I'm looking forward to flying some of those other federation and Klingon ships we've seen so far in the series. I find some of those designs interesting.
Also hoping we get bridges for the Discovery lockbox ships we currently have.
I sure wouldn't mind having the Discovery Enterprise skin option for my T6 TOS connie. crosses fingers
- Fascinating. Truly Fascinating, How controversy seems to be the go to advertising point these days.
- Not unlike, & If I'm not mistaken Radio Shock Jocks?
- Howard Stern, Mancow Muller, Don Imus, Rush Limbaugh. And so on.
- The use of controversy to pull in listeners. Having listeners that hate them, and listeners that agree with them.
- This seems to be STDs selling point, Controversy. Fundamentally produced fan Trolling.
- Retconned variables created specifically to appeal to certain demographics, & Demagogue Social Weltanschauung congregants.
- Controversy Sells, Much like the Pink Chicken fries with the Pink Tax from Burger King.
- Controversy advertising. For chicken fries... It's gotten people talking about... Chicken fries... Nonsensical, & yet as advertising It's working. Even though many customers are being Alienated in the process.
-- As for myself. I'm not interested in TRIBBLE. So I'll pass on this content, Sorry.
- Thanks for all the hard work.
- & Congrats to the fans of TRIBBLE.
Finally decided to make a sig.
I see allot of them with a character, and ship.
though I'm not sure which ship to put on there...
I'll think about it. This will do for now.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
To all Discovery defenders - we can argue about story and lore (I think Disc is very badly written, it's just generic s-f shooting, but if someone likes it - fine by me, de gustibus non est disputandum). But you can't change visuals... If you want it, just don't make prequels, simple as that. Set the show some time after Voyager and done. But if you're making a prequel, you can't blame people for being angry about devastating everything what was established. It's called continuity. Imagine a book. In first chapter John Smith has a dog named Porthos, and in last chapter he has a cat called Spot - and he pretends it's the same pet and he always had a cat. If it's not intended surrealistic writing and Smith isn't psychically ill, then it doesn't make a sense - so why we should pretend that Discovery has?:)
Of course you can change visuals.
Here's what you can pretend, for your personal head canon or whatever:
There is a "real" Star Trek Universe, and the creators of Star Trek material are often inspired in their dreams by this real Star Trek universe. But they don't see all of it, so they have to fill in some story gaps. And they only have the tools of our time available to them when they create a visual representation of it. They need to find actors that can play the roles well. The real Spock might not look remotely like Leonard Nimoy or Zachary Quinto, but Nimoy and Quinto managed to represent their specific style they saw in their dreams really well.
Sure, Gene Roddenberry's set designers saw holographic and touch screens everywhere - but how could he possibly recreate that and make people understand how that is supposed to work, make affordable sets and convince the studio execs to go with it? They couldn't, so it became advanced-for-the-60s looking buttons and colors.
Funny, but more modern shows did a bang-up job of making the 60;s aesthetic look pretty damn good (Enterprise-"In a Mirror, Darkly" and DS9-"Trials and Tribble-lations"), despite it's dated look and effects.
Of course modern shows can replicate old shows visuals. But old shows have a big problem recreating the real look of the Star Trek universe, so they had to take a lot of short cuts and liberty in how they represent it. Newer shows can get a bit closer to it. That they sometimes decide to replicate the old look is an artifact of the way the presentation, not a result of emulating this "real" Star Trek universe.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
A lot of negative post. Here's an idea. How about waiting to see what AoD has to offer before dismissing it and rubbishing it. As the saying goes. Never judge a book. I do feel though that they are using the game as a marketing tool to get more people to sign up to watch Season 2. Although I did enjoy Season 1, there was a lot of bland acting and characters you couldn't get to like. Burnham just did my head in throughout. Tilly on the other hand at first I could quite easily of pushed her out the closest air lock, but then there was that pivotal moment she came into her own. She became a force to reckon with.
