We were excited when we heard that Bethesda was bringing Star Trek: Conquest to the Wii, even more so when the strategy/shooter's $30 budget pricing was revealed ($15 for the PS2 version). So, now that it's out, is it worth its weight in gold-pressed latinum? Well, no.
IGN -- 68%: Though Star Trek: Conquest is technically sound, IGN doesn't think there's enough there to warrant pruchasing: "The game is obviously a quick cash-out strategy game that does little to innovate, and lacks the serious depth it takes to sit among the ranks of strategy greats ... For starters, there's no multiplayer at all in the game, so while it's a turn-based board game in nearly every respect, you'll be playing one-on-one with the computer only, rather than bringing friends into the action via local or online play. Even further, the game has no real story mode, as it only includes a user-defined 'Campaign' mode and skirmish extra mode."
Gamespy -- 20%: GameSpy agrees, and takes issue with its combat portions and inaccuracies: "It's not a very good shooter, with trudging controls, no choice over which of your ships you control (you only get to control one), and bland graphics. And just to drive the license fully into the ground, you'll encounter fun things like Borg spheres as fast/light 'scout' vessels. Technically, Conquest could be worse, since it loads quickly and has no real technical issues. But there is simply no reason to play this game or spend the money on it."
Remember how every other episode of The Next Generation climaxed with some sort of warp core breach that required a saucer separation? The red alert klaxon would sound off and the camera would cut to a shot of Geordi rolling dramatically under one of the descending emergency gates, just narrowly escaping death and ensuring he'd be around to host another episode of Reading Rainbow.
We imagine that's just how your Christmas morning would play out if someone were to gift you Star Trek: Conquest, except instead of a saucer separation, you'll be running out of the house and jumping into your car, driving away as fast as possible, glancing at your rearview mirror just in time to see your house explode spectacularly behind you.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-06-2007 @ 6:13PM
RatMasterD21 said...
classic pic....
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 6:25PM
Mr Khan said...
Someone's a next generation fanboy
I welcome you, comrade
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 6:26PM
mian said...
I'm hoping for a price cut in the spring.
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 6:31PM
pacatak said...
not to be too much of a trekkie, but the saucer separation only occurred three times in the entire series. Come on nerds know these things
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 6:46PM
Eric Caoili said...
well, 4, if you count generations ...
12-07-2007 @ 2:03AM
Trickob said...
you beat me to it.
12-07-2007 @ 9:51AM
pacatak said...
True, but he was writing about the series, which rarely had the seperation. Sadly i don't know the stats for warp core breaches, but i don't think it was more then a couple times a season, unless you count "Cause and Effect" which greatly skews the info.
12-06-2007 @ 6:50PM
DonWii said...
I see your pic, and I raise you:
http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p35/Legolastom/ultimatecombo703607nu0-2.jpg
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 7:00PM
Zack W. said...
I love Star Trek.....I have NEVER played a good Star Trek game.....EVER!!!
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 11:52PM
Maddles said...
Ever played Bridge Commander? Great game IMO.
12-06-2007 @ 7:20PM
Kinda.Odd said...
"We imagine that's just how your Christmas morning would play out if someone were to gift you Star Trek: Conquest, except instead of a saucer separation, you'll be running out of the house and jumping into your car, driving away as fast as possible, glancing at your rearview mirror just in time to see your house explode spectacularly behind you."
Rofl.
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 7:21PM
Donald said...
Kudos to Gamespy for using a number below 60 if they believe it to be a pile of crap.
Reply
12-06-2007 @ 7:34PM
Blue_Falcon said...
A 68% and a 20%.
So much for consistency anymore. I guess one man's trash is another man's treasure. Well, soft of. 68 is far from "treasure" but is pretty distant from a "trashy" 20.
*shrug*
Reply
12-07-2007 @ 12:16AM
ashylarry said...
It IS obviously a quick cash-in on the Trek name, the arcade mode is largely unplayable and the title would definitely be improved with multiplayer and online, but I'll be damned if I haven't managed to have fun playing it anyway.
Reply
12-07-2007 @ 8:56AM
Obadiah said...
Not to be too picky, but I'm not sure that Gamespy played Conquest for very long. It isn't that great of a game (though it isn't horrendous) but you CAN switch from ship to ship. You just tap left and right on the d-pad. Sounds like he played for a few minutes a wrote a review...
Reply
12-07-2007 @ 10:25AM
guttertalk said...
@Zack
Star Trek: Elite Force & Elite Force II for the PC were good.
I was really looking forward to this game: a strategy game for the Wii is a good thing, especially a space one.
Not that the game isn't bad, but quite frankly, Gamespot isn't much of a credible review source these days, and I've seen problems with IGN's reviews, like contradictions.
Reply
12-07-2007 @ 3:29PM
trekkie1701D said...
I got this game the week it came out. I really enjoy it, but being as there is no story-line really hurts it. There is also very few things to unlock, which would have at least made it a little more interesting. This game had a lot of potential! I wouldnt go as far as saying it was a 20%, I'd probably give it an 80% due to the lack of storymode and multiplayer.
Reply
12-09-2007 @ 3:08PM
Mike said...
I've spent some time with this game, and I think 20% is way too low a score. I think the 68% review is reasonable... I'd probably give it more like a 75% or so. I do think Star Trek fans will enjoy the game, and it's budget price is on point.
Reply