Star Trek: Tactical Assault

[Gregory DG]

Anyone get this for the DS or PSP yet? It's too close to my birthday to go buy it myself, and I haven't seen any reviews yet...

 

If anyone has it, please report in!

[Jess Ragan]

I tried the PSP version. It's slow... very, very slow. The control is also rather clumsy. You often have to press two buttons in sequence in order to access some options. I personally didn't care for it. Maybe it would be more enjoyable on a system with a touchscreen, but I'm not counting on it.

 

JR

[Gabriel]

Still waiting on my copy.

[Flojomojo]

I'll probably get the DS version after the holiday price purge. There's too much coming out right now!

 

Star Trek: Encounters for PS2 is a nice cheap ($15) arcade game if you want some Star Trek to tide you over until Legacy comes out and sells a million copies.

[SteveW]

Star Trek: Encounters isn't all that good a game, though. I gave up after 20 or so tries trying to fly the Enterprise through all the stupid rings during the training mission. If you miss one of them set on a different level, you've pretty much lost and have to play the training level over. And over. And over. Making the game playable on different levels wasn't a good design decision. If you didn't have to dip up or down, it would have been like a kick-ass version of Asteroids.

[Flojomojo]

Yup. It's "classic" gameplay, like Venture or Zaxxon. The game won't save until you reach the end of the mission, but the little sub-missions will allow you to start at the beginning without going too far back. The rings were annoying but defeatable with a little memorization and practice IMHO.

[+remowilliams]

Anyone get this for the DS or PSP yet? It's too close to my birthday to go buy it myself, and I haven't seen any reviews yet...

I picked it up yesterday, but haven't had much time to mess around with it. The graphics are no match for the PC Starfleet Command counterparts, but they appear serviceable. The touchscreen controls on the bottom look nice, but I'm not sure how usefull they'll actually be in combat. I was already manuereving with the Dpad (a given for sure) and using the buttons for speed control. Sound is decent, but the volume seemed way low.

 

Definitely more auction oriented over the PC SC games. I'll post a few more thoughts when I get back to it.

[Gabriel]

Star Trek: Encounters isn't all that good a game, though. I gave up after 20 or so tries trying to fly the Enterprise through all the stupid rings during the training mission. If you miss one of them set on a different level, you've pretty much lost and have to play the training level over. And over. And over. Making the game playable on different levels wasn't a good design decision. If you didn't have to dip up or down, it would have been like a kick-ass version of Asteroids.

 

There are certainly some very poor things about the game. The multiple level stuff seems tacked on and is completely extraneous. The ring level is just out and out stupid. And "scanning for warp trails" is almost as bad.

 

But then you get past that BS and start getting into the serious shooty stuff. Then the game starts to shine.

[+remowilliams]

Star Trek Encounters does suck.

 

I spent some more time with Star Trek: Tactical Assault, and so far it's pretty good. I don't know how much replay value is there, but the core game is pretty entertaining, and there's just enough of the tactical element to make it fun for me. It's been put into my DS carry bag, and I give it a thumbs up

[Gabriel]

Mine finally arrived (PSP version). I'm only 6 missions in, but here are my thoughts.

 

Graphics: They're servicable 3D graphics, but not up to PSP standards. I don't know how they compare to the graphics on the DS version. I imagine that the DS probably has much less detail and lower polycounts.

 

Game Engine: The game itself is like they took StarFleet Academy and replaced the battle system with an extremely stripped down StarFleet Command. In other words, you warp from sector to sector, hail and scan enemy ships, choose options from dialog boxes, and then have real-time tactical combats based on your response chain.

 

Don't think of the game as a shooter, or as a simulator. Think of it as a fast paced RTS where you have control of a single, very detailed, unit.

 

Control: Control is incredibly easy. Push up to accellerate. Push down to decellerate. Push left or right to turn. X fires phasers. O fires photons. Square hails ships. Triangle scans the area. Select is used to change alert status. The left shoulder button cycles targets. And the right shoulder button plus square warps you to a new sector.