Ever played "No One Lives Forever"? Great Bond-like game with amazing retro style. But to do something like this you need to boldly go where no one has gone before:) You need to risk and do something new and fun. That could work.
And I'm not going to argue with people, who are saying "visuals are unimportant, because filming technology has improved" - you obviously have no idea, what are you talking about and what are basic rules in creating fictional worlds.
Also fan is not a fanboy. If someone like everything only because it has "Star Trek" logo on it, then he's a fanboy. You can't justify all CBS decisions, because "they have copyright". True fan will be openly speaking, what he doesn' like and what he like.
Well, I think all that Discovery stuff was made by Sisko to confuse Romulans... It's a faake...
NOLF is kind of crapp compared to the Bond games except for the Craig Bond games which are no different from CoD games and are dull and boring. The Bond games were best around the Gamecube/XBox/PS2 generation but after that they went downhill.
The way I see it is STO is a game for ALL kinds of Star Trek fans, not everybody likes every show but every show gets represented in game.
If you don't like a mission (or are unwilling to give a mission a try) then skip it, it's as simple as that.
Saying the game is only allowed to cater to the shows YOU like is childish at best, it's "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" not "Infinite Diversity but only the bits I like".
"As of this moment, we are all dead. We go into battle to reclaim our lives.
This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Victory is Life!"
The way I see it is STO is a game for ALL kinds of Star Trek fans, not everybody likes every show but every show gets represented in game.
If you don't like a mission (or are unwilling to give a mission a try) then skip it, it's as simple as that.
Saying the game is only allowed to cater to the shows YOU like is childish at best, it's "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" not "Infinite Diversity but only the bits I like".
A lot of negative post. Here's an idea. How about waiting to see what AoD has to offer before dismissing it and rubbishing it. As the saying goes. Never judge a book. I do feel though that they are using the game as a marketing tool to get more people to sign up to watch Season 2. Although I did enjoy Season 1, there was a lot of bland acting and characters you couldn't get to like. Burnham just did my head in throughout. Tilly on the other hand at first I could quite easily of pushed her out the closest air lock, but then there was that pivotal moment she came into her own. She became a force to reckon with.
Tilly is one of the best characters, her best moments are playing her counterpart and helping Discovery get home
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Here's something that amuses me to no end about the TRIBBLE and even TNG fans. They harp about the use of rocker switches and not using touch screens in other series ranting on how dated they are. I guess these so called experts on these things have never once taken a look at the cockpit of a modern aircraft or warship. Guess what folks rocker switches abound along with analog gauges even in so called "glass cockpits". Why are they there well it's simple really reliability and ease of making a quick fix. A simple analogue pitot will tell you if you are flying to slow or fast when your digital display goes dark from a power failure or glitch something a digital screen that looses power or has a short can't do. Sure Gene Rodenberry and Matt Jefferies could have pulled magic gizmos out the hat but you do realize both had a background in Aviation right? So that carried over to some design features.
I've made that point many times before, only to be ignored. Touchscreen interfaces are notoriously unreliable in any kind of professional / military environment where reaction time and reliability are vital. No military or commercial craft use them, at least not in anything but a secondary capacity. Dedicated switches and physical gauges and controls are what's used because they are always in the same place and always work the same way so they can be accessed instantly when needed with no delay. Touchscreen interfaces are for consumer devices and commercial POS (point of sale) systems. You'll never see them on a military ship or in a commercial aircraft or in a race car --they're not practical.
Yes indeed however Electric Boat has sort of forgotten that with the Virgina class boats. I for one would not want to deal with a BCP (Ballast Control Panel) that was all touch screen. The nightmare scrolling through the menus while trying to do an emergency blow at test depth with an engineering casualty... YIKES! Then there is the whole photonic mast deal. Yes fewer hull penatrations but sea water has a way of shorting things out so loose the optical head you are blind while an old school periscope works when there is no power every time. I qualed on an all Analog Boat complex hell yes but reliable hell yes! So glad I am out...
