Star Trek, a possibly canon co-op title.

[BennettStar]

You can bury Star Trek right now and never look back.

We can both have it our way.

How can the legacy of Star Trek be preserved AND J.J. Trek continue to be successful? The legacy will be tarnished, has been tarnished, and continues to be tarnished by games like this and new terrible movies.

Yes, good Star Trek will live on inside me and many others the way we remember it, but J.J. Trek is threatening to let that positive image of Star Trek die with us. I'd rather people fifty years from now not knowing what Star Trek was, than to think it was some meaningless, CGI action fest that all the ignorant people of the past just ate up. And I'd much rather Star Trek left a legacy that would make future onlookers be proud of the imaginations and social critiques we are capable of.

 

[BennettStar]

Ew. I hope this game flops. No need to destroy the legacy of Star Trek, along with Kirk and Spock, any more than J.J. Abrams has already done.

I'll assume this isn't irony just for fun.

It's a game, how is this "destroying the legacy" any more than say Sega's 198x arcade game where all you did was blow up Klingons and Nomad over and over again?

People are saying things like "I hope it's going to be like Mass Effect!" in this thread.

I'd rather it be as forgettable as this Sega game I've never heard of.

 

[Yevetha]

You can bury Star Trek right now and never look back.

We can both have it our way.

How can the legacy of Star Trek be preserved AND J.J. Trek continue to be successful? The legacy will be tarnished, has been tarnished, and continues to be tarnished by games like this and new terrible movies.

Yes, good Star Trek will live on inside me and many others the way we remember it, but J.J. Trek is threatening to let that positive image of Star Trek die with us. I'd rather people fifty years from now not knowing what Star Trek was, than to think it was some meaningless, CGI action fest that all the ignorant people of the past just ate up. And I'd much rather Star Trek left a legacy that would make future onlookers be proud of the imaginations and social critiques we are capable of.

owrite, the Trek you knew its over.

Baylon 5 is over, its pretty much the same thing.

 

[Sean Aaron]

People are saying things like "I hope it's going to be like Mass Effect!" in this thread.

I'd rather it be as forgettable as this Sega game I've never heard of.

Mass Effect is memorable? Okay, you're right the legacy of Gene Roddenberry is doomed then.

 

[BillJ]

Ew. I hope this game flops. No need to destroy the legacy of Star Trek, along with Kirk and Spock, any more than J.J. Abrams has already done.

I'll assume this isn't irony just for fun.

It's a game, how is this "destroying the legacy" any more than say Sega's 198x arcade game where all you did was blow up Klingons and Nomad over and over again?

People are saying things like "I hope it's going to be like Mass Effect!" in this thread.

I'd rather it be as forgettable as this Sega game I've never heard of.

I'm lukewarm towards Star Trek 2009. But if I finally get a solid Trek video game out of it, I'll be a happy camper.

 

[BennettStar]

People are saying things like "I hope it's going to be like Mass Effect!" in this thread.

I'd rather it be as forgettable as this Sega game I've never heard of.

Mass Effect is memorable? Okay, you're right the legacy of Gene Roddenberry is doomed then.

Yes, in the gaming world, Mass Effect is in fact memorable. It is setting industry standards with its ratings and appeal. In fact, as an avid gamer, I'd even say little known games like Star Trek: Bridge Commander leave a decent impact on large enough communities to make an impact on the overall legacy of Star Trek. Your response is as if I said "This game alone will destroy Star Trek." I clearly said this game contributes to the death of its legacy, and also is a sad reminder that there will be no more Star Trek games to look forward to.

 

[BennettStar]

You can bury Star Trek right now and never look back.

We can both have it our way.

How can the legacy of Star Trek be preserved AND J.J. Trek continue to be successful? The legacy will be tarnished, has been tarnished, and continues to be tarnished by games like this and new terrible movies.

Yes, good Star Trek will live on inside me and many others the way we remember it, but J.J. Trek is threatening to let that positive image of Star Trek die with us. I'd rather people fifty years from now not knowing what Star Trek was, than to think it was some meaningless, CGI action fest that all the ignorant people of the past just ate up. And I'd much rather Star Trek left a legacy that would make future onlookers be proud of the imaginations and social critiques we are capable of.

owrite, the Trek you knew its over.

Baylon 5 is over, its pretty much the same thing.

I don't understand your post really at all.

I'm sad about the Star Trek I know being over, the Star Trek that actually meant something besides lens flares and explosions.

