Stardate: 24204.2

Today, we bring news regarding the future of Star Trek: Infinite, a journey we've embarked on together with a lot of excitement.

Sadly, we must inform you that Star Trek: Infinite will not receive further updates.

Together, we've explored distant worlds, faced formidable adversaries, and created a community bound by a shared love for the Star Trek universe.

We want to extend our gratitude to those who have been the backbone of this journey. To the incredible team at Nimble Giant whose dedication and creativity made Star Trek: Infinite a reality. Working alongside such a talented group has been a privilege.

Equally, our partners at Paramount deserve a world of thanks. Your support and insights have been an invaluable resource, enriching our development process and enabling us to craft the game that stands before our community today. Your commitment to this project has helped us navigate the vastness of the Star Trek universe with authenticity and passion.

Lastly, we cannot express enough gratitude for you, our community, for your support, enthusiasm, and dedication. Your engagement, feedback, and passion have been the driving force behind this adventure. You've built more than just a player base; you've forged a community of explorers united under the banner of Star Trek.

Though our journey in updating Star Trek: Infinite concludes here, the universe we've created together remains. The legacy of Star Trek: Infinite will live on through you, the community, and the adventures you continue to share.

Thank you for being a part of this incredible voyage, live long and prosper.

 

[tearlaidh]

Paradox, you're nothing but thieving market peddlers.

 

[SpacemanRyan]

.......

TL;DR: Playercount to low. Sorry for devs and players. Not a cashgrab by PDX but merely a cutting of losses. With a hyperbolic the fanbase did this by themselves.

I respect your viewpoint, and you are not entirely wrong about the cascading effect of negative reviews, however if you look at the qualitative contents of those negative reviews you will find a lot of well reasoned opinions.

Simply put, this game did nothing to satisfy its player base and deserves to have a double digit player count. If there were redeeming aspects, people would still be playing it. If there were signs that PDX was going to stand behind this product, players would have stuck with it, learning the mechanics while the game matured as we are all accustomed to when playing PDX software.

Unfortunately, there was every sign in the world that this game was gonna die young and the redeeming qualities are few and far between. The licensed IP is so thin that it reeks of "if we invest X amount of money to secure the brand, we can make X+Y amount of profit".

I'm glad I was able to get my money back from this game, but there are many players who feel used. Add in the fact that we are at two weeks now without the Steam Store page being updated with the last dev log, that PDX is still representing this to new customers as a game with responsive devs actively working to improve, and the whole debacle just seems so sordid.

Maybe the negative reviews killed this game.

Or maybe, in this case, the reviews are as such because thats exactly what the game and it's developers deserved.

 

[UndyingNephalim]

And to anyone calling this a cashgrab, based on the estimated owners, even if the higher ones are correct, which I find unlikly, I don't think the devs or PDX made any money on this.

For the record, a cashgrab does not mean that a company in question actually grabbed a bunch of cash. When people call the game a cash grab, they mean the intentions of the developer. People believe that the sole motivation behind making this game was to make a quick buck off of starving Star Trek fans. When you take into account a lot of the information surrounding the title (releasing with far less content then two massive free mods for example), it certainly feels that way. Most cash grabs actually do fail which is one of the reasons they are a highly discouraged business practice. Even ones that do succeed can end up ruining reputations and resulting in problems down the road. I don't know what the motivations behind the scenes were, honestly it just sounds like marketing incompetence and the usual Embracer Group dropping everything nonsense.

The irony is the very concept of this game should have been a very easy slam dunk. Just make Star Trek Stellaris, fix bugs, add Borg and Dominion DLC = Easy $$$$$$

 

[GeBuch]

I respect your viewpoint, and you are not entirely wrong about the cascading effect of negative reviews, however if you look at the qualitative contents of those negative reviews you will find a lot of well reasoned opinions.

You're right about there being many well reasoned (negative) reviews. And the reviews warning about the end of development are right to call this fact out. But especially here it also felt very toxic.

Simply put, this game did nothing to satisfy its player base and deserves to have a double digit player count. If there were redeeming aspects, people would still be playing it. If there were signs that PDX was going to stand behind this product, players would have stuck with it, learning the mechanics while the game matured as we are all accustomed to when playing PDX software.

For this approach to work there would need be a critacal mass of players, so that even if the game is not initially successfull, it has enough player support that potential updates and DLC push it up to (near) the top in the Steam rankings for a few days.

Unfortunately, there was every sign in the world that this game was gonna die young and the redeeming qualities are few and far between. The licensed IP is so thin that it reeks of "if we invest X amount of money to secure the brand, we can make X+Y amount of profit".