I love STO it has given me years of entertainment and now I find myself torn. The attempt to insert Discovery into STO's timeline despite it not fitting into the pre-existing franchise canon (opinions on the show's quality any which way are subjective so there's no need for them) doesn't sit well with me. It feels forced and it's the first time STO has offered up content that I 100% do not want. I'm not a fan of TOS or the reboot films but AOY provided so much more. I mean, I know I could say Discovery is an alternate universe bla bla bla but I know it won't be treated as one. I want to be excited and I want to sink more time into new STO story content but I disagree with this direction and can't find a way to face it from a detached standpoint. We Trekkies are nothing if not passionate.
Here's something that amuses me to no end about the TRIBBLE and even TNG fans. They harp about the use of rocker switches and not using touch screens in other series ranting on how dated they are. I guess these so called experts on these things have never once taken a look at the cockpit of a modern aircraft or warship. Guess what folks rocker switches abound along with analog gauges even in so called "glass cockpits". Why are they there well it's simple really reliability and ease of making a quick fix. A simple analogue pitot will tell you if you are flying to slow or fast when your digital display goes dark from a power failure or glitch something a digital screen that looses power or has a short can't do. Sure Gene Rodenberry and Matt Jefferies could have pulled magic gizmos out the hat but you do realize both had a background in Aviation right? So that carried over to some design features.
I've made that point many times before, only to be ignored. Touchscreen interfaces are notoriously unreliable in any kind of professional / military environment where reaction time and reliability are vital. No military or commercial craft use them, at least not in anything but a secondary capacity. Dedicated switches and physical gauges and controls are what's used because they are always in the same place and always work the same way so they can be accessed instantly when needed with no delay. Touchscreen interfaces are for consumer devices and commercial POS (point of sale) systems. You'll never see them on a military ship or in a commercial aircraft or in a race car --they're not practical.
It makes sense for present-day militaries, sure. It might not make sense for Starfleet.
First off, Starfleet personnel are supposed to be polymaths: scientists and diplomats in addition to soldiers. The ships similarly are designed to do sciencey stuff as readily as defending Federation citizens from aggressors. Under those circumstances multifunction displays and interfaces make sense.
Second of all, reliability and ergonomics are fundamentally engineering and training problems, which unlike physics problems can potentially be addressed with research and effort. These guys found a way around a fundamental physical law for Pete's sake; designing a useful touchscreen interface should be peanuts.
And it's shown repeatedly that there are manual alternatives (although because the writers don't grok engineering, those fail whenever it would be convenient to the plot).
LMAO Ok fine but here is a situation for your Federation Bridge crew. Ship takes a hit gravity goes down. With me so far? Bridge crew grabs whatever they can to keep from floating away from control sation where they need to be to save the ship. Touchscreen is on all surfaces... Oopps hands swipe across said screen system reads that as an order and decompress's the bridge. Everyone dies quickly sucking vacuum. Same ship but with rocker switches that have a safety cage which is exactly how critcal switches are in every aircraft and spacecraft made. Crew grabs for a anchor to stay in place hand swipes across panel nothing happens bridge stays pressurized everyone lives. Oh yes the polymath thing what a joke. O'brian was nothing like that he was an average grunt. Sorry if they use your standard they would have a hell of a time getting enough crew to run the ship. Do you think the bartender not stupid Whoopie Goldberg but the Starfleet mess specialist was a polymath? I'll go further Voyager... The brillant design crew of that ship crew didn't know how to even create a safe air system they put a air inlets for the enivormental system that just moved air from one place to another with no scrubbers or filters to clean or purify it before it sending that air from point a to point b. If that was done on a closed enviorment vessal like a nuclear sub which I served on everyoine would be dead quickly from things never being filtered out from the air supply. Yet Star Fleet your polymaths couldn't even figure that out... Hence the bio neural gel packs getting a yeast infection from the galley located decks away...
