Dev Log - Stardate: 23782.3

It's been a long road
Getting from there to here
It's been a long time
But my time is finally near
And I can feel the change in the wind right now
Nothing's in my way
And they're not gonna hold me down no more
No, they're not gonna hold me down


Launch Day - Artistic Render

Yesterday was launch day for Star Trek: Infinite, and like with most launches, fires had to be put out and hotfixes needed to be pushed.

We still are fighting fires though, antivirus blocking our games ability to write settings files, DLC not being recognized, weird one off issues that we are still working on reproducing and fixing.
We are working through these as I write this log, and that is why this is a bit short.

The important things to know:
Top priority stuff: Known Issues and Workarounds
Issues and Bugs: Please report them on our Bug Forum.
Tech Support: For more info about optimization and technical issues.
Also join us on Discord: We have an active community that is willing to help out with almost all issues. (also I am there)


We are also starting to see all our reviews come in, and they are hitting around where we expected it to go.

• Polygon.com - Star Trek: Infinite leans in to the best of Trek
  • Star Trek: Infinite is a 4X grand strategy game that shares a lot of qualities with a good Star Trek episode: It’s cerebral, accessible, occasionally a little clumsy, and overall a good time.
• Pcgamer.com - It's Stellaris, but not as we know it.
  • I ask myself "do I still want to play this game some more, now that I'm not being paid?" and the answer here is yes.
• Rock Paper Shotgun - Not exactly a strategy pioneer, but still an enjoyable journey
  • It's a combination of engaging and undemanding that grand strategy seldom manages, and has enough Trek stuff to work for someone who's seen most of the serieseses but only once, and can only sometimes tell if something's a reference to an episode or wholly new
• Trek Central - Trek Gaming Is Back!
  • Star Trek: Infinite is the perfect game for those looking to lead their own version of the Federation, Klingons, Romulans or even the Cardassians.
• Stevivor.com - Where no one has gone before
  • Star Trek Infinite is a glorious strategy game just dripping in canon and nostalgia. I love it sometimes — and hate it in others — but I’ll be damned if it hasn’t taken up my thoughts during most waking moments as I sit pondering how to better deal with the Nausicaans, integrate Bajor or fight the Borg.
• Godisageek.com - Huge, complex, and a Trekkie’s dream
  • The thing is though, it’s all so incredibly Star Trek. That’s obvious, yes, but more than any other Star Trek game I’ve played, Infinite leans totally and completely into the brand.

Now, I'll head back to putting out those fires, and I'll see you all next week.

PDX_Ruk


Up next:
Oh, what's this? New Ferengi buildings… shiny. And a Dyson Sphere, Oh Myyy…

 

[Fulgrymm]

You can just ignore it. It's not like anybody is mounting a defense for Picard or any of the abysmal new shows, anything they do is just press disagree but without any argument it can be ignored.

It's just not logical to include stuff from the new shows when the game is set in the old ones.

I choose not to argue with you because I don't much see the point of trying to change your mind. So I put my little X and move on.

 

[KNakamura]

You can just ignore it. It's not like anybody is mounting a defense for Picard or any of the abysmal new shows, anything they do is just press disagree but without any argument it can be ignored.

It's just not logical to include stuff from the new shows when the game is set in the old ones.

I think most of us have had the experience of discussing with people who hate the new Trek wave and learning it's simply not worth it. If you don't like them, fine, but they are canon.

Incidentally: Did you know that the Romulan sun exploding was in the first launch of Star Trek Online, and that launched in 2010? CBS just changed it to make more sense, frankly, in the Picard countdown comics and Picard show launch.

 

[ForgeFerrus]

My initial opinions can be boiled down to a few things.

1.) The realisation of the Star Trek universe in the scripted part of the game is slightly off. Risa, Denobula and Xindus being uninhabited maybe the right choice in terms of balance, but the first two were home to distinct civilizations (one of whom had a major character on Enterprise) and the other should have a shattered world to represent the destroyed Xindi homeworld. Perhaps Risa and Denobula could start the game as affiliates of the Federation rather than uncolonised?