Since i haven't played it I can't judge the aspect of how well it interprets the license. But in regards to the intent/reasoning, the PDX people that I have met are aware that the motive that you have assigned them is incredibly shortsighted. IMO this was more of a trial to see wether a licensed product based on the clausewitz engine could work.

I'm glad I was able to get my money back from this game, but there are many players who feel used. Add in the fact that we are at two weeks now without the Steam Store page being updated with the last dev log, that PDX is still representing this to new customers as a game with responsive devs actively working to improve, and the whole debacle just seems so sordid.

Maybe the negative reviews killed this game.

Or maybe, in this case, the reviews are as such because thats exactly what the game and it's developers deserved.

It's probably deserved, at least that is my impression based on the reviews. I'm slightly coutious because the PDX community has at times been unfairly harsh to new titles and compared them to games that have been developed for a very long time. So if there had been no Stellaris or only Stellaris 1.0 would people have had the same problems? Or are some issues only because of how good Stellaris is and how great many of the mods are? And if it's the latter, than i would like to remind prople that there were quite a few comments calling for this game to be made, even though the ST:NH did already exist.

For the record, a cashgrab does not mean that a company in question actually grabbed a bunch of cash. When people call the game a cash grab, they mean the intentions of the developer. People believe that the sole motivation behind making this game was to make a quick buck off of starving Star Trek fans. When you take into account a lot of the information surrounding the title (releasing with far less content then two massive free mods for example), it certainly feels that way. Most cash grabs actually do fail which is one of the reasons they are a highly discouraged business practice. Event ones that do succeed can end up ruining reputations and resulting in problems down the road. I don't know what the motivations behind the scenes were, honestly it just sounds like marketing incompetence and the usual Embracer Group dropping everything nonsense.

When i think cashgrab I think of all the sports franchise games, barely any change just a different roster and then asking fulll price for it. And they are (sadly) huge successes for the publishers. So barely any effort and little risk but significant payoff.

The irony is the very concept of this game should have been a very easy slam dunk. Just make Star Trek Stellaris, fix bugs, add Borg and Dominion DLC = Easy $$$$$$

I think there is some significant risk here, it's in direct competition with one of PDS/PDX main efforts and even the unique theme is already being served by a community mod. It's also a more significant effort, the guys behind the mod put a very significant amount of time into it and PDS has enabled them, not just by putting out features, that can be reused, as paid DLC, but also by making many base game features more moddable and extendable with every free patch. Pretty much every major update includes significant improvements for (and often requested by) mod creators. Any new Stellaris-like game based on an existing IP is just lagging to far behind to be "Easy $$$$$$"


So in summary I don't think the whole "Stellaris but Star Trek"-thing is such an easy thing to pull off, just the most obvious out of all potential IPs that could fit a Stellaris-like game. You guys are most likely right that there are some significant issues, I just don't know what was the Devs starting point was and what the community is using as comparison. Considering for how long the community has called for this type of game to be made (and similiar, like I remember also alot of people calling for an official CK2 + AGOT), it was probably that an opportunity eventually presented itself and PDX agreed to finally give the concept of licensed IP + Clausewitz a try. If PDX was just looking for a cashgrab opportunity there would have been even better targets. Games Workshop has been giving licenses to any dev that asks, and such a game would probably have had alot more hype.

 

[Oleg V.F.]

I just don't know what was the Devs starting point was and what the community is using as comparison.

To a good publisher/developer do not interfere negative reviews to complete the game to mind. It's food for error correction. And the attempt to cancel the development with the inability to return money to customers speaks for itself. And those who suffered correctly believe that they were tricked...

There is a saying: "The guy said, the guy did". You need to call a spade a spade, and not try to hide behind negative reviews and excuses to the publisher / developer, blaming all the troubles on customers who bought the game and wrote a negative review... No game pays off in a quarter/year.

 

[Carighan]

This feels like a betrayal for those of us who paid for a functional game and still don't have one.

While this does not excuse releasing games unfinished, independent of that you should never be in a position where you forked over money for a disappointing product as with video games, you can ~always just wait until they are released and post-release reviews are available.

(edit)
And in general, I will say that if you enjoy the content of the game it had at release, then not everything needs years of DLC and 300€+ of extra cash investment. Not every game needs to become your lifestyle. Some of the best gaming experiences are quite compact, one-and-done, games. So if you enjoy a fairly lightweight grand strategy in a Star Trek setting for a few months, that might well be worth the money asked.