Touchscreen is on all surfaces... Oopps hands swipe across said screen system reads that as an order and decompress's the bridge. Everyone dies quickly sucking vacuum.
Demo, swipe your hand against your phone once and see how easy it is to reset it to a factory state. If you don't happen to have a touchscreen phone, take my word for it that contextual safeties are by no means difficult to implement.
Also: why the hell would a TOS bridge have a single rocker switch to decompress the bridge (to make the comparison a fair one.)
Also: here's a TOS bridge station. Note how many unprotected buttons there are.
Also: LCARS is touchscreen. It's literally a projected interface onto a flat sheet of plastic, as depicted with the production tech of the 80's and 90's. You've had since TNG to acclimate yourself to the use of this interface in a space setting. Why the sudden fit?
Also: If most impactful consumer tech comes with touch screens, and that is often the easiest to grasp (no pun intended) visual signifier of its progressive technology, what do you think the impact will be for a TV show to throw flash-Gordon style buttons across the bridge to say "THIS IS YOUR SHIP OF TOMORROW!"
It's tone deaf.
No matter what the diegetic explanation is, DSC is still entirely justified going to a touch screen interface simply for its visual setting to have a Trek-like impact (ie. showing a more advanced but still relatable future to compliment its narratives) with its audience.
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Just to throw my two cents on the growing bonfire here. A great deal of the technology differences are clearly explained in one of the TOS novels. Uhura talks about being asked by a visiting officer (or new junior officer, I forget at the moment) officer why the bridge is so primitive looking with analog controls etc instead of touch screens and newer up to date circuits. She explains that the Enterprise is designed to work on its own on the edge of space without support for extended periods, if they experience unknown phenomenon that blows out half the ships systems, they don't need broken or exploding control screens and circuits that would require a starbase to fix. They have to be self sufficient, as a result she can rebuild almost every circuit on the ship herself by hand if the need ever arose.
This would easily explain why the Enterprise had older looking bridge controls etc. to other ships. It's an easy excuse that they could have included and keep the look of the Enterprise they met in TRIBBLE more to its classic look.
All the other changes to me just seem ridiculous, with no need other than 'its our show so TRIBBLE you' to the part of the fanbase who do care about the continuity they've created.
Personally I despise the show for poor writing, acting glaring plot holes from the very first episode and silly plot points that feel forced. And yes I hate the Klingon redesign, it was pointless with so much already developed to change the appearance and culture so much...to the point of making it hard on the actors to even talk. But if other people like the show then fair enough they get a story like ViL, why not? They've given me expansions for the story I enjoy, let someone else get there story, as long as they don't smear TRIBBLE esthetics over the rest of the expansions to come.
Please don't hate on me for hating TRIBBLE, I won't hate you for liking it, this is all my opinion.
All the other changes to me just seem ridiculous, with no need other than 'its our show so **** you' to the part of the fanbase who do care about the continuity they've created.
That is literally the tone and extent of the criticism offered by those who rage against the show purely on continuity. Discovery's creators care about placing the show in an appropriate era. There are a wealth of nods and major design cues used to show that while Discovery and other non-1701 vessels aren't from the exact same era as TOS they are directly leading up to it. And Discovery season 2 goes one major step further, from what we've seen so far. Narrative? This is the Klingon War. We never had any of the details and the major twists (sore drive and cloaking) are foreshadowing for Search for Spock (transwarp-sans-tardigrade and cloaking). Ie. continuity (even if the bookending is unsubtle.)
You can also find design cues that harken back to Enterprise. For example: the bloody uniforms and the style of the Shenzhou's interior. The DSC season 1 production was basically an average between ENT and TOS with some extra visual flair thrown on to both help the presentation for a contemporary audience and also suggest that it's been a long time between those series, in universe, too. This isn't coming out of the Archer era, it's following the era which follow that. The visuals compliment that while still rooting the show in what's to come. It's great sci-fi world building, because it's stepping above the level of tone deaf fan service (much like the original show did in stepping up from pop-sci fi serials which played close to genre conventions [because of growing audience expectations] without considering how that was constraining.)