2.) I think there is a considerable fail on the music here. With the license, I was expecting some some of the glorious orchestral music Star Trek has been famous for over the years. What was delivered was not what I expected, the score doesn't live up to what Star Trek is known for, and doesn't compare to the grandiose original music Stellaris has. We seem to have the worst of both worlds there. The various sound effects also don't come across as 'star trekky'

3.) I think including the destruction of Romulus was mistake. While lore accurate, it does mean Romulan players are picking the ST: Infinite version of Stellaris's doomsday origin and many players want to play the Romulans because they are a cool race. I would suggest that in future updates, it should be considered to give Romulan players a difficult path to 'save' Romulus. Given it's an alternate history take on the alpha and beta quadrants anyway, I think it would be a positively received move.

Now those complaints are very specific. I think they are important points that I hope would be addressed, but they aren't exactly game breaking. Is the game otherwise perfect? No, but it IS a paradox game and it suffers from the same problem every single Paradox suffers from on launch. It needs more. More major playable factions (the Ferengi are an absolute must for a promotion in my mind), more support powers (the Orions), more minor races, more events, just more.

Overall, I think Star Trek Infinite is a fine game that can't quite yet justify why you should spend a session campaigning in it rather than Stellaris after you get through one or two games. I look forward to seeing Infinite blossom in the years to come.

I agree with you mate, my biggest complaint is the map again, why can't you finally make a normal canonical map with many planets and important systems. especially since they decided to focus on only two quadrants it opens up more possibilities. Dear developers, it is not so difficult to make a canonical map for us. I don't understand what's so funny about randomizing systems?!

 

[ForgeFerrus]

Exactly. When I (UFP) noticed that Romulus was actually about to blow up, I was about 80% sure that there has to be something to stop the supernova or at least mitigate its effects in the Romulan mission tree.

Apparently, there isn't.

I guess you could argue that a rookie player would be hit the hardest by the explosion of their homeworld, while a veteran player would be able to navigate the crisis without too much of an issue, but preventing the supernova due to (presumably difficult, because they weren't taken in canon) ingame steps would also be easier for a veteran.

One could add a toggle which disables the supernova, or add a game option which randomly blows up one faction's homeworld after 30 in-game years, but that's more of a "for the lols" option, I guess.
- For the Klingons, they recreate Praxis 2.0 on Qo'noS
- For the Cardassians, I guess the Bajoran underground goes mental and decides to explode the entire planet?
- For the Federation, uhm, I guess Q does a thing, or the whale probe's long lost cousin shows up and eats Earth because the Federation can't bring back the Dodo, or the mirror universe's Xindi finish what their prime counterparts could't - seriously, there's been about 5000 different threats to Earth in the history of the franchise, and one of them is going to stick sooner or later

For the Romulans, it is necessary to make an alternative capital, New Romulus, and let it be the Romulan Free State or the Romulan Republic as in Startrek Online. That would be cool and Ioconian invasion crisis please.

 

[Imp0815]

I choose not to argue with you because I don't much see the point of trying to change your mind. So I put my little X and move on.

What a sad state of discourse. This shows not that I am incapable of changing my mind, but you are not willing to get into a discussion due to the fear or the unwillingness to change your viewpoint if a new or a better argument is presented.

I think most of us have had the experience of discussing with people who hate the new Trek wave and learning it's simply not worth it. If you don't like them, fine, but they are canon.

Incidentally: Did you know that the Romulan sun exploding was in the first launch of Star Trek Online, and that launched in 2010? CBS just changed it to make more sense, frankly, in the Picard countdown comics and Picard show launch.

The new terrible Movie came 2009 so it already muddled the pool 2010.
Again the tone and style of writing and the understanding what Star Trek was before had already been tainted by the likes of Jar-Jar.

 

[Cymsdale]

What a sad state of discourse. This shows not that I am incapable of changing my mind, but you are not willing to get into a discussion due to the fear or the unwillingness to change your viewpoint if a new or a better argument is presented.

We like a thing. You don’t. Stop being weird.

 

[Fulgrymm]

What a sad state of discourse. This shows not that I am incapable of changing my mind, but you are not willing to get into a discussion due to the fear or the unwillingness to change your viewpoint if a new or a better argument is presented.

I like how you try to frame this as winning some sort of argument, when I specifically wanted to avoid such with you because it's just not worth it. I like new Trek, you don't. It's not rocket science, and there is no argument here for you to win. Stop it.

 

[Imp0815]

I like how you try to frame this as winning some sort of argument, when I specifically wanted to avoid such with you because it's just not worth it. I like new Trek, you don't. It's not rocket science, and there is no argument here for you to win. Stop it.

We like a thing. You don’t. Stop being weird.