I guess if I ever watched/liked Babylon 5, I'd be sad too?

 

[Yevetha]

You could treat it like B5.

Pretend the whole trek is over. What JJ does is irrelevant for you anyway.

 

[BennettStar]

You could treat it like B5.

Pretend the whole trek is over. What JJ does is irrelevant for you anyway.

I think you're missing the word legacy. Of course new Star Trek is over, for me, but will live on, in me. But the legacy is important to me as well. J.J. Abrams is killing that legacy. That is not irrelevant. The new "Star Trek" offers nothing to entertainment that couldn't be achieved without abusing the Star Trek franchise. That is why I hope it fails, quickly and quietly, so as not to tarnish the image and impact of decades of positive Trek forever. Read my above posts to understand why I find Star Trek's legacy important.

 

[sonn]

Ew. I hope this game flops. No need to destroy the legacy of Star Trek, along with Kirk and Spock, any more than J.J. Abrams has already done. The sooner Star Trek stops earning money, the more likely Star Trek will be remembered as actually having intellectual and inspirational content.

 

[SilentP]

I'm intrigued by this title, but I'm not holding up hih hopes. It certainly seemed to come out from nowhere. Looking at theE3 footage, I'm worried that it may end up just being a Star Trek reskin of Mass Effect/Dead Space...

 

[Yevetha]

You could treat it like B5.

Pretend the whole trek is over. What JJ does is irrelevant for you anyway.

I think you're missing the word legacy. Of course new Star Trek is over, for me, but will live on, in me. But the legacy is important to me as well. J.J. Abrams is killing that legacy. That is not irrelevant. The new "Star Trek" offers nothing to entertainment that couldn't be achieved without abusing the Star Trek franchise. That is why I hope it fails, quickly and quietly, so as not to tarnish the image and impact of decades of positive Trek forever. Read my above posts to understand why I find Star Trek's legacy important.

Maybe it will get more philosophical by the third movie.

Who knows.

 

[Blamo]

If it is a "reskin" of Mass Effect (seriously doubt it, because that much work will be incredibly expensive), then it may actually be worth playing. On the other hand, if it's just a co-op third person shooter I'll happily ignore it's existence.

Unfortunately, that's exactly what it's looking like it'll be.

Never really liked shooters, the only reason I tolerate Mass Effect's TPS combat mechanics is because I really love everything else about it.

 

[CaptJack]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/117/1175617p1.html

This article makes it sound a lot more interesting to me. I'm liking the idea of minigame-based tasks and the use of cooperative gameplay, which are both things I've been hoping to see integrated more into the core of STO. While I would absolutely prefer a game set in the 24th century prime universe (Dominion War or concurrent with TrekLit) the way that this new game seems to be focused on creating an authentic Star Trek experience really raises my hopes for the future of Star Trek gaming.

 

[DonIago]

I am perpetually amused by the people who condemn the Trek revival based solely on one film. As we all know, The Cage, TMP, Encounter at Farpoint, Emissary, Generations, Caretaker and Broken Bow are models of perfection...

Give the new brass at least half a chance...

Heck, if it wasn't for second chances we wouldn't have Trek at all. Let's take a moment to remember that The Cage didn't sell the series.

 

[daedalus5]

You could treat it like B5.

Pretend the whole trek is over. What JJ does is irrelevant for you anyway.

I think you're missing the word legacy. Of course new Star Trek is over, for me, but will live on, in me. But the legacy is important to me as well. J.J. Abrams is killing that legacy. That is not irrelevant. The new "Star Trek" offers nothing to entertainment that couldn't be achieved without abusing the Star Trek franchise. That is why I hope it fails, quickly and quietly, so as not to tarnish the image and impact of decades of positive Trek forever. Read my above posts to understand why I find Star Trek's legacy important.

ok - think this post is over the top as were some of your earlier ones - a warning for trolling. Suggest you tone down your dislike of nuTrek as it isn't at all relevant to this thread or forum.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Do you have to have two players to play this game or can it be done on single player?

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Mass Effect itself is pretty much a reskinned Star Trek (it resembles Babylon 5 in other aspects) anyways. They could do a LOT worse than cloning it, especially if they fill it with memorable dialogue.

 

[BillJ]

Do you have to have two players to play this game or can it be done on single player?

That's my big question? But other "co-op" games have single player campaigns as well such as Army of Two.

 

[Yevetha]

Can i do the co-op with some stranger on the net or do i need to personally ask a friend that lets do it together?