Being the person whining about Discovery because it's not playing to your projection for how this era should be (taking it uncritically) is being that person sitting down to TOS and complaining that the villains weren't (to use Trek parlance) Dr. Chaotica enough. That's not a blanket defense against the writing, arcs, and choices in tone (TOS's issues don't go away because pop serial fan wants more of what he already likes), but it is a suggestion for how to treat expectations in the context of sci-fi entertainment (they're just your opinion without further analysis.)
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Here's something that amuses me to no end about the TRIBBLE and even TNG fans. They harp about the use of rocker switches and not using touch screens in other series ranting on how dated they are. I guess these so called experts on these things have never once taken a look at the cockpit of a modern aircraft or warship. Guess what folks rocker switches abound along with analog gauges even in so called "glass cockpits". Why are they there well it's simple really reliability and ease of making a quick fix. A simple analogue pitot will tell you if you are flying to slow or fast when your digital display goes dark from a power failure or glitch something a digital screen that looses power or has a short can't do. Sure Gene Rodenberry and Matt Jefferies could have pulled magic gizmos out the hat but you do realize both had a background in Aviation right? So that carried over to some design features.
Another factor that a lot of people fail to take into account is that while the rocker switches are mainly just on/off toggles the jewel switches are smart switches that sense pressure direction in an analog spectrum and do not just have two positions.
Take a close look at Sulu at the helm, he does not just press them like they are typewriter keys, he uses them a bit like joystick tophats (which is undoubtedly how he is making smooth manual turns when he has to). There is nothing like a keyboard to input typed commands, everything is complex precise gestures across the glowing "fishtank stone" insets instead. Also, in interviews Takei mentions that they are not pushbuttons, they are fixed to the panel and do not move, like the rings some realworld elevators use instead of moving buttons, and he had a kind of self-choreographed routine of touching them at slightly different angles that were different for each kind of maneuver and consistent from session to session.
In essence, except for a few rocker switches toggling functions the control panels in TOS WERE touch screens but with topography instead of flat, and color patterns instead of pictures. In fact, the crew were supposed to be able to read those weird lights just above the control panels, Roddenberry was quite a bit into the "techno-glyphs" idea that was mildly popular in science fiction at the time (Dune is a kind of extreme example of that kind of thing for instance) that compressed information into glanceable chunks instead of having to keep track of rapidly scrolling text. The Matrix movies have a vaguely similar concept where the operators keeping watch on the Matrix would look at the rapidly scrolling and overlapping kanji and "see" what is going on in more detail than watching it as video.
Really, Discovery looks less advanced in many ways, as the fashion for the last few decades in Hollywood is to dumb things down to contemporary levels as much as possible so people can just watch without having to use any imagination. Is that a bad thing? Not really it is just a different style if done right, but the change does make people who are unfamiliar with "raw" old-school science fiction that often dealt with concepts like new-human vs. transhuman vs. posthuman think TOS looks weird and silly which has caused a lot of trouble in Trek fandom.
So is this a real expansion like Legacy of Romulus or a mini expansion like Delta Rising, Agents of Yesterday and Victory is Life.
AoD isn't an expansion in the sense of the ones we've had before. It'll be more like an update, it won't even be on the scale of either AoY or ViL. It sounds like at most 3-4 missions, if you count the new tutorial as 1 mission. There may be more added on later of course, as there was with ViL, so the AoD run of content could likely end up being larger, but at launch it won't be.
Also, I wouldn't have put Delta Rising in that list of mini expansions as DR had more content than AoY and ViL combined. It may not have been on the scale of LoR, but I believe it was the games second largest expansion.
Well, this could be interesting. Colour me intrigued
It'll probably be better than the TV show
As many faults as I have with ST:D, I can't say I hate the show. I'm willing to at least give the STO Devs a chance at making this update 'good'.
