Agree with this. Lucas Arts has a vested interest in the general health of the Star Wars franchise, so aren’t likely to release a half-assed game just to cash in on brand recognition. Paramount seems to just let whomever offers enough cash develop a Star Trek game, and so we’ve had a lot of poor efforts.
I disagree. There is enough possibility for drama adhering to canon: set the game on a Maquis spaceship. It allows all the free roaming, while still being able to insert everything Star Trek. The universe is large enough that you don’t necessarily have to focus on a Federation ship.
Another possibily would be to have the story focus on corruption within the Federation, maybe investigating a Section 31 plot, where a Federation crew is given more leeway. Afterall, most Federation directives are there to protect other species. When focusing the story on humans themselves you free yourself from those directives.
Plenty of stories to be told, even within the rigid ST canon.
This would basically end up not being Star Trek. There basically is no Star Trek outside the Federation. There’re virtually no established characters, no setting, and not very many themes. Doing this would be tantamount to making up your entire gameworld anyway.
Why would any give a rat’s ass about a minor plot element in a 15-year old series with basically no material since? Why would people care enough to buy it? How would this be in any way superior than making your own series - or even just switching the story to Star Wars where it would have equal or better support?
The fact that you can do somethign doesn’t make it a good idea.
That’s my opinion as well. LucasArts (previously LucasFilm Games) has made a ton of great games in various genres plus Star Wars games. Lots of classic adventure games, the Battlehawks games, and then a bunch of good Star Wars games (Rebel Assault, X-Wing, TIE Fighter, and Dark Forces). In my opinion, they spend too much time these days releasing Star Wars games and I hope they get back to other ideas.
I don’t see why that is a problem. Deep Space 9 was technically not a Trek series, and that still was very good. And while I agree that there are not many established characters, there are more than enough recognizable races and archetypes to base a story on. Star Wars now breaks with tradition as well, with 1313, and that is looking very promising.
Again, so what? If any franchise is known for taking a minor element and milking it for all it’s worth, it’s Star Wars. And why would people care enough to buy it? Create a powerful story in a great game, and people will. Not much history for Wild West themed games, but Red Dead Redemption was widely successful.
Basing your game on ST will draw in an instant following, and making it a great game will draw in other people who will learn to love the setting. This is how you make a franchise, and I feel that ST is due for a reboot. Besides, with the new films it may even be the best time for it, if you do want to break with canon. The film did it, so the next generation games can now too.
Make up your mind.
I’m playing KOTOR now after a lot of hype from people and am underwhelmed, frankly. Boring writing, mediocre graphics (even for the time). Yawn. Star Control this aint.
Well, tastes differ. I love the game, though I still can’t stand Bastila much. It’s a little repetitive, but I still fire it up now and then and play.
I think a game could be made around DS9. Maybe even a noir game. I also don’t see why you can’t take a small band of people and make a ST game around it. I’m not sure why it has to be 100% canon, or always has to be Spock and Kirk.
I looked up the new game…I think it’s just called “Star Trek”. If it gets good reviews I’ll get it, but it doesn’t exactly seem plot-heavy.
Yea, I don’t think there’s anything intrinsically about Trek that makes it so you couldn’t create a Mass Effect or KOTOR type game. Have the player be Captain of a starship, and let them fly around from planet to planet on various missions and beam down with a crew to accomplish whatever it is they need to accomplish. If anything, the problem would be that its too much like Mass Effect.
The problem isn’t the material. It’s because of the way Triple-A games are financed and published.
-
Until the last, say, 3-5 years, all the major Triple-A games had to look to the big publishers - EA, Ubisoft, Take2, etc. - to get their games on the shelves at retailers.
-
The major publishers were reluctant to finance massive RPGs because, except for Bethesda’s Elder Scroll games, they don’t really sell in mass quantities compared to Madden and Call of Duty type games. (Ignore Bethesda for a moment - they’re a special case).
-
Plus, the major publishers were mostly focused on the big console games, with cross-platform PC ports being an after thought. RPGs were thought of as a PC thing, especially if there’s lots of reading and story.
-
Massive RPGs like KOTOR and Oblivion cost a lot of money to make, but the publishers didn’t think there was a big market for recouping their investment.
-
As part of their publishing deal, the major publishers would expect to own the IP for a game. The usual game financing deal would be something like this: the publisher gives the developer money to build the game and then markets the game and gets shelf-space for the game in retail stores. In exchange, the publisher would own the IP and would get all their money back before the developers see a dime. This is why it’s common for development teams to be fired when a game ships - there’s no money to keep them together so they can build a new game or even develop some institutional coherence.
-
And as I mentioned, the major publishers had deals with retail stores for supplying product for their limited shelf space. The upshot of all this is that even if an independent team managed to scrape together a few million dollars to make a game - they wouldn’t be able to convince the major retail stores to sell it.
-
The upshot of all this is that there just aren’t very many Triple-A teams making massive RPGs today. Even if you have the money to hire a Triple-A team, there’s not that many such teams around.
-
Licensed properties, like Star Trek, would only deal with the major publishers, and publishers in turn usually hire an in-house team to work on it. This is why licensed games of any genre are usually pretty mediocre. Getting Bioware for Star Wars is the exception. (And you know, outside of Bioware and Bethesda, I’m not sure who I’d call a Triple-A rpg developer any more. Obsidian. CDProkecktRed (the Witcher guys). The Deus Ex Revolution was made by Eidos Montreal - yeah, they’re kind of a big deal. Assassin’s Creed is by Ubisoft, no idea who the actual devs are. Dark Souls, maybe? I haven’t played it but people I respect rave about it. Peter Molyneaux has moved on (and Fable was never all that anyway). Leonard Boyarski is working for Blizzard. Tim Cain is making an MMO. Chris Avellone is going to write Wasteland 2 - that’s exciting, but it’s a Kickstarter game.
Really, if you’re a Triple-A RPG fan, it’s kind of a thin time.
-
So that’s why no major singleplayer Star Trek game like KOTOR. The publishers don’t see enough money in singleplayer games to cover the cost of licensing the IP and hiring big name talent.
-
The good news, of course, is that the big publisher’s hold on retail space is slipping thanks to digital distribution. This, even more than the money, has been the main drag on video game production. The reason Bethesda is unique is that they own their own IP and they do their own publishing. They can spend five years building a game because they’re not beholden to the big publishers for money or retail space. Digital distriubtion opens up the possibility that new video game developers can start small and build up their skills and reputation without having to sell themselves to EA first.
Oh, my. Here’s a whole pile of Internet cookies for you, for typing out that massive response for me (no sarcasm). Thanks.
Oh! happy to be of service!