It wasn't for me (and hence no buy) but who am I to judge what others enjoy?

 

[Oleg V.F.]

While this does not excuse releasing games unfinished, independent of that you should never be in a position where you forked over money for a disappointing product as with video games, you can ~always just wait until they are released and post-release reviews are available.

This is what those who are going to write the opposite of what was written before are writing - psychology and an attempt to influence the masses.

And in general, I will say that if you enjoy the content of the game it had at release, then not everything needs years of DLC and 300€+ of extra cash investment. Not every game needs to become your lifestyle. Some of the best gaming experiences are quite compact, one-and-done, games. So if you enjoy a fairly lightweight grand strategy in a Star Trek setting for a few months, that might well be worth the money asked.

Is trying to influence the masses again, justifying the current situation with the game.

How can you enjoy a raw game with bugs in the code? In fact, the game cannot be completed if it contains problems. Don't talk nonsense... Star Trek Infinite is not a bug-free game, so your comment is inappropriate and doesn't make sense. Everything you wrote refers to completed games in which DLС was not planned to be released to expand the game.

 

[Oleg V.F.]

The developer, in order to sell the game, is not obliged to pander fans of Star Trek movies. The game can be created in the Star Trek universe, but with its own narrative - this does not spoil the game, but makes it self-sufficient and original. It is not possible to please the fans in principle, they will always find something to complain about in the game in order to remain unsatisfied.

As a rule, high expectations of fans and the desire of publishers to make money quickly - kill games, since many games are being developed today, those who bought the game may not immediately log into the game, which means that it is wrong to measure popularity by the number of players playing during the day. The raw state of the game with errors will further distance the players from the game, and the player will have to wait for it to be fixed, which did not actually happen. The easiest way - stopping developing the game by reducing the staff who worked on the game, rather than bringing it to mind by fixing bugs in the game.

A fan - is a fanatic who is fanatical about something, creating problems for the creators, pointing out, as it seems to him, certain problems in the film or the game, believing that he knows better how it should be. This is a kind of disease when a fans seeks to create problems for others.

 

[Herrebrugh]

EDIT: There was a post quoted here, which has seemingly been deleted, arguing that the game failed due to being completely wrong about the lore.

To be honest, I've watched all (live action) Star Trek series fairly recently and I wouldn't be able to even remotely play the Star Trek historian you are. I still agree with your point, though, but more in the visual and sound design. I can excuse a fan not being able to give a rundown of a series' lore from A to Z on command, but surely one can remember, and is gripped by, the look and feel of that series? None of that could be seen in this game. The lack of special sounds for the weapons has been noted, but the music is also just vaguely 'space-y', and none of the strongly developed visual identities of Star Trek can be found here. The UI makes some vague nods to the iconic LCARS of TNG, and that's it. I could definitely make a better and more atmospheric UI, simply by staying close to the source material. In fact, I started doing just that for a mod, but the state of the game at launch and the already lacking development made me feel I was wasting my time.

 

[Carighan]

How can you enjoy a raw game with bugs in the code? In fact, the game cannot be completed if it contains problems. Don't talk nonsense... Star Trek Infinite is not a bug-free game, so your comment is inappropriate and doesn't make sense. Everything you wrote refers to completed games in which DLС was not planned to be released to expand the game.

I don't. My point is that if someone bought the game, clearly they could.

The issues were known, and they paid for the amount of content that was in the game, so even with the lack of content and the bugs, it was clearly worth the money at the time, so lack of further releases and polishing seems to not be an issue to them.

 

[corestandeven]

EDIT: There was a post quoted here, which has seemingly been deleted, arguing that the game failed due to being completely wrong about the lore.

To be honest, I've watched all (live action) Star Trek series fairly recently and I wouldn't be able to even remotely play the Star Trek historian you are. I still agree with your point, though, but more in the visual and sound design. I can excuse a fan not being able to give a rundown of a series' lore from A to Z on command, but surely one can remember, and is gripped by, the look and feel of that series? None of that could be seen in this game. The lack of special sounds for the weapons has been noted, but the music is also just vaguely 'space-y', and none of the strongly developed visual identities of Star Trek can be found here. The UI makes some vague nods to the iconic LCARS of TNG, and that's it. I could definitely make a better and more atmospheric UI, simply by staying close to the source material. In fact, I started doing just that for a mod, but the state of the game at launch and the already lacking development made me feel I was wasting my time.