Also, as I was typing that last bit, something interesting came to mind. It might be a nitpick, but it's how my mind works.
Somewhere, someone was saying how TRIBBLE isn't the 'proper' abbreviation for Discovery, that it's insulting. Well, yes, I understand how it could be interpreted that way, which is why I use the colon between the ST and the D. If we're not meant to use ST to denote Star Trek, then what does this game become? Online? ONL? Nope, not for me. STO has been and always shall be my abbreviation.
Can "we", the folks here on a forum for a Star Trek Game, get away with just using TNG, ENT, DSC? Yes, because we're already in the mindset of knowing we're talking Star Trek so the "ST" becomes redundant. However, outside of Star Trek forums, folks may not know what those abbreviations may mean, so I add the "ST:" and it's habit for me now.
I'm sorry if my use of ST:D offends, but I don't see myself changing my use of it.
Hello. My name is iamynaught and I am an altaholic.
AoD isn't an expansion in the sense of the ones we've had before. It'll be more like an update, it won't even be on the scale of either AoY or ViL. It sounds like at most 3-4 missions, if you count the new tutorial as 1 mission. There may be more added on later of course, as there was with ViL, so the AoD run of content could likely end up being larger, but at launch it won't be.
Clarification here: no, Age of Discovery will not ship as a single expansion. But also no, they won't reach the size of an expansion as others have and simply add more episodes within the few month run of that release. AoD will consist of multiple connected seasons which should (from what we've been told) build to form a big, recognizable content block. But, over the course of those multiple seasons (be they sequential or not.)
Basically, Cryptic's setting out on another building arc (like the lead-up to the Iconian War) but rather than shooting for a particular story point they're working to build a big chunk of Discovery content without having to wait until expansion 5 to do it. More broadly, "Age of Discovery" seems to me more like an official announcement of the support Cryptic is getting from CBS and how that's opened the doors on using the new stuff in the Star Trek universe. Day to day operations: big season coming up with more seasons to follow.
Can "we", the folks here on a forum for a Star Trek Game, get away with just using TNG, ENT, DSC? Yes, because we're already in the mindset of knowing we're talking Star Trek so the "ST" becomes redundant. However, outside of Star Trek forums, folks may not know what those abbreviations may mean, so I add the "ST:" and it's habit for me now.
I've been using DSC off the forums. There hasn't been any confusion to note and the only problem I can envision is if I opened a discussion with DSC and no clear indication that I'm talking about Star Trek. In which case, TRIBBLE is far more perilous.
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Discovery. TRIBBLE? Really? Here I thought the greater community of fandom and Trek had settled in DIS or Disco...
Yeah, its called Star Trek: Discovery... TRIBBLE; blame the advertising department.
Actually I find calling it Disco even more derogatory than TRIBBLE.
If you want to argue that "Star Trek: Enterprise" should be STE instead of ENT, I'll entertain that argument more than one for 'Disco'.
Well, "Disco" at least turned up in-universe.
Officially, though, the abbreviation is DSC (and not DIS *glares at Memory Alpha admins*).
"DSC; No bloody TRIBBLE, no bloody DIS, no bloody Disco!" -Anonymous Redshirt
and the fact that they blatantly plagiarizing 'The Orville' to save it because it's so ****, makes no never mind to you, right? And aside from that, the fact that you have to pay per episode to watch it shows in itself that the show was **** even before it was "aired".
That is a worse move than anything that DSC did over its entire first season, including Culbergate. At least when DSC brought up nonconsensual sex, it was meant as something to be horrified by.
If anything it's The Orville that plagiarized Star Trek.
Okay that does it! My Captains are gonna be launching as many Orvilles in STO as possible! LOL!!!
Getting upset over an acronym just because it's similar to another acronym is just silly.
