|By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 - 03:25 pm: Edit
Vanessa says: There's always something about FC going on over there. They seem to really like the idea of me being a presence there. TMP is a big place and I need help...I usually just keep a pulse on the Sci Fi forum. They seem really good there about FC, nothing negative and like I said, they really like me being there. On Tuesday I put 2 threads in about the Academy release and the threads are really creating a lot of buzz...lots of excited people expressing that they WILL NOW go buy it...they just didn't want to drop so much money. They like having an alternative.
|By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, March 26, 2007 - 04:26 pm: Edit
Some guys there are "wondering" why we haven't shown the Constitution-class CA on the cover of Federation Commander products.
There are a lot of ships in the game and in the Star Fleet Universe and we happened to pick other ships since the Constitution-class is rather overused.
(The Federation Kirov-class battlecruiser is my favorite Federation ship and I use it a lot.)
We certainly could use the Constitution class and have, many many times, on other products.
If somebody is theorizing that there is some contractual or licensing reason why we did not use
the Constitution class, or something that changed in our relationship with Paramount, they're
just barking up the wrong tree and seeing conspiracies where there are none.
The Constitution class is seen on Booster Pack #1 in the Federation Commander product line, so that alone disproves any conspiracy theories.
|By Will McCammon (Djdood) on Monday, March 26, 2007 - 06:12 pm: Edit
Not to mention right up front, on the cover of FC:Academy.
|By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, March 26, 2007 - 07:43 pm: Edit
Somebody let them know.
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation