User Reviews (1 - 11 of 55)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Would be good if I could play this

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 9 / 13
Date: October 24, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I actually purchased this twice and had to return it twice. I could not get it to play on my unit. I checked on Bethesda website I found several posts in there discussions section about the same thing. It apparently has something to do with it being on a blue disk instead of a dvd so the company could save money.

If anyone else out there has had the same problem let us know.

Many technicalities forces the game to not follow the series very well

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 3 / 5
Date: December 06, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Since I started Star Trek gaming I've always wanted to fly the big ships. The SFC series allowed me to do this, but it wasn't in three dimensions, as space is in reality. So you can imagine how excited I was to find out about this game. Unfortunately I was very disappointed even though I was able to move around in three dimensions. I think Bethesda just doesn't know what people want anymore. The Enterprise missions did not resemble anything that happened in the series. For some reason the Xindi Reptilian is the most powerful Xindi ship in the game. The Aquatics had the best ships, but were left out completely. In stead, they used Xindi Arboreal cruisers. The Arboreal are not warriors and their ships are poorly armed, why they were chosen to contribute to a clearly shooter game is beyond me. The Genesis mission hardly resembled the movie. For some reason the people at Bethesda think that following invisible trails is fun because there are at least two missions like that. For some reason the warp trail zigzag. Zigzagging is not the best idea when traveling faster than light, and I'm pretty sure they established that in the show. The intro movies cannot be skipped, which would be fine if they were interesting or exciting but they're not. Every time you lose and have to restart from a checkpoint, you have to watch the movie again. The Klingon Vor'cha class does not belong in the TOS section of the game, but for some reason it is there. The training mission (the first mission) is both annoying and unnecessary. For some reason the Klingons are the second weakest race in the game. Even the Cardassians are stronger, even though the Klingons nearly conquered the Cardassian Empire in Deep Space 9. Most of the TNG missions are tolerable, but none are really that fun. The best missions are the Deep Space 9 missions, which can be expected for a shooting game, because the second half of Deep Space 9 was all about the war with the Dominion. Unfortunately there are only two of the DS9 missions. One mission is mostly played as Deep Space 9, which is great until you spend literally eight minutes just shooting asteroids that are only coming from one direction. The only thing they seemed to get right is the Defiant. The Federations only real battleship should be the best Federation ship in the game, and it is. I managed to quadruple Kirk's high score in onslaught with the Defiant more than once. I couldn't even come close with any of the other ships. The use of mines in the game is both annoying and unnecessary. They take at least half of your energy supply, and mines were never used in dogfights in the show. They were only used in large fields to protect planets or the wormhole in Deep Space 9. Furthermore, I don not understand why the Defiant shoots photon torpedoes instead of quantum torpedoes, why the NX-01 has phasers instead of phase cannons, why the Cardassians are harder to beat than the Klingons, Borg, Species 8472, and Romulans. The Cardassian, Romulan, and Borg ships are very confusing. The Cardassian fighter is something that Bethesda came up with, the cruiser barley resembles the cruisers seen in the show, and the freighters are apparently more powerful than the cruisers. The Romulan "Defender" is simply a Warbird from the original show and the "Raptor" is an exact copy of the Warbird from TNG only smaller. So you are essentially fighting three generations of Romulan Warbirds. Bethesda got the Borg sphere correct, but a Borg Tactical Cube is less formidable than the standard Borg Cube. Lastly, one of the Voyager missions is almost an exact copy of an episode taken from TNG. If they wanted to have that specific mission, for what ever reason, they should have at least put it in the correct series. It does not make sense for that mission to be in Voyager. It is based off the episode of TNG where Romulans, Humans, Cardassians, and Klingons are racing around the quadrant collecting DNA samples to unlock some sort of ancient secret, which turns out being the source of all life in the Milky Way Galaxy. This race is between the Kazon and Voyager in the game. Voyager is just trying to get home, and the Kazon probably thought it was a weapon as the Klingons did in the show. Any intelligence Voyager would have had on the secret would have come from the Kazon, so for Voyager to be wasting time finding some sort of ancient weapon does not make much sense.

To be honest Onslaught is the most fun function of the game. But Onslaught isn't fun just being able to use the old NX ships. So you have to play the missions in order to unlock ships to make it more fun. I would suggest waiting for the game to go on some sort of sale before you buy it. Don't rent it because it would be a waste of money. The Enterprise and Original Series missions need to be played in small doses or you will want to put your controller through the screen. You won't get to do anything fun if you rent it. There is little need to play the missions after you unlock the Defiant because the ships unlocked after that are not very good. Unless of course you wanted to play battlefest as the Borg. Battlefest is fun, but you spend more time waiting for the loading screens to finish than you do blowing stuff up.

If you are looking for a Star Trek game that uses the big ships and you have a computer that can handle it, go for the Starfleet Command series. It is less of a shooter game, but the missions are less annoying and you don't have to unlock ships for skirmish. The graphics for 3 weren't much worse than Encounters, and you can't move in three dimensions, but you can modify and upgrade ship systems. For example, you could fire both Quantum and Photon torpedoes from the Defiant if you wanted to. As far as I know, there is no way to customize your ship on Encounters.

Blue disc on this game doesn't work!!!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 3
Date: November 27, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I played this game a total of 3 times and this game kept coming up "Bad disc error" or something like that. I already returned it once and it's going back again, apparently I'm not the only one having this problem. Bethesda really screwed up on this one!.

To be honest ... it sucks!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 14
Date: October 31, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Sorry all you trekkies and trekkers out there, but I "encountered" a few problems that made me didn't want to play through "Star Trek Encounters" any longer. Ships didnt go fast enough, the controls are EXTREMELY CLUNKY, cheesy graphics, difficulty in locking on to specific areas of an enemy ship to fire weapons at them, but the MAIN problem was the stupid radar/sensor that I constantly had to use in order to find warp trails from enemy ships and lock on to them. To give you and ideal of what i'm talking about, picture yourself blind and sitting in the dark, when suddenly, one of your contact lenses pop out of your eye and you stoop down on the floor to try to find it. Yes, that's how bad trying to find things with the radar/sensor is. Now don't get me wrong, I like star trek, I like it very much. And I really really REALLY tried to like this game. But, unfortunately, it wasn't a very good play, and given the history of the star trek franchise, (all you trekkies and trekkers out there can agree with me on this one) that this game could have and SHOULD HAVE been way better.

On a nicer note, the game did have pretty exposives. But that still don't make it a good game. It's a boring game!

Anyway, to make a long story short, I took the game back to the store and got my money back. Now I will use my refund and spend it on the next star trek game that comes out. Noooo, not "Star Trek Legacy" ....., the OTHER star trek game. The one that comes out tomorrow and is of a more higher quality... (the one called "Final Fantasy VII") Yeah... now that's what I call a REAL star trek game.

Game doesn't work. Don't waste your time.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: January 10, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Do a quick search on the internet, or through the rest of the reviews here, and you'll see this game has a high failure rate. The game comes on a blue CD instead of a silver DVD to save a few cents. This alone should not cause it to fail, but it does. My PS2 will not read the disc at all, but reads all other blue CD's just fine. Many others have had the same problem. Bethesda tech support tells you to turn your PS2 on its side, or upside down to get it to work. If that fails, they tell you to keep swapping the game out until you get one to work. Don't take my word for it though, check out their forums: [....]

All this is not worth it for the horrible reviews the game gets when it does work. Tech support was useless at resolving my problem, or in helping me in any way. They also don't seem to know the difference between a CD and a DVD, and think "older" PS2's can't play blue CD discs, which they can. Avoid this game.

Game was unreadable

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: November 27, 2006
Author: Amazon User

This game did not work at all, it was a rip off, I see I was not the only customer with this problem. Waste of money very unhappy about this seller.

Horrible gameplay mechanics

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: December 02, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I love the concept of flying around a starship shooting at enemy ships in the trek universes. Problem is, the game control mechanics are the absolute worse I've ever seen in any 3D space game. X-Wing in the mid 90's had vastly superior gameplay mechanics. Which the basic concept of the game is a good one, the implementation is just so poor that it isn't even worth $15. You're locked in to playing just the "Enterprise" series ships until you complete some totally obtuse objectives that mainly exist to teach you the horrible gameplay mechanics. Avoid it.

Bethesda Design company big let down

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: December 03, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I've played alot of Star Trek Games. Going back to the original Star Trek game for the Nintendo 1!

This is by far the stupidest game ever designed. The training course alone is enough to drive you insane.

The visuals are not stunning. The game play is pretty lame. And you can't even skip the cut scenes! Almost 90% of PS2 games allow you to skip cut scenes if you want to go on with the game. Plus it takes like two minutes to load the Main menu! Its billed as shoot em up, but you view it from a semi bird's eye view.

My purchase was an impulse buy. If you are reading this stay the hell away from this game.

I think that the design company went extremely cheap with this game as if though it was designed by 15 year old high school students or something. This has given me serious second thoughts about Bethesda's other game for the PC Legacy.

BY FAR THE WORST TREK GAME EVER!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: December 07, 2006
Author: Amazon User

i saw this one on the shelf and grabed it and ran to the check out, didnt even know it was coming out (thats a red flag right there) put it in and the first thing i noticed was the bad music, star trek games allways have good music in them much like the movies and shows, this game replays the same tune over and over. gameplay?? sucks. took me longer to learn the controls good enough to pass the first three missions than the rest of the game took to finish, and the process was very enrageing. there is no story line at all. some cheap narator who sounds like shatner (hopefully its not, it sounds that bad) reads the mission title and briefing at the begining of SOME of the missions. the only good thing i can say about this game it the graphics look great, the ships and explosions are cool. its my hope that this was a bare bones model for how legacy is going to be because this game had potential, but it either ran out of money or didnt have much to start with. definately do not buy this game, rent it, borrow it from your die-hard trekie buddy, but dont buy it.

You get what you pay for

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 3
Date: January 04, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Without exaggeration, this game is the worst game I have every played.

I feel taken advantage of. Game develops know that they are guaranteed a certain level of sales if they are able to license the Star Trek name and stories from Paramount. Bethesda has taken advantage of every single Star Trek fan out there by creating a steaming, unplayable turd of a game and calling it "Star Trek."

Don't waste your hard-won earnings on this game like I did. I will never buy another game made by Bethesda ever again.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next 

Actions