- Publisher: Interplay
- Release Date: Sep 7, 2000
- Critic score
- Publication
- By date
-
Granted, the game utilizes several really nice ideas that haven't been really been explored enough in the real-time strategy genre but for all of the good ideas, "New Worlds" still lacks focus, polish, and fun.
-
Daily RadarI'd like to know who decided to make a realtime strategy game, where some of the missions could last a solid 45 minutes to an hour, without the option to save the game.
-
Clearly an an unfinished game. We have yet to see whether the patch will remedy some of these problems. Well, quite frankly, there are too many obvious flaws and bugs, so it's going to have to be one helluva patch...
-
Yet another flop for the Star Trek game franchise. Has there ever been a good one? At this point I really can't recall any. The many failures such as this one cast clouds over the possible sunrise of any good games that may have been released.
-
Take this game back to the drawing board; make it a game that would be good WITHOUT the Star Trek name behind it and stop relying on a franchise to sell a product.
-
Everything looks the same, wasting nice graphics engine. A galaxy's worth of micromanagment.
-
The beautiful graphics and authentic Trek feel aren't enough to overcome the confused AI, awkward interface and glacially slow pace in what is ultimately a disappointing game.
-
PC GamerIf you don't ahve high expectations for a Trek RTS, then you won't be disappointed. [Nov 2000, p.160]
-
If you've played "Star Trek: Armada," you'll find that Star Trek: New Worlds provides the other point of view and will complete your collection.
-
Fans of "StarCraft" "WarCraft," and even "Myth" will love this new addition to the real-time strategy genre, and Trek fans finally have worlds of their own to build, populate -- or destroy.
-
The only connections this boring real-time strategy game has with "Star Trek" are the logo on the box, the names of the races, and the types of weapons that your units use.
-
The horrible game mechanics will keep all but the most die-hard Trekkies at bay.
-
A game which is wholly unsatisfying and verging on unplayable.
-
AntagonistWithout the Star Trek name on this one, it's just another faceless bad strategy game with a really nice body.
-
The construction sounds and repetitive voice samples may get on your nerves after a while, but this is a minor shortcoming.
-
The weak interface, annoying gameplay, and lack of variety and balance between the races make the game a failed experiment.
-
Trying to connect with another player caused my game to crash on numerous occasions and when I went to join a game on Mplayer, there was no one to be found. I guess I wasn't the only one having problems with this.
-
The repetitious battles and limited tech tree will leave RTS gamers wanting, and the story is contrived at best, so Trek fans will be disappointed.
-
A very good and interesting game it is indeed, and it would have gotten a higher rating from this humble reviewer if only they had remembered to include a game-save feature. As Spock was fond of saying: Most illogical.
-
CNET GamecenterIt goes where no Trek game has gone before -- and it should stay there!
-
A rockin' soundtrack along with quality sound effects and voice acting add to the production value, but can't improve the gameplay.
-
While the game is still a good one, I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to someone who was looking for a good RTS.
-
The game is boring and badly executed.
Awards & Rankings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 11 out of 18
-
Mixed: 3 out of 18
-
Negative: 4 out of 18
-
BillL.Jul 22, 2005
-
A.Z.Dec 16, 2001
-
DustonB.Dec 1, 2001