Exactly. Most Star Trek fans were not after an experience that religiously follows the events in the series. Its would be like playing an Axis power in Hearts of Iron and getting angry that your side won because that is not historically accurate. What would be the point of playing? But you do want, and expect, the lore to be accurate and fit with the series. The anology going back to HoI would be playing a historical WW2 era game, and suddenly laser weapons were able to be built, it would kill the immersion.

STI was littered with issues, and some very basic things that most fans would know. Does the Defiant ever fire green disrupters in any episode? Do Romulan ships ever fire yellow phasers? Does the Excelisor come after the Defiant and Intrepid? Do Federation starships FTL jump away when retreating? Does the Federation have 'Governors'? As Herrebrugh raises, most fans know what photon torpedoes sound like, and within seconds you can find that sound file online. Does this game bother with any ST sounds, nope. The buildings you can build all look very generic sci-fi. etc.

Fans wanted a decent Star Trek strategy game that was faithful to the series. Instead we got a cheap Stellaris knockoff, where the devs couldn't even be bothered to make it feel like Star Trek, and funny enough there was backlash.

Also yeah, there are some ragey negative reviews, and some toxic ones, but many have entirely reasonable things to say. Some of which were spotted well before release and were tried to be flagged to the devs, but were ignored.

 

[Dragon_King_1]

EDIT: There was a post quoted here, which has seemingly been deleted, arguing that the game failed due to being completely wrong about the lore.

To be honest, I've watched all (live action) Star Trek series fairly recently and I wouldn't be able to even remotely play the Star Trek historian you are. I still agree with your point, though, but more in the visual and sound design. I can excuse a fan not being able to give a rundown of a series' lore from A to Z on command, but surely one can remember, and is gripped by, the look and feel of that series? None of that could be seen in this game. The lack of special sounds for the weapons has been noted, but the music is also just vaguely 'space-y', and none of the strongly developed visual identities of Star Trek can be found here. The UI makes some vague nods to the iconic LCARS of TNG, and that's it. I could definitely make a better and more atmospheric UI, simply by staying close to the source material. In fact, I started doing just that for a mod, but the state of the game at launch and the already lacking development made me feel I was wasting my time.

It was less about the movies and more about the television shows. The whole thing was way off, too far off in fact.

For the Federation at least, their iconic technologies needed to be researched. Technology and ships that should have been in from game start (phasers, photon torpedoes) not only had to be researched, but some were developed massively later than the lore states (like the Excelsior-class, which was developed long before TNG.)

Not only that but groups that should have been in the Federation or at least known by them were instead completely missing, or independent. By the time this game takes place, Risa was a member of the Federation, Denobula was a member of the Federation, and the Betazed Houses [paging Counselor Troi!] were a member of the Federation. The Nausicaan Pirates were not part of the Federation but the race was in fact known TO the Federation, hell one of the major plot points of an episode of TNG and the reason Picard had an artificial heart, was because a Nausicaan dealt him a fatal blow while he was still a young lieutenant, long before the start of the series.

Exactly. Most Star Trek fans were not after an experience that religiously follows the events in the series. It would be like playing an Axis power in Hearts of Iron and getting angry that your side won because that is not historically accurate. What would be the point of playing? But you do want, and expect, the lore to be accurate and fit with the series. The anology going back to HoI would be playing a historical WW2 era game, and suddenly laser weapons were able to be built, it would kill the immersion.

STI was littered with issues, and some very basic things that most fans would know. Does the Defiant ever fire green disrupters in any episode? Do Romulan ships ever fire yellow phasers? Does the Excelisor come after the Defiant and Intrepid? Do Federation starships FTL jump away when retreating? Does the Federation have 'Governors'? As Herrebrugh raises, most fans know what photon torpedoes sound like, and within seconds you can find that sound file online. Does this game bother with any ST sounds, nope. The buildings you can build all look very generic sci-fi. etc.

Fans wanted a decent Star Trek strategy game that was faithful to the series. Instead, we got a cheap Stellaris knockoff, where the devs couldn't even be bothered to make it feel like Star Trek, and funny enough there was backlash.

Also yeah, there are some ragey negative reviews, and some toxic ones, but many have entirely reasonable things to say. Some of which were spotted well before release and were tried to be flagged to the devs, but were ignored.

This, exactly this. Even the most basic fan knows what color a phaser or disruptor blast is, or what a photon torpedo looks and sounds like, or when the Excelsior-class was supposed to be developed. Phasers are orange, disruptors are green, photon torpedoes are orange, and the Excelsior was developed right after the Miranda, way back in the 23rd century.

