This just in. Youpeople I be crazy. Yeah it has some major issues, but most games do these days. Its playable (to a point), and its some what fun (not after a point). Is it worth $60, hell no. But at $20 $1, if you like Star Trek, you should absolutely maybe think about playing it. I'm a little majorly bummed I paid full price for it. But I am at least enjoying it so far (well I was to a certain point). I am about one third of the way through the game, and I did that in about the same time it took for them to do the quick look. (continued on post #80)

Then again I also played TWD Survival Instinct and didn't think that was all that bad either. Maybe I just like bad games. (TWDSI is a goty compared to this game)

Now back to our regularly scheduled programing.

I don't have time for games that aren't completely awesome. Sad but true.

I think you just like bad games. But hey, I'm glad you're enjoying it, that's really all that matters.

#TeamBoned

It's not completely terrible. It has some decent ideas, and the presentation of the story's actually perfectly fine for a movie tie-in. There's just a lot of technical jank and poor pacing. Just feels like an inexperienced team with their hearts in the right place. If anything, I appreciate the amount of variety they at least attempt in it. It's totally playable. It also feels like more effort/time/budget was put into this as opposed to Survival Instinct(though even that had a couple of good ideas and moments in it, just a lack of money/development time). Kind of wish people would stop comparing the two.

Nothing I have seen from this screams "star trek" at me. It has the label but not the spirit. Then again, neither did the last Star Trek movie, even if it was an alright flick.

https://vine.co/v/bPLjdaKdZg5 Yeah... no. It's boned.

Looks as bad as Aliens to me.

@jdh5153: I didn't think Colonial Marines was that bad either. It was playable, and enjoyable.

@rabidcentipede: So, do you then don't like good games or do you think they are freakin fantastic?

@winternet: Give me an example. What do you think is a good game.

@rabidcentipede: Does that mean you don't know any good game? :D Anyway, Syndicate.

I didnt think it looked that bad tbh. (I also didnt mind TWD: survival instinct, but the zombie hug mechanic was fucking broken)

I'll probably play this at some point, maby not for awhile though I just got PSPlus and I heard Okami's pretty long...

o.O Maybe if you're on LSD while playing.

@winternet:I thought Syndicate was a pretty good game up until that first boss battle. I ended up getting very frustrated with it and ended up never playing it again though. But I thought everything before that (so probably most of the game) was pretty good.

If you are asking what games I think are great games, I don't judge games like most people I guess. I only base my opinion on my personal experience and playing time with them. I don't care what the general consensus is. I don't care what reviews say. With that said. Some games I think are "freaking fantastic" are Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Mass Effect (1,2 & 3), Spec Ops The Line, Skyrim, Ni No Kuni, P4G, Crusader Kings II, Dragon's Dogma, and a bunch more, but that is just off the top of my head.

Games that got a bad rap and or reviews that I enjoyed however: Alpha Protocol Two Worlds 1 & 2, Ventica, RAGE, Silent Hill Downpour, Risen 1& 2, and many more. This is just from this gen. And off the top of my head.

I guess I also don't have a tremendous hate reaction to games like most people. I am not that picky. As long as I can have fun in a game, that is all that matters. Yes, I do want games to be good, have a great story and great mechanics. But not every game can be a game of the year.

The standards for what makes a shooter "good" have gone up because the market is so saturated with them, so when one that's only OK comes along, it tends to get shunned maybe a bit more than it should. There are far better shooters out there to play, unless you've played all of them, in which case why not play something else?

If you're enjoying yourself, though, then continue to do so.

stop having realistic expectations i REALLY dont like it

this. Games are one of the most time consuming mediums so I can only afford(time wise) games that either get universally great reviews which I would feel bad for missing or games which I have personal favor for.

Is there any other way?

Holy shit.
So there are people out there who are able to form their very own opinions about games(and books, and movies and so on) and not just doing like the majority of dead fish and go with the flow?!
You are a welcome sight among a sea of brainwashed drones!

Let us make a club of pretty cool people.
It'll just be you and me so the beer is free, at least.

It just looks supremely boring to me.

If it's something you enjoy, enjoy it.

I heard the game was bad before I got it. I've played through the first 2 missions already and am starting to see the issues with the game. That being said, it is not completely trash. If you are a Star Trek fan, you will most likely enjoy this game. This game falls into the category of "it's not a great game, but I like it cause I really enjoy this fiction" i.e. Ghostbusters or Jurassic Park games.

Admitting it has major issues is the same thing as saying it's boned.

I don't know. I like a lot of games that have major issues. Mirror's Edge is one of my favorite games this generation and it has big problems.

Nah, if it were truly boned, it would be an unplayable or nearly unplayable mess. Big Rigs is boned. Drake of the 99 Dragons is boned. Star Trek? A middling if buggy licensed video game, but not boned.