It's not about winning an argument or being weird. I want to know why you disagree with me; maybe I missed something or there's a viewpoint that could convince me that it's the right decision to include it. Tell me why you love the new Trek and why it should matter in a game about the old Trek? Ending a discussion you started by just disagreeing with me, only to wiggle out with "there is no discussion," makes no sense to me. I find this even somewhat childish.

P.S. Writing this i realized this is not a space exclusive for adults so you could just be that, children. So i apologise if came across rude, you can of course just like the things you like. ♥

 

[Calvax]

Tell me why you love the new Trek and why it should matter in a game about the old Trek?

This isn't a game about old trek, it's a game about a specific era in trek (the mid-late 24th century) which spans shows made in the 80s/90s as well as shows made in recent times.

The Next Generation: 2364 – 2370
Deep Space 9: 2369 – 2375
Voyager: 2371 – 2378
Lower Decks: 2380
Prodigy: 2383
Picard: 2399 – 2402

If the game had a hard end point before 2380 you'd have a point, but it does not.

 

[Imp0815]

This isn't a game about old trek, it's a game about a specific era in trek (the mid-late 24th century) which spans shows made in the 80s/90s as well as shows made in recent times.

I think with this statement in the Dev Diary, says it is clearly based on TNG era - And TNG is 80s/90s and overall most loved by Star Trek fans and created the basis for the fandom in itself. So why add the revisions outside the basis then?

 

[Calvax]

I think with this statement in the Dev Diary, says it is clearly based on TNG era - And TNG is 80s/90s and overall most loved by Star Trek fans and created the basis for the fandom in itself. So why add the revisions outside the basis then?

There are new trek shows that take place in that era, the same as DS9 is featured in that era even though it takes place after TNG.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

P.S. Writing this i realized this is not a space exclusive for adults so you could just be that, children. So i apologise if came across rude, you can of course just like the things you like. ♥

Not only children may be entitled to (not) liking things just because.

DS9 [...] takes place after TNG.

Not really, or at least not fully. DS9 season one is parallel to TNG season 6. VOY (which also belongs to the "TNG era") begins at DS9 season 3.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

I want to know why you disagree with me; maybe I missed something or there's a viewpoint that could convince me that it's the right decision to include it.

You have asked (which is fine), they said they won't tell you (which is also fine). This might not be satisfactory to you and maybe not the best debate culture but it's the way it is. They are in no way obliged to satisfy your curiosity. Please stop insisting.

 

[Calvax]

Not really, or at least not fully. DS9 season one is parallel to TNG season 6. VOY (which also belongs to the "TNG era") begins at DS9 season 3.

I'm aware, I put the dates in my post above. DS9 *mostly* takes place after TNG. Agreed that Voyager is considered part of the TNG era despite the fact it takes place after TNG.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

despite the fact it takes place after TNG.

Unless you count the movies...

 

[Calvax]

Unless you count the movies...

You're a moderator so I don't really want to get into it. But are you saying the game was explicitly designed with the idea that any new trek, regardless of what year it takes place in, is excluded from the game?

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

You're a moderator so I don't really want to get into it. But are you saying the game was explicitly designed with the idea that any new trek, regardless of what year it takes place in, is excluded from the game?

No, that's not what I'm trying to say. Quite the contrary, actually. To me "TNG era" means "anything that happens within that era" and not "anything that was created in the period the namesake was created".

Maybe I was a bit too pedantic with "X is after Y".

 

[Binday]

My only concern is the many negative reviews on Steam. It will make the game sell less and then we will get less love and DLCs. Hope I will be proven wrong because it is a good game. I love it already.

Same I will be severely disappointed if sales aren't good enough to polish it.

 

[Binday]

The 1.5x seems to be a lie. It's way faster than 1.5x

Either way it needs to be faster.

 

[Imp0815]

No, that's not what I'm trying to say. Quite the contrary, actually. To me "TNG era" means "anything that happens within that era" and not "anything that was created in the period the namesake was created".

I hope not. - As I mentioned before, the new Trek does widely ignore the tones or initial intent of the shows when they were first released. Any retcon or badly thought out additions that take place in the "TNG era" should be ignored if you want to capture what Star Trek is about. - Hyperbolically speaking, if some writer comes forward in the next year and writes that Vulcans are highly aggressive religious zealots in the "TNG era", you must include it based on your perspective, at least.

In short, I don't think that cherry-picking is the way to go; I'd rather see games based on the "TNG era" abide by the initial concepts of the "TNG era".