Star Trek Is A Spock And Kirk Buddy Game, OK

By Jim Rossignol on February 15th, 2013 at 7:00 pm.

Alt+f4, are you sure?
Oh, marketing. Attaching a line to your Star Trek Making Of video that says “The Ultimate Co-op Experience” is just asking for trouble, isn’t it? I know I barely get to be in charge of anything in this universe, but in this case I’d definitely have gone for “Look, Spock and Kirk Can Hold Each Other.” And they can, as the video explained: it had to be a co-op game, because Kirk and Spock are opposites who attract. I mean, they don’t fist-bump, but do have each others backs. So to speak.

Hrm.

, .

78 Comments »

  1. TJ says:

    If this turns out to be the game they describe rather than the game it looks like it will be ace.

    • Doreen_Young says:

      just as Jeffrey implied I didn’t even know that a mother able to profit $7220 in 4 weeks on the computer. have you seen this web link… http://www.snag4.com

    • Syra says:

      Still looks like a mash up of a mass effect knock off and that one military shooter that forced coop all the time. It was so forgettable… what was it called again…

      • GreatGreyBeast says:

        Army of Poo?

        • f1x says:

          Could be worse.. Kane and Lynch..

          but that didn’t force co-op tho

          • vasek45 says:

            Except K&L was awesome. Espescially the second one despite the laughable length. Should’ve been 30-35$ from start though because of the apparent lack of content.
            Army of Two was awful.

          • f1x says:

            K&L 1 and 2 mood and dialogues were good

            gameplay was a hell spawn

            but we can agree that Army of Two was shit indeed
            I’m not sure why they are insisting in a sequel

          • vasek45 says:

            Well, I just happen to be one of those weirdoes who can play and love games just for the mood, setting and writing even if the gameplay is bad or non-existent at all. For example, Thirty Flights of Loving, I liked it a lot. Hell, Alan Wake is my favourite game in this gen. Apart from HL2:EP2 maybe and Read Dead Redemption.

          • f1x says:

            Well those other games that you mention had a perfectly fine gameplay,

            K&L was quite broken,
            but hey! I did play the campaigns in both K&L 1 and 2, can’t say I didn’t like them, to be honest they had a much better storyline than Max Payne 3 (which I found somehow very similar to K&L 2…),
            but if they just took a bit more time to refine the gameplay/mechanics…could’ve been great games

  2. AraxisHT says:

    I don’t like this Star Trek. The game actually looks worse than the movie (if that’s possible). I certainly won’t play this game. I hope Jar Jar Abrams doesn’t ruin Star Wars as well.

    • iucounu says:

      I liked the movie!

      • Premium User Badge

        mpk says:

        Do not want.

        Pegg and Urban I could take; one’s doing an impersonation and the other is just being Glaswegian and In Space, both of which rate about one hundred and twelve on the 10-point scale of awesomeness. The rest of them, well… Yelchin is playing a casually-racist version of Chekov, Cho’s Sulu was passed over by the script, save some fan service and Chris Pine has no charisma. Quinto and Saldana are playing completely different interpretations of the original characters and can at least have some credit.

        That said, I’m an old school Trek fan. Nothing has ever beaten the original show for me, not Picard’s facepalm, or Riker’s beard-acting; not Sisko’s sudden goatee or Voyager’s ridiculous sexual politics, and the less said about Enterprise, the better.

        Gimme that old time Trek anyday. All this lense flare is for young ‘uns.

        Also: Sarek’s chin was too big.

        • SuperNashwanPower says:

          When I watch Abrams reboot, I feel like I am looking at the semi-decomposed corpse of Star Trek, being puppeteered by a 12 year old with a disturbing fascination with fire.

        • Premium User Badge

          Hidden_7 says:

          I think I might be the only Trek fan in the world (in the sense that I’ve watched all the shows, though not all OF the shows if you catch my meaning), that legitimately likes Enterprise. In a pinch I think it might be one of my favourites.

          In any case, I’m clearly a rare commodity, anyone want to buy some signed organs? They’re collector’s items!

          • GreatGreyBeast says:

            At least you seem to have a good attitude about it. I like Bill & Ted 2 loads more than the first one, so I know how you feel.

          • SuperNashwanPower says:

            enterprise was okay, at least the first couple of series. It was the movie that I could not stomach

  3. x1501 says:

    Who’s up for “100 Things I learned from this trailer”?

