Star Wars, Star Trek, and Gaming

[Ralif Redhammer]

That’s one of the points the Netflix series The Toys That Made Us makes. Star Wars was just plain more toy-friendly. Star Trek didn’t have a lot of gear, whereas Star Wars had all sorts of blasters, lightsabers, helmets, and so on. But the vehicles in particular were the sticking point. Star Trek pretty much just had giant ships like The Enterprise and Klingon Birds of Prey, or little shuttles. They just weren’t on the same scale. Star Wars had so many vehicles the action figures could just jump into.

There’s definitely ,ore Star Wars toys in general than Trek. Is there a Lego Enterprise? You’re right in that’s it’s much more heavily merchandised. Historically, merchandising has always been a massive part of Star Wars’ identity. While there are Trek toys and models, it’s not in the same league.

 

[cmad1977]

Well, that's a problem in and of itself. If the rules are mostly the same, why have both games? It would be like owning several Monopoly sets. Why bother?

Because Fantasy Flight can’t resist producing anything with minis, tokens, chips and buttons.

MOAR STUFF!!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think part of it is that Star Trek characters- in film & TV- are kind of glass cannons. They have great offensive power in their hands, but poor defenses. They can kill thousands or disintegrate things with their sidearms. They can stun just as easily. Their phasers (and some of the others sidearms in the setting) have adjustable fields of fire, so you basically aim with pinpoint precision or a wide spread AoE.

...but if you get the drop on someone? Well, they pretty much have to drop their weapons.

IOW, if one side has a tactical/positional edge like that, that’s pretty much ending the fight. Most of the fun character level combats in that setting occur hand to hand, without their gee whiz gear.

In Star Wars? Blasters, lightsabers, etc. all over the place in personal combat. It’s not just space opera, it’s like action from the Wild West.


As for the toys themselves... I never had any of the action figures for either franchise (or BSG, for that matter).

I used to have a phaser when I was a kid. The gun-like one with the removable mini one attached.

Never had a lightsaber, though. I couldn’t see the point in having ones like they had in my youth. Now, those polycarbonate ones? That’s a different story.

 

[Umbran]

In Star Wars? Blasters, lightsabers, etc. all over the place in personal combat. It’s not just space opera, it’s like action from the Wild West.

True. n Trek, if someone aims a phaser at you, you're pretty much done unless you are in a space with lots of cover. But note how rarely in the movies we someone take a blaster bolt, and still keep moving - that is still rare. The difference is that in Star Wars, almost everyone is a horrible shot (or the weapons are not terribly accurate). It's liek a G.I. Joe cartoon, with blaster fire everywhere, and nobody getting hit. Very cinematic, at least. Pew! Pew! Pewpewpew!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Certainly! I mean, in Trek, that stun setting comes in handy- the sci-fi equivalent of “winging” someone in a western or cop drama. SW doesn’t really have that.

But again, any one of those Trek phasers can be used as an AoE weapon, a rock heater, a disintegrator, etc. SW sidearms aren’t so useful. They’re just sci-if sixguns with nigh-infinite ammo. I think that makes them more “fun” in a sense, they mesh better with our childhoods. They’re more like what kids think of when playing cops & robbers or cowboys & Indians.

 

[Jester David]

It's worth noting that the best opening for a Star Trek movie was $75 million. Compared to Solo, which is a disappointment at only $85 million.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Which Trek movie was that?

 

[Jhaelen]

Well, that's a problem in and of itself. If the rules are mostly the same, why have both games? It would be like owning several Monopoly sets. Why bother?

Yet, many people do own several variants of the same game, including re-themes: Risk, Risk Legacy, Risk: Europe: Risk: The Lord of the Rings, etc.

One of my friends owns every edition of 'Axis & Allies'. Once a player has determined that she likes a certain (kind of) game, she tends to look for games that are similar. I'm seeing this every day in the Recommendations section on BoardGameGeek.

Imho, 'Star Trek' simply isn't sexy. Personally, I have no desire to play a game of 'Star Trek'. I would be very interested in playing 'Ashen Stars', though, despite it being rather obviously inspired by 'Star Trek'. The reason? It's set after the 'Star Fleet'-equivalent has been disbanded after a galaxy-wide war against an alien aggressor that was only barely repulsed. Now, the player characters represent freelancers hired to do the jobs the 'Star Fleet' used to look into. So, instead of playing officers in a rigid organization with restrictive laws, you're troubleshooters looking for a mostly legal way to make easy money. I.e. it's really closer to Firefly in theme.

And even in FFG's Star Wars RPG, which has been split into three different 'settings', 'Edge of the Empire' is by far the most popular. In it the players are smugglers and bounty-hunters at the fringes of the known worlds. While I don't have the numbers to prove it, I'd bet that 'Age of Rebellion' is the least popular because it shares many of the problems that the 'Star Trek' setting has. 'Fate and Destiny', the third Star Wars setting assumes all players are Force-Sensitives (aka aspiring Jedi) and most closely resembles a fantasy RPG. Jedi are nothing but knights with light sabers after all, and 'The Force' is a kind of magic.

 

[Umbran]

Which Trek movie was that?

Star Trek, from 2009, the first in the "Kelvin timeline".

We should note, however, that Trek's not really intended as a movie franchise. It is designed first and foremost as a TV property. And if we want to compare incomes, we should probably talk about how much money the 550+ hours of TV Trek has pulled in over the years.

 

[Umbran]

One of my friends owns every edition of 'Axis & Allies'. Once a player has determined that she likes a certain (kind of) game, she tends to look for games that are similar. I'm seeing this every day in the Recommendations section on BoardGameGeek.

Meh. Using BoardGameGeek to imply things about the general game-playing population is like using EN World to talk about the general RPG crowd. Most players aren't posting on either site, so the sites aren't representative.

Imho, 'Star Trek' simply isn't sexy. ... So, instead of playing officers in a rigid organization with restrictive laws, you're troubleshooters looking for a mostly legal way to make easy money.

Okay, so "sexy" is "being able to act without oversight".

What "restrictive law" does the Federation have that doesn't appear on pretty much any world other than the Prime Directive? You realize that only applies in a small number of the possible scenarios a Trek game can cover, right?

And the Jedi, they have no rules at all, right?

Remind me - which game has a mechanic that has you turn into an NPC if you don't behave nicely? Hint: it isn't a Trek game