I'm in the same boat as OP. If I enjoy a game for its game play, why should I care what reviewers think or what the average gamer thinks about it? In my opinion, what only makes a game bad is when it becomes unplayable because of bugs.

@rabidcentipede: We're not crazy! You pointed this out yourself: for $20, Star Trek is not bad. But it's not $20 dollars. It's $60. Reviews have to take in the price, right? Otherwise you could say "well when this game becomes 2 bucks it'll be a pretty great deal!"

I don't think playable really cuts it anymore for me, a game needs to be at least good or interesting to get my attention and this seems like neither.

What a movie still deserve a good review if it was filled with huge, preventable mistakes? People want to call games art, or at least something on par with movies, and then when they're rotten shit they still want to stick up for them. You can't have it both ways, you have to hold things to a higher standard . This game shouldn't have been made, or at least at the $60 price. Maybe as a $15 XBLA game...

Holy shit.

Not everybody is made of infinite money. I (and I assume many others as well) can't buy every game that comes along simply because it might be an underrated gem. Also, as I said earlier, I've got too many other things to do in the day to spend my free time playing an inferior game when that time could be better spent playing a game that I don't have to make concessions to enjoy.

lol

They're called opinions. Perhaps you have heard of them and how they function.

Never said any of those things and my point apparantly flew right over your head.
But at least you had a point to something someone said somewhere, so good on you.. I think? :P

If you took offence to the "brainwashed drones" part(I'm just guessing here) then I didn't mean Giant Bomb people.
More just internet people in general that just go "YEAH! This game totally sucks. Everything is so bad about it, gameplay, music, characters, everything"
Then you ask them if they have actually played the game and they go
"no, but someone told me so"
It's just sad.

Really? I mean, really? Are you saying that everything that is playable is instantly good? Just like every movie that is watchable is good and every music album that is listenable is good?

Exactly.

I am bummed that I used a gift card on a mediocre Star Trek game personally.

This game is so boned its metaphorical rectum is the size of the proverbial grapefruit. That makes no sense but dems the bones.

I'll rent it at Red Box tonight and see if my girlfriend will suffer through it a bit with me after we're drunk. Maybe the alcohol will make it playable.

I'll say this, if you compare this to other movie games, it doesn't look as bad as Thor or Captain America...But looking at it as a supposed AAA game with a $60 price tag...It looks pretty shitty. So compared to shit I'd say it looks like not so bad smelling shit. Compared to everything else? I wouldn't want this on my shoe.

I didn't take offense to anything. I was mostly responding to @rabidcentipede's statement that "I only base my opinion on my personal experience and playing time with them. I don't care what the general consensus is. I don't care what reviews say," but you also agreed with him, so I guess I was responding to you too.

And I also never accused you of saying anything. I was merely trying to point out that it's really hard to ignore reviews and develop your own opinion on a game when you have limited time and money. I have limited time and money, so I look to reviews, gameplay videos, and word-of-mouth to inform my purchasing decisions. I was also trying to point out that (and this is really a huge shame - the death of the B-tier game and all that) I simply don't have enough time in the day to devote what free time I have to playing games that I probably won't enjoy.

It's not about being or not being made of infinite money. It's about playing what interests you regardless of popular perception.

Done. Should be interesting.

@jdh5153: D'aww :3

Its interesting that this games apologist also have to give caveats while insisting people should play it.

I've seen people play it. This game is pretty bad.

I have no problem with bad games, but this game has the cardinal sin of entertainment. It's just boring and dull.

Now I am sure you can create something interesting out of that (In fact I'm pretty positive you can) but as it doesn't work as intended and is a pretty low quality game I have no interest in it.

To be fair though, I'm no Star Trek fan so it wasn't hard for me to not be interested in it already I guess.

Well, we're on a video game review site, whose entire purpose is to shape your opinion of a game independent of personal experience based on the opinions of others.

So a few things: a) I dunno if would call giant bomb a video game review site. I mean, do you think that reviews are the central piece of this site? I don't think so b) The main purpose of Giant Bomb is to entertain us. And while they do that they also give enough info, opinions and interpretations that will help shape our own opinions c) While GB helps shape our opinions, it's not the most important thing on creating an opinion. For example, as much as Jeff talked highly of Syndicate through 2012, and it most definitely had an impact on my own opinion, I still don't think that Syndicate is that great nor I think that it was one of the top 10 games of last year.

@winternet: Jeff has said it many times: video game reviews should serve as a buyers guide, and lose its relevance and purpose the longer a game is out. As a buyer's guide, it's there to shape your opinion on if a game is worth putting down money for before you've had any personal experience with it.

@turambar: But, that's your opinion on "if a game is worth putting down money for" and not your opinion on the actual game, which is what we were talking about before. It's two different opinions on two different subjects.