    1) The Vulcan nerve pinch is much more effective than a phaser.
    2) “Spacediving” is a thing now.

    • Brun says:

      Space diving is, in actuality, a real thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Stratos

      • x1501 says:

        True, but actual so-called “space diving” is somewhat different from shown in the trailer, in that it’s not really performed from outer space and that still sort of requires the aid of gravity from a planetary body you’re supposed to be diving to.

        • Brun says:

          “Outer space” is simply a question of altitude. You couldn’t space dive from orbit, but you could do it from orbital altitudes if you had some means of reaching those altitudes without being in orbit, if that makes sense. I think in the movie they jump from a shuttle that’s sort of just hovering at near-orbital altitude (no doubt making use of some kind of magic space-technology).

          • x1501 says:

            I think you’re missing my point. In the trailer, he seems to be freefalling into the [outer] space, not out of it.

          • SirKicksalot says:

            In the 2009 movie it looks like they’re violently shot out of the ship. I assume being shot like a bullet would work in any direction in space.

          • SuperNashwanPower says:

            To be fair, Baumgartner is a total dick who also achieved something incredible. Just sayin’

  4. S Jay says:

    Spacedive?

  5. S Jay says:

    Is this a Mass Effect III mod? :)

    • f1x says:

      The cover and shoot thing, certainly looks like Mass Effect, for whatever the reason

      Not like all cover + shoot things are suddenly invented by Mass Effect, it could look like Gears of War but no, it looks like Mass Effect

  6. destroy.all.monsters says:

    I cannot imagine how well a slash-fic laden game would do particularly amongst the wimmen folk but I dare say it would have to be far more entertaining than explodey-ness in Trek drag.

    Hell I’d probably buy it just to piss off Fundies. And why is it that Fundies are against fun? It is in their name and everything.

    • dE says:

      But I’m affraid there’s also dies. So Fun Dies. Pretty accurate to be honest.

  7. dE says:

    So gaming managed to paraphrase two popular characters into two words: Soldier, Stealth.
    Also can Star Trek finally get over it and allow those two lovebirds to live out their destiny? I mean, it’s kinda obvious the way Kirk overemphasizes his amourous adventures and how Spock always tries his hardest to look unemotional and cold.
    But when push comes to shove, there’s just so much tension between the two, they should just get a room and celebrate their coming out.

    • Premium User Badge

      RedViv says:

      Oh my…

      • dE says:

        Well, isn’t it “to boldly go where no man has gone before”?

        Then, there’s also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOI_mksUUgQ (sorry, it’s in german but you get the idea, I’m sure).

        • Premium User Badge

          RedViv says:

          Oh, majority of German humour. How much I still don’t grasp, even after a bit more than a decade in this country…

          • f1x says:

            Well, german cheesy humour is one hell of a thing, seems stuck in the 80s, back when Benny Hill was a thing

            But I’m not gonna say much, because I’m spanish and spanish humour is possibly the worst thing ever

  8. destroy.all.monsters says:

    When I hear “authentic Star Trek” what I don’t think of is kids playing Shatner’s and Nimoy’s roles in ridiculously over the top action.

    • S Jay says:

      Well, those are not based on Shatner and Nimoy, but I get what you mean.

  9. Premium User Badge

    RedViv says:

    Uncomfortable levels of uncanny valley going on here.

    • Moni says:

      I’m not sure it’s the uncanny valley. This is that really low point before the line goes up. It’s just really ugly.

      Still, pew-pew and space-pinches, I’ll file this one under “has some potential”.

  10. Premium User Badge

    JiminyJickers says:

    The graphics look brilliant. I would rather have a more RPGish Star Trek game than this though.

    Probably would give it a go if the demo impresses. They still do demos don’t they?

    • SuperNashwanPower says:

      “The graphics look brilliant”

      Should have gone to Specsavers

    • f1x says:

      graphics are ok, not something impressive, not bad

      but yes, I would like to try a demo aswell, it could be that the game is actually good

  11. TheIronSky says:

    They need to stop making Star Trek into an action movie. I always imagined a Star Trek game would be more about exploration and discovery of a new species or planet and the drama that evolves from such a situation. Similar to when you land on Feros in Mass Effect 1 for the first time. That’s the feeling they should try to capture, not this JJ Abrams action movie crap – that should be reserved for blockbuster movies like Super 8 (which I actually thought was pretty alright).

