual play mechanics.

If they can put together even a mediocre playing experience, this will take off like, well, a starship.

Re:Looking good! (1)

agent0range_ (472103) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773774)

Good point. Screw the gameplay and have a full ship walkthrough that looks this good and it'll sell like hotcakes. Probably more so than if they tried to make it a game.

Re:Looking good! (1)

ClamIAm (926466) | more than 8 years ago | (#14774571)

Isn't this what most licensed games go for anyway? I don't see that working out all that well...

Big Booty (1, Insightful)

Supurcell (834022) | more than 8 years ago | (#14772781)

Did anyone else notice how big the ass of that crewman was in the ready room demo pic at the bottom? I'd hate to see female characters forced into the same stereotype that all MMORPGS seem to be doing. I wouldn't be surprised if they change the female Starfleet uniform to a string bikini.

Re:Big Booty (1)

MagicDude (727944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773032)

You have bunch of computer nerds and star trek nerds making a demo female for display, how did you think she was going to look?

In any case, I'd imagine that during the real game, players will have the option to make their own body type for their character. Something like city of heroes where the character creator can make an "Incredible Hulk" type character just as easily as it can make a "Joe from Accounting" type character. It would ultimately be up to the player to decide how well endowed or "Ensign McKnightish" they make their character.

Re:Big Booty (1)

TomHandy (578620) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773034)

I do understand and agree with the sentiment, but realistically, would it be that surprising if they do have the sex appeal aspect in a Star Trek Online game? I mean, it's not exactly like the Star Trek franchise itself has ever really shied away from that (hell, look at those miniskirt uniforms in the original series...... and that's not to mention the more blatant attempts with 7 of 9 in Voyager, or those Hoshi/T'Pol shower scenes in Enterprise. DS9 had some sex appeal even, in Jadzia Dax, and in those Dabo girls or whatever. Heck, even TNG, which I would venture to say probably was the most desexualized of any of the series, still had it's share of this kind of thing).

I think it's kind of inevitable that you'd have that in this game too. Hopefully though there will be more of a choice though, which is probably the most you can ask for.

Re:Big Booty (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773968)

That crewman WAS a female. And my initial thought was, if all of the women have asses like that I can't wait to join up.

Remember, big asses are nice asses. White boy!

LK

Re:Big Booty (1)

scaryjohn (120394) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783023)

It honestly didn't register as booty to me. I seriously thought it was maybe a chair headrest or some sort of shadow. Now that you say it, I don't know how I feel.

Forget online. (1)

Daimando (842740) | more than 8 years ago | (#14773122)

I'd like to see an Offline variation of this game. If my computer can handle it(Bought it in 2004)

That's one fine ensign (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14774888)

Or maybe she's a captain, either way I like her butt.

Precise look important for suspension of disbelief (1)

master_p (608214) | more than 8 years ago | (#14774933)

Precise copying of the look & feel of Star Trek is important for suspension of disbelief, especially for the kind of fans ST has. I generally do not like RPGs (the fantasy medieval setting is not my preference), and I do not have time to play in a MMORPG. But If Star Trek Online comes anything close to what we all ST fans dreamt of, I will be signing up as soon as possible.

I am also happy that they selected the TNG looks. In my heart, the last real Star Trek was TNG. That does not mean I did not enjoy DS9, VOY and ENT. They were fine shows (some of the episodes were even better directed and filmed than TNG), but away from the core values Gene Rodenberry has set for the show.

Why do dark? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 8 years ago | (#14775291)

Why is it that StarTrek seemed to get darker as time went on. With TNG, there was good lighting on the ship. Maybe Cardassians didn't like bright lights and the Federation budget didn't allow for new bulbs, but why was Voyager do dark? Surely the power needed for some lights is a tiny fraction of what the Warp Core chews up.

Worst of all, when there was a red alert on Voyager, all the lights turn off! The bridge goes dark, with just some low red lights and the glow of the computers to see by. Not exactly what you want in a battle.

Re:Why do dark? (1)

Grab (126025) | more than 8 years ago | (#14775630)

Hey, how's Voyager going to get to a Walmart when the bulbs blow?

I can just see the Enterprise stocktaking now:

"50 photon torpedoes - check. 20 tonnes of replicator stuff - check. 1000 boxes of hundred-watt filament bulbs - check..."

Re:Why do dark? (1)

hplasm (576983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14781509)

How many borg does it take to change a lightbulb (?) on Voyager?


None- just wait 'til the next episode, they will all be as good as new...

Ob Red Dwarf quote (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14776333)

Worst of all, when there was a red alert on Voyager, all the lights turn off!

It could be worse, it could happen like this:

Rimmer: Step up to red alert!
Kryten: Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb.

Re:Why do dark? (1)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 8 years ago | (#14778842)

Worst of all, when there was a red alert on Voyager, all the lights turn off! The bridge goes dark, with just some low red lights and the glow of the computers to see by. Not exactly what you want in a battle.
How so, Einstein? Assuming the controls, panels, screens and whatnots are self illuminated or backlit it wouldn't be a problem. Do you drive at night with bright interior lighting?

Everyone will be ON the BRIDGE anyway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14780606)

Let's face it. Every MMO has a place where everyone congregates. All the other locations are deserted. In EQ, it was Eastern Commons, in WoW it's the Auction House home city. In STO (Star Trek Online) the bridge is going to be packed full of Ferengi shouting "WTS FAZER $1B CREDITS! PST !!!onelevenvindiesel!!!!" I also predict various permutations of the name RYKER, PIKARD, SPOK, and KURK!

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...