It was an awful use of the licence, like most Trek games post-2000.
But companies will still interpret that as "people don't like Star Trek games", because thats how the industry works.
Any new Star Trek games in development? Especiall SP ones?
- Thread starter Ghost
- Start date
- Status
It was an awful use of the licence, like most Trek games post-2000.
But companies will still interpret that as "people don't like Star Trek games", because thats how the industry works.
I think its just that in the 90s, Star Trek games actually felt like you were in Star Trek, with the Federation acting like it would in the show, whereas this game was just a "Gears of War" style third person shooter clone with less refined gameplay, which didn't particularly reflect how Starfleet operates, didn't reflect how it feels to live in the Star Trek setting, and also wasn't very imaginative in it's use of the licence, i.e. not expanding what we saw in the JJ films much.
Even if you did want to make a Star Trek game in the Gears of War style, without any investigation or anything seen in older games, you could do so much more with it; show a Klingon war for example, and visit lots of interesting locations - enemy colonies, shipyards, dilithium mines, internment camps, etc - expand a lot on the JJ Klingons.
Instead of expanding the flimsy premise of having Kirk and Spock beam down with rifles and do everything, they could have taken the opportunity to use Sulu and Checkov for some missions, or Scotty and McCoy, as they did in older games, where you chose your own landing party - instead the dictates of Hollywood were followed, instead of the dictates of story - i.e. use the biggest two stars, instead of expand on the characters of Sulu and McCoy. The plot itself was bear bones too.
Even if you did want to make a Star Trek game in the Gears of War style, without any investigation or anything seen in older games, you could do so much more with it; show a Klingon war for example, and visit lots of interesting locations - enemy colonies, shipyards, dilithium mines, internment camps, etc - expand a lot on the JJ Klingons.
Instead of expanding the flimsy premise of having Kirk and Spock beam down with rifles and do everything, they could have taken the opportunity to use Sulu and Checkov for some missions, or Scotty and McCoy, as they did in older games, where you chose your own landing party - instead the dictates of Hollywood were followed, instead of the dictates of story - i.e. use the biggest two stars, instead of expand on the characters of Sulu and McCoy. The plot itself was bear bones too.
I thought it fit the tone of the Kelvin movies pretty well.
Sure something like that probably won't work for TOS, or TNG, but I thought it worked pretty well with the more action focused Kelvinverse.
The only thing is, the Kelvin movie universe still must operate much the same way as TNG, its just we happened to see lots of action in the movies by chance - games were traditionally a good way to flesh out a universe better, because they allowed you to live in a setting - so early Star Wars and Star Trek games always expanded their worlds. Games no longer do this now, the days of the "immersive sim" have been replaced by shallow experiences.
Star Trek and Star Wars games used to operate like this; they combined extreme faithfulness to the lore, with expansive and possibility-opening interpretations of those ideas, and also gave players a world that taught how it was to live in the setting by experience. Games recently have been the opposite; their use of lore locks down on wonder, closing possibilities, their worlds are linear and scripted, and their sense of how it is to actually live in the setting are entirely gone.
So when finally presented with the ability to walk around the ship in that game, and see everyday operations, it should have been a little more thoughtful - perhaps the ability to simply choose missions from a map, or select the away team, and a couple of sections involving science/archaeology, would have made things feel more like you were a captain with a ship, and part of a crew of astronauts on in a scientific research/humanitarian organisation.
Star Trek and Star Wars games used to operate like this; they combined extreme faithfulness to the lore, with expansive and possibility-opening interpretations of those ideas, and also gave players a world that taught how it was to live in the setting by experience. Games recently have been the opposite; their use of lore locks down on wonder, closing possibilities, their worlds are linear and scripted, and their sense of how it is to actually live in the setting are entirely gone.
So when finally presented with the ability to walk around the ship in that game, and see everyday operations, it should have been a little more thoughtful - perhaps the ability to simply choose missions from a map, or select the away team, and a couple of sections involving science/archaeology, would have made things feel more like you were a captain with a ship, and part of a crew of astronauts on in a scientific research/humanitarian organisation.
I'm going to have to completely disagree with you there. It seems to me that game worlds have gotten a lot more detailed and games go a lot deeper into them than the ever have before, just look at games like the Mass Effect series, or if you want to go for adaptations the Batman: Arkham games. I will agree that most of the Trek games we've gotten recently haven't really gone too deep into the mythos, but I don't really think that is something that games are required to do.
EDIT: Another thing to keep in mind is that this was made when there was only one movie and a handful of comics, so they hadn't really established a lot about Kelvinverse at that point, and they probably wanted to leave the more in depth exploration to the movies and comic.
EDIT: Another thing to keep in mind is that this was made when there was only one movie and a handful of comics, so they hadn't really established a lot about Kelvinverse at that point, and they probably wanted to leave the more in depth exploration to the movies and comic.
Last edited:
Why? TOS and TNG didn't operate the same way.
Mass Effect is an outlier, if we are being honest; it's phenomenal it in terms of building a sci-fi a setting.
But what I meant was Star Trek and Star Wars games; I wasn't being specific enough, and I apologise.