    • timzania says:

      Though I’m OK with the JJ Abrams film in general, I agree that action is a bad fit for Star Trek. Further I’d argue that the action formula is largely dictated by the blockbuster-movie format: if people are only going to see one Star Trek film every two years or so they don’t have time for as much thinking or character development and expect to be entertained.

      Some previous Trek films have been more slow-paced and thoughtful but they always had the backing of a TV show to keep people interested. Also the property is seen as so commerically valuable now, and the movies so expensive, that it’s difficult to justify the extra risk of breaking formula.

      What I’m saying is that Star Trek needs to be on TV to be great. Always has, always will.

      • Brise Bonbons says:

        My primary response to the reboot film was “drat, if only they had something sort of like this on TV; they wouldn’t have the budget or plot constraints pushing it to be a shit action movie, and it could just get on with being about the characters and the whole exploring new worlds thing”. So yeah, right on with that one.

        Now, I did enjoy the new film for what it was (in spite of its blockbuster cliches; I can ignore irritants if I apply myself stubbornly enough). Hell, I quite enjoyed the rebooted characters for the most part. But I agree that at its heart the “spirit” of Star Trek is totally unsuited for any sort of action media, be it game or film.

        Give me a Star Trek RPG or starship management game (or on the film side a good thriller, mystery, adventure, horror, or travel flick) and I’ll get my wallet out.

      • Premium User Badge

        drewski says:

        JJ Abrams is just a nerdier Michael Bay.

    • SuperNashwanPower says:

      Much was made in promotion of some PR line about old school Star Trek being about fusty ambassadorial meetings and WHO THE FUCK WANTS TO SEE THAT WE’VE GOT TITS AND SPLODES, which to be honest worked on most people. But for me one of the best trek episodes ever was when Picard had to defend Data’s rights as a sentient being in a court (Measure of a Man?), with Riker forced to adopt a ‘prosecutor’ role. It was dramatic, it got you thinking, and if you had any attachment at all for the characters it was also emotionally affecting. I still get chills thinking about it now. The reboot utterly threw away anything even vaguely in the way of contemplation, and suffered for it. Who needs ambassadors when you can just blow them up (oo-rah, captain)?

      But yeah I guess that backs up the view about needing the TV series too, because thats where all the attachment is formed. Oh god and don’t get me started on the episode with Data’s cybernetic daughter. That had me bawling my eyes out.

      • Prime says:

        I found the promotion for the film to be quite insidious. There were a few memes like the “fusty ambassadorial meetings” going about, lines you kept hearing over and over again almost as if someone wanted you to think that way…

        The one that most annoyed me was The Onion’s “Star Trek fans bash new film as fun, watchable” piece that got plenty of exposure. As good a piece of satire as it was it didn’t help the people who genuinely had a problem with the reboot to make their case – people just used it to shout down criticism, as if there was something wrong with you for not just shutting up and enjoying it. The whole affair felt deeply manipulative, in the same way that critics of the original Michael Bay Transformers film were told it was just a “popcorn” film and to criticise was to “miss the point”.

        • Premium User Badge

          Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

          I very much enjoyed reading your perspective, Prime, and the thoughts of SuperNashwanPower above, and found that they mirror my own evaluation even though I had not put it into words, and indeed, if I had attempted to put it into words I probably would not have encapsulated it so elegantly.

          In the debased language of the age we live in, I wish to bestow upon both of you the response “THIS”, “QFT”, and possibly the mathematically precise (but no less congratulatory) “+1″.

  12. Smion says:

    “BE THE ENTERPRISE!”
    So this one is going to get reviewed in the Flare Path then?

  13. Premium User Badge

    mpk says:

    One paragraph in and already I’m having flashbacks to RPSH Spock porn.

  14. SkittleDiddler says:

    Oh look, another trendy “co-op first, gameplay second” game. And it looks to be of the highest quality, just like the others.

    • Premium User Badge

      Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

      When did co-op become a bad thing?

      I love co-op. Lady Smingleigh doesn’t like competing against me but she goes all wibbly when she gets a chance to mow down hordes of zombies/demons/aliens/pensioners by my side.

      • SkittleDiddler says:

        Co-op is a wonderific thing, but when something becomes a trend marketing movement within the industry, it eventually starts losing luster. Just like tower defense games, season passes, and roguelikes.