As corestandeven says, we wanted a decent Star Trek strategy game that was faithful to the series, even if it had to bend the lore a bit. Instead we got a Star Trek-themed Stellaris copy which the developers couldn't even be bothered to make it look and feel like Star Trek.

I firmly believe that the developers of Star Trek Infinite clearly never watched a single solitary episode of Star Trek in all their lives. If they had, they'd know these very basic things that even the least-knowledgeable Star Trek fan knows.

For being a passion project about Star Trek, IMHO these developers were clearly very dis-passionate. To me, and to many others, it is clear they have no business anywhere near this franchise, as they are clearly not fans of it since they can't even get the most basic of things right about it. And yet they expected it to sell to this very demanding fandom.

Opinions aside though, the facts are that instead of making a game that looked and sounded like Trek, they went the "Moar Pew-Pew" approach, creating something that was just a Star Trek skin over an existing game, including getting the look and sound completely wrong.

These developers can't even get the most basic thing about Star Trek right, so is it any wonder Star Trek fans hate Star Trek Infinite?

And as I said, this fandom is very demanding. Heck, even JJ Abrams' rebooted movies did Trek better than this and fans STILL hated them! If this was an experiment to turn Stellaris into a branded thing, then they sure picked the wrong franchise to do it.

 

[The Russian Empire]

It was less about the movies and more about the television shows. The whole thing was way off, too far off in fact.

For the Federation at least, their iconic technologies needed to be researched. Technology and ships that should have been in from game start (phasers, photon torpedoes) not only had to be researched, but some were developed massively later than the lore states (like the Excelsior-class, which was developed long before TNG.)

Not only that but groups that should have been in the Federation or at least known by them were instead completely missing, or independent. By the time this game takes place, Risa was a member of the Federation, Denobula was a member of the Federation, and the Betazed Houses [paging Counselor Troi!] were a member of the Federation. The Nausicaan Pirates were not part of the Federation but the race was in fact known TO the Federation, hell one of the major plot points of an episode of TNG and the reason Picard had an artificial heart, was because a Nausicaan dealt him a fatal blow while he was still a young lieutenant, long before the start of the series.




This, exactly this. Even the most basic fan knows what color a phaser or disruptor blast is, or what a photon torpedo looks and sounds like, or when the Excelsior-class was supposed to be developed. Phasers are orange, disruptors are green, photon torpedoes are orange, and the Excelsior was developed right after the Miranda, way back in the 23rd century.

As corestandeven says, we wanted a decent Star Trek strategy game that was faithful to the series, even if it had to bend the lore a bit. Instead we got a Star Trek-themed Stellaris copy which the developers couldn't even be bothered to make it look and feel like Star Trek.

I firmly believe that the developers of Star Trek Infinite clearly never watched a single solitary episode of Star Trek in all their lives. If they had, they'd know these very basic things that even the least-knowledgeable Star Trek fan knows.

For being a passion project about Star Trek, IMHO these developers were clearly very dis-passionate. To me, and to many others, it is clear they have no business anywhere near this franchise, as they are clearly not fans of it since they can't even get the most basic of things right about it. And yet they expected it to sell to this very demanding fandom.

Opinions aside though, the facts are that instead of making a game that looked and sounded like Trek, they went the "Moar Pew-Pew" approach, creating something that was just a Star Trek skin over an existing game, including getting the look and sound completely wrong.

These developers can't even get the most basic thing about Star Trek right, so is it any wonder Star Trek fans hate Star Trek Infinite?

And as I said, this fandom is very demanding. Heck, even JJ Abrams' rebooted movies did Trek better than this and fans STILL hated them! If this was an experiment to turn Stellaris into a branded thing, then they sure picked the wrong franchise to do it.

I just wanted to say that I agree entirely with everything you've written. You also make a good point about JJ's work, which, of course, was a disaster for the franchise but nevertheless at least got (most) of the basics right.

 

[unmerged(25767)]

This is frustrating. Again Paradox shows its disrespect to their customers. Wanted to buy Millennia, but will skip that now.
Pitty no trustworthy company will create a new BOTF.

 

[MyLordFellington]

A half-baked product. Where's the refunds?

 

[unmerged(25767)]

Also tried to gat a refund, but it was declined by Steam. Played the game more than 2 hours.

 

[RELee]

Caveat emptor, y'all.

 

[DiscoRay]

Caveat emptor, y'all.

Thank you Mr Data.

 

[RELee]

Yes Captain. You are most welcome.

 

[RabbaDooDabba]

I see, so this is what Stellaris Dev Diary #317 was sacrificed for...