Looking at a game like Rise of the Tomb Raider or Dragon Age, they do a great job world building, but where once Star Trek and Star Wars had the likes of Dark Forces, Klingon Honor Guard, Judgement Rites, and Knights of the Old Republic, we no longer get anything on that level. By the opinion of many geek pundits, an opinion I strongly agree with, EA has badly managed the Star Wars licence; i.e. we are in the middle of a great Star Wars renaissance, but they have produced basically multi-player shooters, and fuck all else. Their entire policy is to make "games as a service" and saddle people with as many microtransactions and ongoing charges as possible, effectively writing off single player experiences, because they can't milk them enough, and mere profitability is not good enough when they can print money from "whales", i.e. people with addictive disorders. My fault for the misunderstanding, I should use clearer sentences. You could argue Star Trek has been mismanaged for a decade.
True, not a lot about the Kelvinverse had been established at that point, but what you have to remember is that every new setting starts that way, and often games were at the forefront of fleshing them out, just like comics were. I would have liked the first game to have been a bit more ambitious in fleshing out the setting, but it wasn't.
Again, my fault for not being specific, I basically intended to say "Prime Timeline", and TNG wasn't good enough shorthand for that.
As an aside, I dread to think of the damage that would be done to the RPG genre if EA manage to run BioWare into the ground, as they have done for numerous other studios. If BioWare went under as a company, it would be devastating to an entire style of RPGs that they were (almost) the sole expression of.
Last edited:
I see what you're saying, and I actually do agree with you, but that isn't really something I go in expecting from games, and I don't hold it against them when they don't have.
I definitely very much agree with you about EA's handeling of the Star Wars license. I was really hoping we'd get a good, third person, single player action game from them, but all we've gotten so far are the two Battlefronts. I'm still really pissed that Amy Hennig's game fell apart, I love the Uncharted games and I was really looking forward to seeing what she did with Star Wars.
I definitely very much agree with you about EA's handeling of the Star Wars license. I was really hoping we'd get a good, third person, single player action game from them, but all we've gotten so far are the two Battlefronts. I'm still really pissed that Amy Hennig's game fell apart, I love the Uncharted games and I was really looking forward to seeing what she did with Star Wars.
Yes, I've been saying this for awhile now. It's not even so much that they're stuck with games as a service, but that with SW having entered another peak, that they've failed to take advantage of it beyond the two Battlefront games. Maybe they're waiting for the 3rd movie to come out before doing much else, but I remember when LucasArts couldn't wait to take advantage of the Prequel trilogy for their games and we got a whole new deluge of games, good and bad.
I agree, Amy Hennig's game would have been great, and I think it would have done some good for the franchise, at least in terms of offering people a different experience other than Battlefront. But EA being EA, didn't like the idea of it overshadowing Battlefront, and it was a missed opportunity.
The thing with Star Trek right now is that I'm not sure it's really in a situation to make enough money as a game property. The 2009 game pretty much put any stop to any plans they might have had and I'm sure investors aren't too keen on wanting to invest more on a Trek game unless a really good idea for one were put forward. A bit of of the problem is narrative. Just where would one go? What would it explore, and when? These aren't simple answers, as the franchise is a bit all over the place. I've been saying for awhile now that I feel a new game would likely be best with an entirely new crew unattached to any of the others so that they can build upon it and maybe build a narrative its own.
I noticed a Star Trek game that came onto Steam without any fanfare maybe its still in the Developmental Stage or Early Access its called Star Trek: Adversaries its a Card Game. And an older Star Trek game which is on Facebook called Star Trek: Alien Domain. Something to look into for Casual Gamers. At least until they actually make another Star Trek game.
I've tried the Non VR Star Trek: Bridge Crew and you can in fact play it solo or with friends on Steam. I have played the Solo mode but until you finish all the missions you can only be the Captain. You can play the training missions which tells you about each role, Captain, Engineering, Tactical and Navigation. As the Captain you can give orders or take over Stations to control them. I also Noticed but havent tried the Voice commands. Would be cool if you could do everything with just voice commands not sure how smoothly that would go there.
I've tried the Non VR Star Trek: Bridge Crew and you can in fact play it solo or with friends on Steam. I have played the Solo mode but until you finish all the missions you can only be the Captain. You can play the training missions which tells you about each role, Captain, Engineering, Tactical and Navigation. As the Captain you can give orders or take over Stations to control them. I also Noticed but havent tried the Voice commands. Would be cool if you could do everything with just voice commands not sure how smoothly that would go there.
There was a Deep Space Nine game for casinos
https://www.trektoday.com/content/2017/04/star-trek-deep-space-nine-adventure-game/
https://www.trektoday.com/content/2017/04/star-trek-deep-space-nine-adventure-game/
I would love to see some reboots/remakes of some classic Star Trek sim/strategy games like the Armada and Starfleet Command series. Back in the day, they both had a thriving mod community and provided hours of playability beyond the baseline releases. There's a lot they could do there to bring those titles into the new century.
I would also like to see the unfinished Borg Assimilation and Secret of Vulcan Fury games finally be brought to market. Both (IMO) had great potential.
I would also like to see the unfinished Borg Assimilation and Secret of Vulcan Fury games finally be brought to market. Both (IMO) had great potential.
I don'd mind the graphics of 25th Anniversary and Judgment Rites, they have old school charm.
What I would not mind is if the ship fighting had been more like Bridge Commander now, and perhaps even include a simulation mode that also includes Gorn, Orions, Tholians etc.
Regarding Bridge Commander I can understand. The game is still a lot of fun but the graphics have aged.
What I would not mind is if the ship fighting had been more like Bridge Commander now, and perhaps even include a simulation mode that also includes Gorn, Orions, Tholians etc.
Regarding Bridge Commander I can understand. The game is still a lot of fun but the graphics have aged.
Is it a gambling game? What's preventing it from being adapted to regular arcades?
Kor
- Status