      • GreatGreyBeast says:

        I like Left4Dead. I love coop in Serious Sam games. But what those have in common is combat-focused arena levels centered on emergent action gameplay that can be easily scaled to match the number of players. Has coop ever been great in a *narrative* focused FPS? The only one I’m familiar with was Fear 3, which was eehhhhhhhh.

        • Premium User Badge

          drewski says:

          I guess it depends what you think of the Halo series’ narrative, or Gears of War, both of which are at least as, if not more, satisfying playing coop compared to solo.

      • RProxyOnly says:

        Co-op has ALWAYS been a bad thing, it’s just that moron knuckledraggers outnumber those looking for a bit of depth in their games.

        Co-op games sacrifice depth of story, original/unusual gaming mechanics or even fun for a section of gamers in favour of dumbass pew pew… quick, run, shoot.

        How can people perpetually buy shooting games? Do none of you get bored?

        • Faxmachinen says:

          Hey, I resemble that remark!

          So you prefer to have an AI companion instead? Because that’s what you’d get. Or have you already forgotten the horrors?

          I kind of agree though. Lately there’s too much focus on getting co-op shoehorned into the story, and it results in a poorer singleplayer experience, and a poorer 3-player coop experience (because all such games are 2-player coop only). All I want is a singleplayer game that I can alternately play with any number of friends, and I really couldn’t care less if the story makes no sense at all in co-op.

        • Premium User Badge

          Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

          Why, I bet you hate puppies too. Why do you hate puppies? You’re a bad person for hating puppies.

        • Premium User Badge

          Vandelay says:

          Co-op is not a bad thing, it is just used in pointless ways. The vast majority of games that focus on co-op just rely on the fact that a lot of experiences are more fun with other people. The gameplay rarely actually has any depth added by the additional person, except for the occasional moment where a switch needs to be pressed at the same time or you need to pick someone up when they are down.

          That doesn’t mean that co-op is automatically bad.

          In the case of this game and judging by what we see in this video, there doesn’t seem to be any reason whatsoever to play this in co-op mode. For a video that bills the game as “The Ultimate Co-op Experience”, there didn’t actually seem to be any gameplay that showed cooperation, besides them standing next to each other shooting.

        • Koozer says:

          *angry counter-argument and something about Four Swords on the Gamecube”

  15. ZIGS says:

    Co-op is the cancer killing SP games

    • SuperNashwanPower says:

      Contact the Daily Mail for advice on cures for cancer

    • x1501 says:

      In about the same way that the Internet is the “cancer” killing cable television.

  16. Risingson says:

    Star Trek The Trailer: trying to make the game feel like Rio Bravo and actually making it look like Top Gun.

  17. foda500 says:

    I’ll just leave this here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uxTpyCdriY

  18. mechabuddha says:

    I love coop. I hate actiony Star Trek. So what I’m going to do is play this game with my eyes squinted and pretend it’s coop Mass Effect. Problem solved!

  19. ColOfNature says:

    Star Trek is dead to me.

  20. Prime says:

    When you break Star Trek down into those elements of course it had to be a co-op game; there was no other game we could possibly make.

    Sure, if you’re going to reduce the entire Star Trek experience to one ridiculous bro-mance. Yeah, not really feeling this one. Methnks I’ll give it a miss.

  21. guygodbois00 says:

    It looks aimed for the much younger audience than usual. Therefore, I’ll pass. Also looks infested with consolitis.

  22. Iskariot says:

    I am not a huge Star Trek fan per se, but I have enjoyed several Star Trek games very much. I might try this, although I miss a certain Star Trek vibe in what I have seen from this game. Too many explosions and high octane action is going on I think.
    Personally I do not like the main lizardy opponents. It would have been much cooler to battle classic opponents like the Romulan’s. I love the the more stealthy, black ops/political intrigue vibe of the Romulan’s.

  23. Didden says:

    Having grown up with a Commodore full of movie licensed games, let me tell you how this one will pan out: Not well.

  24. Strangerator says:

    They certainly appear to be taking Star Trek into Uncharted territory.

    When asked if he thought he his remake had forever changed the essence of what Star Trek was, J.J.Abrams replied:

    “Don’t set out to raze all shrines — you’ll frighten men. Enshrine mediocrity — and the shrines are razed”

    (Though this quote might actually be from someone else entirely)

  25. Premium User Badge

    ordteapot says:

    Maybe a game will finally get Spock and Kirk’s relationship dynamic right: