Two Very Different Star Trek Games Are Warping In for 2025 — Here’s the Real Story

Why This Announcement Actually Matters

This caught my attention because we’re not just getting another safe phaser-blast from the past; we’re getting two wildly different takes on Star Trek. In 2025, Star Trek: Infection aims to go full survival horror in VR, while Star Trek Voyager: Across the Unknown pitches a strategy-roguelike about keeping the USS Voyager and its crew alive in the Delta Quadrant. That’s a big swing for a franchise that often plays it safe in games.

• Two distinct bets: VR horror (Infection) vs. strategy-roguelike (Voyager: Across the Unknown).
• VR push is bold but niche-comfort settings and interaction design will make or break Infection.
• Voyager’s roguelike structure could finally deliver a proper “FTL-but-Trek” fantasy-if the writing and systems are strong.
• Publisher history matters: Daedalic pivoted to publishing after Gollum’s flop; execution will be under a microscope.

Breaking Down the Announcement

Star Trek: Infection (Meta Quest 2/3, PC VR) goes where Trek rarely does: psychological horror. You play a Vulcan officer infected by an alien organism aboard the USS Lumen. Expect claustrophobic ship corridors, resource-scarce survival loops, and VR-driven puzzle solving while your cognition is literally compromised by the story. The hook is bold-Trek’s optimism mashed with personal dread—and if the team nails haptics, hand presence, and diegetic UI, this could be the most memorable Trek VR experience since Bridge Crew.

The risk is obvious: VR horror needs immaculate comfort and interaction design. If locomotion is sloppy, if jumpscares are cheap, or if the infection “mind tricks” come off as gimmicky screen filters, players bounce. Also, a horror-forward Trek game needs to feel more like “The Thaw” or “Frame of Mind” than a generic space ghoul run. Give us imaginative, canon-friendly weirdness over sludge monsters that could be from any sci-fi.

On the other track, Star Trek Voyager: Across the Unknown (PC, PS5, Xbox Series) pitches a strategy survival roguelike where you manage Voyager across 12 sectors of the Delta Quadrant. Allocate power, repair systems, juggle crew morale, and make the kind of calls Janeway lived for: diplomacy vs. torpedoes, ethics vs. expediency, maybe even flirting with Borg tech when the pressure spikes. If you’ve ever wished FTL had tricorders and Prime Directive headaches, this is the pitch.

The roguelike promise—runs that meaningfully diverge and characters that react to your choices—sounds right for Voyager’s premise. But that hinges on strong writing and event design. If “random events” boil down to bland stat checks or if the tech tree lacks meaningful trade-offs, the loop will flatten fast. I want to feel the crew tug-of-war: Tuvok asking for logic, Torres pushing engineering risks, the Doctor debating medical ethics, and Janeway’s voice in the middle.

Industry Context: Trek’s Gaming Track Record

Star Trek games are tricky. Ubisoft’s Bridge Crew (2017) nailed the Starfleet fantasy in VR but fizzled post-launch. Dramatic Labs’ Star Trek: Resurgence (2023) had heart and strong Trek vibes, but rough edges kept it niche. Meanwhile, Star Trek Online quietly kept the lights on for a decade-plus with deep lore hooks. The lesson: Trek fans show up when the fantasy is authentic, not when it’s just phasers and hull plating.

It’s also worth noting publisher history: Daedalic Entertainment, attached to Voyager: Across the Unknown, infamously stumbled with The Lord of the Rings: Gollum and then pivoted hard into publishing. That pivot isn’t a red flag on its own, but it does raise the bar for messaging and polish. If they want trust back, transparent systems design and good console performance are non-negotiable.

What Gamers Need to Know (Beyond the Trailer Glow)

• Infection VR needs: smooth locomotion options (teleport/snap), rock-solid hand interactions, diegetic menus, and comfort-first scares.
• Voyager needs: meaningful scarcity, crew dynamics that change runs, and ethical dilemmas with teeth—not just +5 diplomacy checks.
• Pricing and scope matter: Is Infection a tight 6-8 hour narrative or a longer survival loop? Is Voyager more campaign than “endless run”?
• Canon and tone: Trek can do horror and desperation—but it must still feel like Trek: curiosity, problem-solving, and consequences.

I’d love to see Voyager integrate episode-style arcs—mini “seasons” within a run, where a decision in Sector 2 echoes in Sector 10. For Infection, lean into VR strengths: environmental storytelling (LCARS panels you physically manipulate), positional audio that sells ship scale, and puzzles that don’t devolve into “grab-keycard-door-opens.”

Looking Ahead

With the franchise’s 60th anniversary looming, timing is on their side. The split approach—one for headset owners hungry for something weirder, one for strategy fans who want command decisions with consequences—could finally give Trek a proper foothold in modern gaming. But both titles are swinging above the belt: VR horror precision on one side, systemic narrative complexity on the other. That’s exciting—and exactly where things can go wrong.

If the devs deliver on authenticity and systems depth, 2025 might be the year Trek games stop feeling like side missions. If not, we’ll be talking about another round of “great premise, so-so execution.” I’m cautiously optimistic—and ready to set phasers to “wait for hands-on.”

TL;DR

Two new Star Trek games are aiming high: Infection brings psychological VR horror to Starfleet, while Voyager: Across the Unknown promises a proper strategy-roguelike take on surviving the Delta Quadrant. Both ideas are right for Trek—but execution, comfort, writing, and systems depth will decide if these are instant classics or just another shuttlecraft passing in the night.