News: Nintendo News | Star Trek Soars to Wii [ Confirmed ] Page 1

Nintendo News | Star Trek Soars to Wii [ Confirmed ]

03.08.2007

Update - Following the original speculation of a Star Trek coming to Wii, Bethesda Softworks has now confirmed the game's existence.

Bethesda Softworks, a ZeniMax Media company, today announced its next STAR TREK videogame, STAR TREK: Conquest, a blend of strategy and intense action set in "The Next Generation" era. Conquest will be available for the Wii and PlayStation 2.

Players take control of Federation, Klingon, Romulan, Cardassian, Dominion, and Breen forces and lead them in a campaign to control the Galaxy, one planet at a time. Build and manage your growing empire in turn-based strategy, fully utilising the Wii Remote as you select and maneouvre your starships throughout the large, galactic map.

Strategically, you must effectively manage limited resources to expand your empire. You decide how to best achieve objectives by managing your fleets and admirals, building support structures, researching technology, and engaging your enemies in combat.

Once battle is initiated, Conquest switches to a ship level tactical view allowing direct command of your ships as you engage in real-time combat. While maneuvering your starship with the Nunchuk, take direct aim and fire away with the Wii Remote.

The game is scheduled for a simultaneous release this Holiday season at an the estimated price of $29.99 on Wii and $19.99 on the PlayStation 2.

Stick around for further updates...

Original News: A listing on retailer site GameFly seems to suggest Star Trek: Conquest is heading to Nintendo's ickle white box, developed by Bethesda Softworks. No further details have been revealed, but the game's existence does seem legitimate.

Be sure to stick around for updates...

Star Trek: Conquest (Wii)

Game Details

Screens

Videos

Developer

Bethesda

Publisher

Bethesda

Genre

Strategy

Players

C3 Score

n/a

Reader Score

0 (0 Votes)

Out now

Out now

None

Out now

Comment on this article

Comments

«s previous1next »

Crazylurch 25.07.2007#1

A decent Star Trek game is unlikely. They all kind of suck which is a shame.

Woooooooo!!!

mooojc 25.07.2007#2

Never was a fan of Star Trek games, even if this one is being developed by Bethesda Softworks.

SAMUSMCLOUD 26.07.2007#3

I LOVE Star trek, but the games are almost always poorly made, no good. I'd love to trick myself into thinking this one will be different, but thats probly not true.

Who knows what they'll do with a Star Trek game on the Wii? might be weird, might be cool.

Despite the cost of living, its quite popular.

jesusraz 03.08.2007#4

The DS game by Bethesda was decent enough, so I'm really looking forward to what the team comes up with for Wii!

Adam Riley [ Director :: Cubed3 ]

UNITE714: Weekly Prayers | Bible Verses

Darkflame 03.08.2007#5

-sigh- another PS2 & Wii grooping.

I wish the ps2 would just die.
(no offence to the machine, its just its pulling the average wii title quality down a lot)

As for Star Trek games, most do suck.
But, in theory, the universe is great for gameplay.

Id love a Homeworld or XCOM style Star Trek game.

I think Xcom fits Stargate more, however.

http://www.fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
Last update; Mice,Plumbers,Animatronics and Airbenders. We also have the socials; Facebook & G+.

Takeo 03.08.2007#6

Darkflame said:
-sigh- another PS2 & Wii grooping.I wish the ps2 would just die.(no offence to the machine, its just its pulling the average wii title quality down a lot)

No thats just the fact that the majority of Wii games are pure shite because developers cant be asred to do anything but put gimicy, crappy controls in...that or movie tie ins, which we all know are crap.

"Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us." Deviantart Profile-||-Myspace

patjuan32 03.08.2007#7

Darkflame,

I was just thinking about Homeworld also. If Bethesda makes a strong single player and a decent multiplayer, this could be a great game. I'm not too sure how they would implement a Wifi multiplayer mode. I guess a player would have a time limit in which to move all their units.

dartmonkey 03.08.2007#8

Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.

It's amazing how the most tedious elements of the Star Trek universe are selected for games. Conventional RTS? Snore. I want to explore new worlds, to seek out new life, etc. I want to jump round the Holodeck, hunt down Borg and blow shit up. I want to see if Troi can read my dirty mind.

Oh, and shoot Wesley Crusher in the face.

Less posty, more gamey.

Darkflame 03.08.2007#9

"No thats just the fact that the majority of Wii games are pure shite because developers cant be asred to do anything but put gimicy, crappy controls in"

Which is all they CAN do when dual-developing for the PS2 and Wii.

http://www.fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
Last update; Mice,Plumbers,Animatronics and Airbenders. We also have the socials; Facebook & G+.

CuRoi 03.08.2007#10

I remember really wanting to get Star Trek: Bridge Commander after playing the demo. Couldn't find it anywhere though. Shame, considering it was meant to be one of the better Star Trek games.

The Wiimote would be perfect as a phaser. Why did they have to make a turn-based strategy instead? Smilie Just give it to the PS2 only.

Oh, and shoot Wesley Crusher in the face.

Bah, I hated him. He's so cleancut. So apple pie American with page-boy hair. Always makes sure he never leaves without his goody two shoes. What a tosser. Although Stand By Me is a great film.

Takeo 03.08.2007#11

Darkflame said:
No thats just the fact that the majority of Wii games are pure shite because developers cant be asred to do anything but put gimicy, crappy controls inWhich is all they CAN do when dual-developing for the PS2 and Wii.

Bull-shit! They do it fine for the rest of the other consoles out there...I mean look at GTA and Assassins Creed atm, both being developed for simultanious release for the 360 and PS3, much harder to develop for, and they BOTH look outstanding for BOTH formats so why cant they do that for another two systems that have pretty equal processing power?

Its because developers cant be arsed to do it, and Nintendo can see that they will make a quick buck cashing in on pussy arse movie tie in's with gimmicy controlls because kids will snap it up...yes you could argue that its good marketing but its alienating the gamers that have bin with Nintendo since the start, and loyalty like that is worth any amount of new customers if it means selling out and producing crap games.

"Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us." Deviantart Profile-||-Myspace

Mongo 03.08.2007#12

patjuan32 said:
Darkflame,I was just thinking about Homeworld also. If Bethesda makes a strong single player and a decent multiplayer, this could be a great game. Im not too sure how they would implement a Wifi multiplayer mode. I guess a player would have a time limit in which to move all their units.

Generally, turn-based multi-player games work well if everyone can enter their orders simultaneously, and then when everyone is done the orders are all processed in proper sequence. The best time-limiting option I've played is where a timer starts counting when there is only one player left working on their turn...so if everyone needs more time, no one gets cut off, but if one guy is slower than everyone else, they can't stall everyone else indefinitely.

Regarding this game, it sounds like it could be a great game, if it's well done. I'd certainly buy a well done turn based strategy game with real-time tactical battles to resolve conflicts for the Wii (regardless of what universe/timeframe it's set in).

Takeo R.I.P. said:
Darkflame said:No thats just the fact that the majority of Wii games are pure shite because developers cant be asred to do anything but put gimicy, crappy controls inWhich is all they CAN do when dual-developing for the PS2 and Wii.
Bull-shit! They do it fine for the rest of the other consoles out there...I mean look at GTA and Assassins Creed atm, both being developed for simultanious release for the 360 and PS3, much harder to develop for, and they BOTH look outstanding for BOTH formats so why cant they do that for another two systems that have pretty equal processing power?Its because developers cant be arsed to do it, and Nintendo can see that they will make a quick buck cashing in on pussy arse movie tie ins with gimmicy controlls because kids will snap it up...yes you could argue that its good marketing but its alienating the gamers that have bin with Nintendo since the start, and loyalty like that is worth any amount of new customers if it means selling out and producing crap games.

There's no reason a title can't be done well on the Wii and PS2, IF they focus on the Wii first, and pare the game down for the PS2 later. The problem with most (all?) of the PS2/Wii games we've seen so far is that they were making PS2 games and then the marketing weasels suddenly demanded that they release it for the Wii also since that's obviously going to be the volume winner for this generation of consoles. Then you get PS2 level graphics and crappy Wii controls tacked on as an afterthought.

When the developers start their next generation of games designed for the Wii first (or at least include the Wii from beginning), we'll get better quality multi-platform games.

( Edited on 03.08.2007 20:05 by Mongo )

Edit this post:

[quote][b]patjuan32 said:[/b]<br/>Darkflame,I was just thinking about Homeworld also. If Bethesda makes a strong single player and a decent multiplayer, this could be a great game. Im not too sure how they would implement a Wifi multiplayer mode. I guess a player would have a time limit in which to move all their units.[/quote]

Generally, turn-based multi-player games work well if everyone can enter their orders simultaneously, and then when everyone is done the orders are all processed in proper sequence.  The best time-limiting option I've played is where a timer starts counting when there is only one player left working on their turn...so if everyone needs more time, no one gets cut off, but if one guy is slower than everyone else, they can't stall everyone else indefinitely.

Regarding this game, it sounds like it could be a great game, if it's well done.  I'd certainly buy a well done turn based strategy game with real-time tactical battles to resolve conflicts for the Wii (regardless of what universe/timeframe it's set in).

[quote][b]Takeo R.I.P. said:[/b]<br/>[quote][b]Darkflame said:[/b]No thats just the fact that the majority of Wii games are pure shite because developers cant be asred to do anything but put gimicy, crappy controls inWhich is all they CAN do when dual-developing for the PS2 and Wii.[/quote]Bull-shit! They do it fine for the rest of the other consoles out there...I mean look at GTA and Assassins Creed atm, both being developed for simultanious release for the 360 and PS3, much harder to develop for, and they BOTH look outstanding for BOTH formats so why cant they do that for another two systems that have pretty equal processing power?Its because developers cant be arsed to do it, and Nintendo can see that they will make a quick buck cashing in on pussy arse movie tie ins with gimmicy controlls because kids will snap it up...yes you could argue that its good marketing but its alienating the gamers that have bin with Nintendo since the start, and loyalty like that is worth any amount of new customers if it means selling out and producing crap games.[/quote]

There's no reason a title can't be done well on the Wii and PS2, IF they focus on the Wii first, and pare the game down for the PS2 later.  The problem with most (all?) of the PS2/Wii games we've seen so far is that they were making PS2 games and then the marketing weasels suddenly demanded that they release it for the Wii also since that's obviously going to be the volume winner for this generation of consoles.  Then you get PS2 level graphics and crappy Wii controls tacked on as an afterthought.

When the developers start their next generation of games designed for the Wii first (or at least include the Wii from beginning), we'll get better quality multi-platform games.<p>

Save Changes Cancel Full Edit

dojo 03.08.2007#13

I can imagine this game to be rather jarg. Ah well.

Jump_button 04.08.2007#14

<_< fu$king ports wish they stop it now i can tell them now iam not biy a shit lazy port

My ART Gallery la la la la!

Laurelin 04.08.2007#15

Isn't this game a port of the PC-Star-Trek Bethesda busted a great lot? Wow, can't wait not to play it...

Takeo, Wii is far advanced in processing power then PS2, even Cube was. But no one did decent games for it. So hope they begin on Wii and port down to PS2. Since PS2 is so difficult to develop for, they do it the other way round. Which is a shame.

I find your lack of faith disturbing!

Wiill 04.08.2007#16

I could be interesting in this game, but I'll need screens, hands-on impressions and videos before I start becoming properly interested, just to make sure it's not mediocre like Legacy.