New Star Trek game trailer.

[Kelbie]

If people do get this game, it will give people a chance to get involved with Mass Effect 2

[Mr. D]

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

[Whiskers]

It seems I was mistaken. Apologies, gentlemen. I could have sworn Sony announced it was a PS3 exclusive too...

[Carbonizer]

I know its early and stuff but the graphics seem to pre-date Mass Effects' standards :/

[Kelbie]

Actually Mass Effect 2 has updated their graphics and alot higher than the previous version.

[Carbonizer]

I wasnt on about Mass Effect 2... I was on about the unreleased Trek game

[Kelbie]

My bad..

[Felus]

It seems I was mistaken. Apologies, gentlemen. I could have sworn Sony announced it was a PS3 exclusive too...

I was thinking the same thing when i see it at the Sony spotlight.

[Alexraptor]

Your point being? Star Trek isn't very successful in the gaming industry. Developing a game which is likely not going to sell well for multiple systems would be a bad idea.

Excuse me?! Star Trek IS a cash cow waiting to happen, if the dipshits at Activision would just get off their high horse and make BC 2 or if a company had the balls to get the rights from them and make the game, it would be highly profitable, just look at BC today. Yes its dieing a slow and painful death BUT its 10 years old!! And its still alive "if only barely..." a BC2 is a success just waiting to happen

Thing is all Activision does these days is CoD......Damn Activision

After the shit Activision pulled back in 2003, I Highly doubt that Paramount or CBS would be willing to sign a new contract with them, wether Activision actually wanted to or not.

Also one has to remember that Activision is really only a publisher.
Bridge Commander was actually developed by Totally Games.

What needs to happen is for the Star Trek license to get back into the hands of a competent publisher... not another greedy company who just wants to make a quick buck like Bethesda.
On that note, IMO Bethesda is directly responsible for the failure of Star Trek Legacy.
They forced Mad Doc software to deliver before the game was ready, and a lot of content was cut.
Whats more they also pretty much stopped supporting the game less than a month after launch, never authorizing a patch that could have fixed many of the biggest problems Legacy had.

[Whiskers]

What needs to happen is for the Star Trek license to get back into the hands of a competent publisher... not another greedy company who just wants to make a quick buck like Bethesda.
On that note, IMO Bethesda is directly responsible for the failure of Star Trek Legacy.
They forced Mad Doc software to deliver before the game was ready, and a lot of content was cut.
Whats more they also pretty much stopped supporting the game less than a month after launch, never authorizing a patch that could have fixed many of the biggest problems Legacy had.

I agree entirely. Someone earlier mentioned a Bridge Commander 2, and I have to say I think it's probably the best bet for a successful Trek game. But I think it ought to be more than that... think Bridge Commander having a baby with Mass Effect. Think the paragon / renegade system evolved times a billion. Your actions in game should directly affect the universe in some way. Say you're sent a distress signal from a Klingon ship near a border system, but you also have to deliver urgent medical supplies to a planet in another nearby system. If you choose to save the Klingon ship, your reputation in Starfleet will be damaged, you may receive a demotion but will maintain peace with the Klingons. If you choose to save the planet, you'll gain a promotion, reputation and maybe a new ship, but it results in war between the Federation and the Klingons. Such diverse and important moral choices are a core part of Star Trek, and would make for a simply breathtaking game.

Perhaps this new game they've announced will be similar. I'm hopeful, but really doubtful.