Also the fact that the shirts on the show say Disco on them just seems unprofessional and makes no sense since Disco is not a shortened version of the word Discovery, there's no such thing as a shortened version of that word. There's clearly no reason why they can't say Discovery in full on the shirts.
Comments
It'll probably be better than the TV show
Also hoping we get bridges for the Discovery lockbox ships we currently have.
I sure wouldn't mind having the Discovery Enterprise skin option for my T6 TOS connie. crosses fingers
- Not unlike, & If I'm not mistaken Radio Shock Jocks?
- Howard Stern, Mancow Muller, Don Imus, Rush Limbaugh. And so on.
- The use of controversy to pull in listeners. Having listeners that hate them, and listeners that agree with them.
- This seems to be STDs selling point, Controversy. Fundamentally produced fan Trolling.
- Retconned variables created specifically to appeal to certain demographics, & Demagogue Social Weltanschauung congregants.
- Controversy Sells, Much like the Pink Chicken fries with the Pink Tax from Burger King.
- Controversy advertising. For chicken fries... It's gotten people talking about... Chicken fries... Nonsensical, & yet as advertising It's working. Even though many customers are being Alienated in the process.
-- As for myself. I'm not interested in TRIBBLE. So I'll pass on this content, Sorry.
- Thanks for all the hard work.
- & Congrats to the fans of TRIBBLE.
I see allot of them with a character, and ship.
though I'm not sure which ship to put on there...
I'll think about it. This will do for now.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
And I'm not going to argue with people, who are saying "visuals are unimportant, because filming technology has improved" - you obviously have no idea, what are you talking about and what are basic rules in creating fictional worlds.
Also fan is not a fanboy. If someone like everything only because it has "Star Trek" logo on it, then he's a fanboy. You can't justify all CBS decisions, because "they have copyright". True fan will be openly speaking, what he doesn' like and what he like.
Well, I think all that Discovery stuff was made by Sisko to confuse Romulans... It's a faake...
If you don't like a mission (or are unwilling to give a mission a try) then skip it, it's as simple as that.
Saying the game is only allowed to cater to the shows YOU like is childish at best, it's "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations" not "Infinite Diversity but only the bits I like".
This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Victory is Life!"
Seconded
Tilly is one of the best characters, her best moments are playing her counterpart and helping Discovery get home
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Yes indeed however Electric Boat has sort of forgotten that with the Virgina class boats. I for one would not want to deal with a BCP (Ballast Control Panel) that was all touch screen. The nightmare scrolling through the menus while trying to do an emergency blow at test depth with an engineering casualty... YIKES! Then there is the whole photonic mast deal. Yes fewer hull penatrations but sea water has a way of shorting things out so loose the optical head you are blind while an old school periscope works when there is no power every time. I qualed on an all Analog Boat complex hell yes but reliable hell yes! So glad I am out...
No peace in Star Trek nor fandom! For in the far future of the 47th Season, there is ONLY WAR!
LMAO Ok fine but here is a situation for your Federation Bridge crew. Ship takes a hit gravity goes down. With me so far? Bridge crew grabs whatever they can to keep from floating away from control sation where they need to be to save the ship. Touchscreen is on all surfaces... Oopps hands swipe across said screen system reads that as an order and decompress's the bridge. Everyone dies quickly sucking vacuum. Same ship but with rocker switches that have a safety cage which is exactly how critcal switches are in every aircraft and spacecraft made. Crew grabs for a anchor to stay in place hand swipes across panel nothing happens bridge stays pressurized everyone lives. Oh yes the polymath thing what a joke. O'brian was nothing like that he was an average grunt. Sorry if they use your standard they would have a hell of a time getting enough crew to run the ship. Do you think the bartender not stupid Whoopie Goldberg but the Starfleet mess specialist was a polymath? I'll go further Voyager... The brillant design crew of that ship crew didn't know how to even create a safe air system they put a air inlets for the enivormental system that just moved air from one place to another with no scrubbers or filters to clean or purify it before it sending that air from point a to point b. If that was done on a closed enviorment vessal like a nuclear sub which I served on everyoine would be dead quickly from things never being filtered out from the air supply. Yet Star Fleet your polymaths couldn't even figure that out... Hence the bio neural gel packs getting a yeast infection from the galley located decks away...
