Slashdot Mirror
Cryptic Studios Releases New Star Trek Online Details, Trailer
Two days ago, an AP interview with Cryptic Studios' Jack Emmert provided new details about Star Trek: Online, which was lost in developmental limbo for quite some time. Today, Cryptic released a game-play trailer and a forty-minute webcast discussing the game.
I've never figured out why it seems that everyone in the Navy (Starfleet) is an ensign or higher in the Trek universe; Ensign is a commissioned officer rank, not an enlisted rank.
Yet, most of the stuff that happens on ships gets done by enlisteds, and even officers will listen to an NCO who knows their stuff.
So, you'd think the random guy would be a private, private first class, sergeant, etc.
But nope...
(and I say this as a long-time Trek fan: "huh!?")
i am a soviet space shuttle
Supposedly all our social problems have gone away because everybody's "more evolved"
You may laugh, but that's exactly what many of the early Russian communists thought would happen.
No, that's capitalism. The majority of people in a capitalist society work for someone else and their efforts go into making a profit for someone else.
America, Home of the Brave.
Isn't it going to be a little unrealistic to have a million starships going around? Besides, what do you have to work up to? Admiral, then the game gets REALLY boring. You just sit behind a desk.
I mean, with games like WoW, its more realistic to have hundreds of people all at the starting point of the game because they are just people and there are lots of people in the world.
But if everyone starts with their own starship and you have a lot of people playing, its going to end up looking like that TNG episode where Worf quantum leaps several times. "Sir I'm receiving 250,000 hails". (Sorry Wil, I couldn't resist quoting you)
It works because envy and greed and want are largely eliminated. The elimination of those wouldn't be communism or socialism. Such systems would be rendered obsolete. There would be little desire to (re)distribute something if everyone has it. People who want for little are generally easy going. People who have hope for something better are usually well behaved. Maybe you didn't watch enough of the show to learn how it worked.
Socialism is not about distributing wealth equally, even on paper. Please read up on what socialism IS before you talk about socialism. Germany, often described as socialist (though all countries are socialist to one degree or another {roads, public schools, cops}), does not try to make everyone equal. They just try to make sure that the disparity between the top and bottom isn't terrible. If you're sick in Germany, you go to the doctor. In the US, that's a privilege extended to those with (certain) jobs (not all jobs include benefits). Yet, it is still possible for someone through the sweat of their brow to become wealthy. Capitalism and socialism work beautifully together. But that's not what is going on in ST.
Communism, socialism, capitalism and so are moot when there's no point in being greedy, or there is less to "need". Why charge so much for medicine that certain people can't afford it, if there is no scarcity of medicine?
The social problems weren't described as evolution in the biological sense, they might have referred to it cultural evolution. The federation didn't have as many internal troubles as say, the Klingons. The federation didn't have as much external problems until something on the outside pushed in.
"But but but how did they get there?", you blubber, pretending to not understand. Time, pain and technology. Time and pain taught that version of Earth that the cause of much of their problems was want and greed. The former is mostly the result of the latter. Pain of wars and crime eventually taught them these lessons. Technology makes civilization possible. It also makes morality feasible. In an every man for themselves struggle to survive, moral decisions are a luxury. i can worry about whether is it right or wrong to kill you and take your land if i'm starving. Where people perceive that they have hope for something better, they are less likely to take stupid risks, or feel that it is ok to take from others.
The illusion of scarcity, or the sense that 'whoever dies with the most toys wins' drives most of the misery we see in the world. If i could get a Porsche from a replicator today, and get a Ferrari tomorrow, i would care far less about 'getting ahead'. i could put my time and effort into better things. Or do things and not worry about what it pays. It's the old "what would you do if you won the lottery?". i'd paint, write, travel, develop games, teach kids computers. i wouldn't be sitting in a cube farm working on TPS reports.
What would you do if someone came along and paid off your mortgage? Or your landlord said you could live rent free? Such an event would effectively double my income. i could take a lower paying job that would give me more satisfaction. Or i could spend that extra money to take art and language classes. i could buy lego sets and give them to kids so they could have fun and learn spacial and engineering skills.
If you find such a world hard to swallow, imagine how today's world would look to someone from 200 years ago. Marriages are for love? Blacks aren't farm equipment? Women leading nations? Widespread literacy? Conquest of weaker nations seen as bad? Some people of that time might see those as bad things, but i think their pretty groovy, and so would the people benefiting from those social evolutions.
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!