#STAR TREK GAME PC#

It feels so incredibly obligatory and tacked-on that it's often preferable to play alone. Other than that, most of the co-op gameplay is about both of you tapping a button to pry open a stuck door or boost the other guy up a ledge every couple of minutes. Bland combat with another person by your side doesn't make it any less bland, but at least someone will be there to see the goofy physics launch an enemy into the air when you snipe them. but in this case, itвЂ™s too dull and buggy to drag someone else with you. Ideally, co-op could save the day in a game like Star Trek. Having to stop and scan absolutely everything with the Tricorder (Star Trek's version of Batman: Arkham City's Detective mode) to see through walls, hack control panels, and spot hidden wires doesn't help the pace, either. As the old saying goes, if you can't make a minigame that isnвЂ™t annoying to play more than once, you shouldn't make a minigame at all. The operative word, of course, is 'attempting,' because what it actually did was to break up the boring third-person shooting with swimming, flying, space combat, and hacking minigames so mind-numbingly simple and repetitive and/or frustrating they made me eager to get back to just being bored. I'll give developer Digital Extremes credit for at least attempting to cram in a wide variety of gameplay. Likewise, all the alien machine gun, shotgun, sniper rifle, and beam/rocket launcher equivalents are not only unremarkable in performance, they're all lumpy chunks of alien technology that are difficult to even tell apart. The Enterprise interior looks good enough (except for the weird Sick Bay level) but the alien ships and world you fight through are uniformly brownish and messy. It's really quite surprising that I never hit a real game-breaker considering all of the scripted events that failed to trigger. It's bad вЂ“ lots of really clumsy-looking movement, people, and objects clipping through each other crazy, badly lip-synced dialog (not that syncing it with this corny writing would fix it) and general screwups make Star Trek play like a blooper reel. Then they open their mouths, or do something like interact with the environment or other characters in any way, and the dire state of their animations sets off a red alert in my brain.

#STAR TREK GAME PC#

Particularly on the PC version, the texture detail is impressive, and most of the sounds and phaser-bolt effects are actually quite authentic.

As long as they're holding still, or engaged in general dive-rolling-into-cover actions, Kirk and Spock look and sound a lot like Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto, respectively ('cause they did the voice acting). It's just that at first the graphics got my hopes up that this wouldn't be a bad game. I shouldn't have been surprised by any of that. The end.' No? Too much? Alright then, how about combat that isn't completely generic, featuring a clever weapon perhaps? Maybe some kind of substantial difference between the two playable characters? Or even a reasonable expectation that a bug won't cause my own weapon to explode in my face when I fire a charged shot? Nope, nope, and nope. how about a plot that's more ambitious than, 'Oh no, velociraptors with ray guns have stolen a superweapon, we'd better shoot them until we get it back! Pew pew pew. What did I expect from a licensed game released a few weeks ahead of a major movie? Oh, I don't know. Terrible animations, dull combat, repetitive puzzles, and rampant bugs wore out Star TrekвЂ™s welcome long before its pointless story came to an end. but playing Star Trek: The Game reminded me that it'll never get any easier to see the potential of one of science fiction's greatest universes squandered on a barely serviceable, paint-by-numbers third-person shooter. As a life-long fan of the shows and films, I've seen a lot of bad Star Trek in my time.

Star trek game