Star Trek

any of u ever played freelancer i wouldnt mind that kind but still i understand what your saying

A space game came out recently that uses a god and quite intuitive space flight and navigation interface.
The game is X3. It has an easy way of controling pitch, jaw, roll, speed and left right up down strafing.
And all you need to use all this is a mouse (pitch, jaw, fire (buttons), targeting(whell)), the asdw keays for strafe, and qe for roll.

Then you have menus (could be done better but are still quite easy) for navigation.

The system is fairly easy to control and is done in such a way that you can control fighters as well as you can control freighters.
It has a full 3D system obviously and as for graphics it's breath taking, with beautiful background nebulas, planets glowing and incredibly textured ships.

I think that the developers at Perpetual that are asigned for space fights and navigation should take a look at the game.
I am not saying that STO should work in the same way as X3. I just want to say that at the moment X3 is the leading single player space game and that it has some interesting ways to implement navigation, combat and flight.

For sector navigation the game uses a 2d grid and uses jump portals for transportation form sector to sector, so this is not realy a good solution for STO. But the insector system could be interesting for STO. The stations and ships in each sector are fully positioned in 3D but the navigation screen uses a 2d map. The player still has a full 3D flight control over the ship just the navigation (select target on a map and auto travel to it) is done in 2D. As for dogfights the game has an interesting system for both dogfight and large ship combat. Both are done in the same way. The difference is that small ships have a high lvl of maneurability and less powerfull front mounted weapons, while big ships are quite stiff but with powerful weapons mounted on turrets.
With redaining and adaptations the system could be used for STO too. But even if it's not some of the ideas could be derived from it.

yeah that sounds similar to the style of movement from freelancer

Yeah i played freelancer. And X3s control system looks like is based on freelancers idea.
But I have to admit that it is far better than freelancers one.
I admit that freelancer gives you quite a good feeling even without a joystick.
But X3 gives you far more options than what freelancer gives you.
And if you like the freelancer universe in singleplayer mode I sigest you to get your self X3.
It has a great economy system and a lot of ships, an interesting story and graphics to just stop your ship and admire the surounding.
In graphic advancment for space combat it just like doom, hl, farcry and f.e.a.r. are for FPS games.
And for me the X3 ship designs are far nicer than the ones from freelancer.

The thing I don't like as much is that wen you dock on the station you stay in your ship. There are some animation where you see your character, but that it animations not like freelancer where you are on a station.
I would prefer a system more free then it was in free lancer but with a design a little more like it was in privateer where the stations were quite nice. An it would be nice to have a great diversity of station interiors but then again this is still far better then nothing.
It is just that it would be nice to park on the station/planet/moon and then take a tour around it, or go to the mercenary/trading guild and talk with a person for a mission. Or just quicly jump to a nice terminal and look at the quick misions posted on it.

Oh well just an old romantic.

x3 sounds good.  Yeah the thing that really bugged me in freelancer were the animations that happened when you were docked in the stations.  I mean it was good for the first few times, but it got repetitive quite quickly, and it was annoying not to be able to move around freely.  I hope its something that is incorporated really well in ST:O

What everyone has to keep in mind is that hopefully there will be no "Manual steering input" as if we were in Insurrection. Starships are not starfighters to be controlled with a CH 4 button Flightstick. There is a specific reason why the command and flight control are specifically controlled through a voice to person interface. I'm sure some submariner will be able to explain why they do that. Gene had very good reasons for following that methodology. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the interface went something like a command line:

/conn course set 024 mark 35

Which would be 24 degrees relative right angle to current path, and 35 degrees upward elevation.

The Next Generation Technical manual states 5 modes for flight information input: destination planet or star system, destination sector, spacecraft intercept, relative bearing (shown above), absolute heading, galactic coordinates.

I'm hoping that it's still a 3d world, but what they want to avoid is non-trekkie elements, like those posters who said they would fly upside down just to spite the rest of the players. I'll be glad to not run into players who think that this is funny. In some cases this is really cool, like the original poster mentioned the Riker maneuver with a roll, then using dorsal phasors to hit the underside of an enemy craft. Besides being very tactically smart, it looked wicked cool too.