 

Gameplay: I'm finding the game itself a bit of rough going. You have to be careful in your dialog choices when talking with enemy captains, or you might end up fighting multiple ships which are larger than what you currently have. Also, in battles where you have allies, the enemies ignore the other targets and focus their attention on you. You'd think they'd be a bit troubled by that Constitution class cruiser pumping phaser fire into them, but, instead, they're much more interested in focusing on their fire on your Destroyer.

[Lord Thag]

I picked this up as well. The game is pretty good, but it is hard as heck. You have to get used to fighting upwards of six enemy ships per mission by the time you hit Mission 8 or so. If you stick with it, and learn how to fight competently, the game is very fun and rewarding. It's that fair kind of difficult that rewards good players and punishes the lazy ones. Graphics are serviceable, if not outstanding. The game is currently one of my most played DS games. Good, solid stuff.

Edited November 28, 2006 by Lord Thag

[8BIT 1337]

I've played the PSP version and I found it really, really boring. The Star Trek universe just wasn't meant for video game ship to ship combat. I'll take a fast paced Star Wars game any day (Rogue Squadron, Starfighter) over the boring combat I had in ST:TA.

[Gabriel]

I've played the PSP version and I found it really, really boring. The Star Trek universe just wasn't meant for video game ship to ship combat. I'll take a fast paced Star Wars game any day (Rogue Squadron, Starfighter) over the boring combat I had in ST:TA.

 

Do you realize that you're comparing what is more or less a naval combat game featuring big lumbering battlewagons with guns facing every direction and complaining it doesn't play exactly like a game focusing on fast, nimble, forward-only firing fighter interceptors? Tactical Assault isn't like that because it's not trying to be that at all. It's trying to be a simpler version of Star Fleet Command (which is a real time computerized version of an extremely detailed turn based tabletop wargame), not a turn 'n burn flight sim.

 

If you prefer a faster paced game, Star Trek Encounters (PS2) is much more fitting of the bill. There's a skirmish mode which feels similar to a starship version of Robotron.

 

You should be able to find Shattered Universe (PS2 and XBox) available for cheap. You drive fightercraft in the Star Trek mythos and fight other fighters and the big ships.

 

And, of course, Star Trek Legacy (X360) is supposed to come out soon. It looks more of a traditional flight sim.

 

Or, if you're just looking for a flight sim (not Trek oriented), there's the excellent Ace Combat for the PSP.

[Flojomojo]

Gabriel gets it. It's WWII navy combat with battleships (Star Trek) vs. WWII air combat with fighter planes (Star Wars). The only thing they have in common is the "star" in the title. Star Trek came first, both on the screen and in computer games, and while it's not as viscerally exciting, it has a place.

 

Personally, I want a portable Star Raiders remake -- Star Trek tactics mixed with Star Wars 3D shooting fun. I guess Star Fox Command is close, as is Starmaster on the Activision collections...

[8BIT 1337]

Do you realize that you're comparing what is more or less a naval combat game featuring big lumbering battlewagons with guns facing every direction and complaining it doesn't play exactly like a game focusing on fast, nimble, forward-only firing fighter interceptors?

 

A better question is, do you realize that I'm the type of gamer who finds big lumbering naval combat incredibly boring and a waste of time?

 

That's is why I also mention I prefer fast, nimble combat. That way the reader can decide if they're going to like this type of game based on whether or not they like the same types of games I do.

 

It's just an opinion friend - there's no need to debate it.

Edited November 29, 2006 by Nature Boy

[Flojomojo]

It's just an opinion friend - there's no need to debate it.

Oho, I don't think you get off that easily, Nature Boy! The internet was invented for pointless debate!

 

It was you, Nature Boy, who made the specious comparison between Star Trek and Star Wars. Now you must live with the nerdly discourse which will follow:

 

Uhura vs. Leia?

Star Destroyer vs. Enterprise NCC-1701D

Tribbles vs. Ewoks

Harrison Ford vs. William Shatner

 

Expect frequent references to http://www.merzo.net/, the merits of CGI vs. plastic models, fans of green aliens, and maybe, if we're really lucky, perhaps we'll hear from someone into the whole Kirk/Spock thing.

