or: Abandon hope, all ye who have at least two brain cells to rattle together.

Writers Bob Orci, and Alex Kurtzman

The two retards are responsible for both Transformers movies and the clusterfuck of retard nonsense that made up the last Star Trek movie. And now they're helping to write this?

http://www.gametrailers.com/news/co-op-star-trek-title-coming/3439

It looks good.....also the last movie was a reboot. Of course it's gonna be different.

Different is fine. I like different, like the new Hulk movie compared to the other one.

Thoughtless, mindless, retarded, lacking any knowledge of crafting a plot, story, character development, let alone character, on the other hand, not so much.

Sometimes mindless gaming or movie watching is okay, you know.

It's a post by nondeplumage, so chances are I'll agree with the opinion anyway, but this opinion bears repeating, and hammering home again. I'll add: No respect for canon, continuity, moral subtlety, and overdoing lens flare effect like a 1st-year film student on a French New Wave kick abuses black-and-white mode in their digital short film.

It was so bad I quit somewhere at the 45 minute mark. Even the pile of adipose dreck that was Star Trek: Nemesis didn't prompt the abort that quick. In my opinion, Star Trek doesn't really loan itself well to feature film form. Some of the movies are engaging nonetheless and tell a decent one-off story, but to flourish Star Trek really needs the multi-episode format of the television season, so you can explore all the individual character and plot arcs with the ensemble cast with nuance and a sense of pace. But the movie format, and this is Paramount we're talking about here, so "blockbuster summer popcorn theater-seat filler" is implied (there isn't going to be a Cannes or Sundance Star Trek film, ever), tends to take the worst elements of Star Trek and magnify them. It's still too "Star Trek" for the average moviegoer, and for intelligent fans of the franchise insultingly dumbed down. I'm glad there were never any DS9 film adaptations for this reason.

Of course the Star Trek reboot raked in wheelbarrows of cash by being the most un-Star Trek of them all, so you can predict what will become of that franchise in years to come, as it marches down the path of Michael Bay-cum-Zack Snyder cultural oblivion.

As far as the STar Trek game goes...there hasn't been a good once since 2002's "Bridge Commander," so at least they can hardly do worse than the genre's latest offerings.

Reboots don't have to respect canon, you know.

And btw, stop being so pompous in your opinions.

yes because plot points such as 'Spock gets his brain removed and is controlled by a mechanical device' or 'furry creatures devour everything in sight' are just the pinnacle of story telling.

Perhaps this new game will suck, maybe it won't. Just give it a chance first you can't just dismiss it because you didn't like the fact they turned Star Trek into a summer blockbuster, adding new younger audiences to the Star Trek Franchise, I'm baffled at the reasoning behind so many people's anger at allowing new audiences to easily jump on board. Reboots do not detract from everything you've loved before, because those media pieces still exist, it just gives new people the ability to enjoy the license and if you really love your license as much as you say you do, you won't be against new people enjoying it even if it's in a different way to you.

Elite Force was among the few good Star Trek games. The big issue here though is that Paramount are, collectively, a big thundering cunt. So who knows how long this game will be on sale even if it makes it that far?

I'm a huge fan of Next Generation and Deep Space Nine, and I did kind of dislike how the new movie aimed for pop entertainment rather than Star Trek, but man you guys can be crazy about this stuff. It was still a pretty good movie, all things considered, and this game still has some good potential.

Between this and the Duke thread there is a hell of a lot of "my opinion is right because I am more refined than you" bullshit going on around here lately.

And you can do one better for forums everywhere and go die in a fire. Deal?

It's very nearly like reading comprehension, but you either forgot to actually read or failed to comprehend what the problem is.

and you assume that I was directly addressing your issue with the writers, which I'll address now by simply saying Stephen King is a writer some of his stories are good, some are bad, take each individual work as it comes.

I was leaving an open comment to everyone who would take an opposing stance to the game without playing it, or in fact this rampant hate for reboots I've seen knocking about quite a lot, especially in regards to the Star Trek reboot. It doesn't have much complexity in it's writing, because it's not aimed at that audience, it's aimed for people that aren't trek fans, to give them a Trek experience they'd enjoy. It's aimed at the average Joe walking down the street who likes big explosions and space, it's aimed at the current generation of 'cool' nerds who aren't inclined to sit down and do a character study of Spock, but rather use the name of Star Trek as recognition that they are a 'nerd' is this a bad thing? maybe, maybe not.

As for the game I feel it's downright wrong to turn around and dismiss the game before it's even got details besides 'the writers are from the film, it's co-op and a shooter' an infinite number of monkeys at a type writer will eventually write Shakespeare, you just don't know until you check.

Wait a sec... let me get this straight... a CO-OP Mass Effect is what there making? Sweet! i'll pre-order now!