Basically I just hope that not everyone get's to jump into a Conn or Ops seat, or any of the bridge positions, these things should take learning, not just for the character but for the player as well. Personally I'd look forward very much to spending a 40 hours of in game training (read questing) just to get a start for feeling what it's like to sit at Ops or the Conn. Think any newly minted ensign could convert the probe's transmission from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home into what it'd sound like underwater? It took a seasoned veteran 15 seconds to get the modulations right, and that's just for communications, not even for something as complex as Tactical or Ops.

I hope they give it enough depth.

Dont flame as i havent read all the posts, just got a jist of the conversation..

I read the blurb on the Website and the developers are using the term 2d to desribe the ships being the same orientation in space eg. the same way up, not combat being carried out in just 2 dimensions.

You will still be able to go up & down etc. and maneuver.

Quote (JCD @ Dec. 19 2005, 8:42 pm)

No I understand the difference...  but every other mmo space based game today and complete 360 degree movement... The unwashed masses seem to be able to figure those games out.

Earth and Beyond didn't, but then again the game's already been shutdown.

Later,
LAR

Well, its one point who  makes 2D as "basic" an option. Anyone remember how an certain enteprise crewer named zulu didnt know how to land manual in one of the movies?
Noone use to fly manual much in any series, really.

The big problem is, the reason this is done is of couse to make it advanced, and seems an natural choise since humans would need an data control to go between on so large and complicated crafts. And, it also makes the craft more an large craft and less jetfighter like.

The problem i mentioned, is if combats is an submarine/battleship like combat, why do ppl need an team? those combats go on an long time, imagine an mmo where one control an walking character, one targets, and one can hit attack button, and an 4. casts heal magic on self. Do that sounds fun? I halfway think atm it would be more fun if it looked halfway as an action engine(looked as FPS game, CS/Unrelal action), but was an classic rpg engine. So, all would not thing "everquest in space", but an action game where teamplay gets elevated to something beyond any game now. And, it still can be an "rpg" "most 2D" engine.  

Dont mean to sound like im anti action here guys but.

Alot of people are going to get this game for the social interaction and the technical stuff, not to Starship Combat.

Personally i wouldnt mind an expansion like JTL featuring advanced starship combat. They could really go to town in this in regard to how ships are flown and how combat is carried out.

I think the game on launch should have a firm base and some ship-ship combat.

Now...if Perpetual find they can do it all and do it well for launch day so much the better, but i would prefer the other aspects to be sorted first.

Im sure some people might understand where im coming from on this one..

Worst. Decision. Ever. 'nuff said.

2D IN STO THAT SUX.

I would also want to see starship combat be more than playing x-wing v's Tie Fighter. Id like to see tactics play an important part and not just zooming around the place firing torpedos like theyre going out of fashion!

Alot of the people who watched TNG when it came out, me included, are in their 30's now and require a little more depth in this area of the game.  

I mean there are lots of episodes where starship combat has required more than the bull in the china shop mentality of rushing in guns blazing.  I could also quote Wrath of Khan as a good example of starship combat with more depth..

Quote (Tannagra @ Dec. 20 2005, 2:19 pm)

Dont mean to sound like im anti action here guys but. Alot of people are going to get this game for the social interaction and the technical stuff, not to Starship Combat. Personally i wouldnt mind an expansion like JTL featuring advanced starship combat. They could really go to town in this in regard to how ships are flown and how combat is carried out. I think the game on launch should have a firm base and some ship-ship combat. Now...if Perpetual find they can do it all and do it well for launch day so much the better, but i would prefer the other aspects to be sorted first. Im sure some people might understand where im coming from on this one..

OMG, JTL was horrible.  All SOE did was take the same forumal they used on the ground, put it in space, and gave it non-rpg(twitch) combat.

Later,
LAR

Jesus Guys, lighten up.

I didnt say it had to be exactly like JTL

I meant an expansion the same as JTL...