 

[Gregory DG]

^^ Ugh... I could've gone my whole life without seeing that image of Kirk/Spock! (Although, I think the positions would be reversed if it were real...)

[+HatNJ]

Oh thats just not right

Edited November 29, 2006 by HatNJ

[Gabriel]

 

Uhura vs. Leia?

Star Destroyer vs. Enterprise NCC-1701D

Tribbles vs. Ewoks

Harrison Ford vs. William Shatner

 

Expect frequent references to http://www.merzo.net/, the merits of CGI vs. plastic models, fans of green aliens, and maybe, if we're really lucky, perhaps we'll hear from someone into the whole Kirk/Spock thing.

 

 

1) Uhura looked hot with funky hair. Leia was not accentuated by the bagel do'. Advantage: Uhura.

 

2) Picard would surrender, so the point is moot.

 

3) Tribbles hate Klingons. Ewoks smash walkers with giant logs. Too close to call.

 

4) Harrison Ford is a better actor. But William Shatner is THE SHAT! Advantage: William Shatner

 

5) Both CGI and plastic models can be crappy if done poorly. That said, if both are done equally well, CGI is infinitely superior.

 

6) Orion chixxorz r teh hawtness

 

7) Kirk is clearly the bottom.

[Lord Thag]

Uhura vs. Leia? I'll take the latter in that skimpy outfit she was wearin' hangin' with the giant slug, thank you very much.

 

Star Destroyer vs. Enterprise NCC-1701D. Giant sleek warship capable of being real awesome and shooty, or an ugly, fat idiotic looking ship where everything is handled via sub-committee and moral debate. Duh.

 

Tribbles vs. Ewoks. Hmm, hostile teddy bears vs vibrating keychain ornaments. I'll take the former.

 

Harrison Ford vs. William Shatner. Like this is even a contest. It's the SHATNER people. C'mon! The man is currently starring a show where he sexually harasses a midget and dresses in tights and wrestles that skinny slimey guy from DS9. NO CONTEST!

 

Of course, both franchises seem to be hell bent on spitting out continually worse movies, so they do have that in common.

 

Me, I'll take the new Battlestar Galactica and Firefly.

 

 

I am such a dork.

[8BIT 1337]

Uhura vs. Leia?

Star Destroyer vs. Enterprise NCC-1701D

Tribbles vs. Ewoks

Harrison Ford vs. William Shatner

 

Hmmm.

 

Uhura vs. Leia?

I'd choose option c - Padme!

 

Star Destroyer vs. Enterprise NCC-1701D

Call me crazy. ("Crazy!") But I'd go with the Star Destroyer here. Or again I'd go with option c and choose the Death Star!

 

Tribbles vs. Ewoks

My favourite Star Trek episode of all time is DS9s: "Trials and Tribblations." And as much as I like Star Wars, I've never really liked the Ewoks. The Tribbles win hands down, real easy like!

 

Harrison Ford vs. William Shatner

I really do like Harrison Ford, but it's an autographed picture of William Shatner that adorns my games room (as well as an autograph from Cletus of Dukes of Hazard fame and an as yet unautographed picture of Adam West as Batman). So this one is pretty easy too

[Gabriel]

 

Uhura vs. Leia?

I'd choose option c - Padme!

 

 

Hell, yeah. Comes complete with handlebars!

 

[Gregory DG]

Well, I ended up getting this for the DS the other day. I saw it at EB for it's standard $30 (or was it $35?) price tag. Then I saw it over at TRU for $20. It was the last one so I jumped on it.

 

It's not a bad game. Tough, certainly. Repetitious, so far. But I love the ship combat anyway. Plus you can't go wrong with a Captain Kirk voice over.

[+HatNJ]

I have it for the ds as well I don't like the firing mechanics couple shots and wait for recharge little sluggish on maneuvering but its ok for a quick fix

 

Why isnt there any decent Star Trek games where you can fly the ships decently good AI and just a decent game?