Demo, swipe your hand against your phone once and see how easy it is to reset it to a factory state. If you don't happen to have a touchscreen phone, take my word for it that contextual safeties are by no means difficult to implement.
Also: why the hell would a TOS bridge have a single rocker switch to decompress the bridge (to make the comparison a fair one.)
Also: here's a TOS bridge station. Note how many unprotected buttons there are.
Also: LCARS is touchscreen. It's literally a projected interface onto a flat sheet of plastic, as depicted with the production tech of the 80's and 90's. You've had since TNG to acclimate yourself to the use of this interface in a space setting. Why the sudden fit?
Also: If most impactful consumer tech comes with touch screens, and that is often the easiest to grasp (no pun intended) visual signifier of its progressive technology, what do you think the impact will be for a TV show to throw flash-Gordon style buttons across the bridge to say "THIS IS YOUR SHIP OF TOMORROW!"
It's tone deaf.
No matter what the diegetic explanation is, DSC is still entirely justified going to a touch screen interface simply for its visual setting to have a Trek-like impact (ie. showing a more advanced but still relatable future to compliment its narratives) with its audience.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
A great deal of the technology differences are clearly explained in one of the TOS novels. Uhura talks about being asked by a visiting officer (or new junior officer, I forget at the moment) officer why the bridge is so primitive looking with analog controls etc instead of touch screens and newer up to date circuits. She explains that the Enterprise is designed to work on its own on the edge of space without support for extended periods, if they experience unknown phenomenon that blows out half the ships systems, they don't need broken or exploding control screens and circuits that would require a starbase to fix. They have to be self sufficient, as a result she can rebuild almost every circuit on the ship herself by hand if the need ever arose.
This would easily explain why the Enterprise had older looking bridge controls etc. to other ships. It's an easy excuse that they could have included and keep the look of the Enterprise they met in TRIBBLE more to its classic look.
All the other changes to me just seem ridiculous, with no need other than 'its our show so TRIBBLE you' to the part of the fanbase who do care about the continuity they've created.
Personally I despise the show for poor writing, acting glaring plot holes from the very first episode and silly plot points that feel forced. And yes I hate the Klingon redesign, it was pointless with so much already developed to change the appearance and culture so much...to the point of making it hard on the actors to even talk. But if other people like the show then fair enough they get a story like ViL, why not? They've given me expansions for the story I enjoy, let someone else get there story, as long as they don't smear TRIBBLE esthetics over the rest of the expansions to come.
Please don't hate on me for hating TRIBBLE, I won't hate you for liking it, this is all my opinion.
You can also find design cues that harken back to Enterprise. For example: the bloody uniforms and the style of the Shenzhou's interior. The DSC season 1 production was basically an average between ENT and TOS with some extra visual flair thrown on to both help the presentation for a contemporary audience and also suggest that it's been a long time between those series, in universe, too. This isn't coming out of the Archer era, it's following the era which follow that. The visuals compliment that while still rooting the show in what's to come. It's great sci-fi world building, because it's stepping above the level of tone deaf fan service (much like the original show did in stepping up from pop-sci fi serials which played close to genre conventions [because of growing audience expectations] without considering how that was constraining.)
Being the person whining about Discovery because it's not playing to your projection for how this era should be (taking it uncritically) is being that person sitting down to TOS and complaining that the villains weren't (to use Trek parlance) Dr. Chaotica enough. That's not a blanket defense against the writing, arcs, and choices in tone (TOS's issues don't go away because pop serial fan wants more of what he already likes), but it is a suggestion for how to treat expectations in the context of sci-fi entertainment (they're just your opinion without further analysis.)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Another factor that a lot of people fail to take into account is that while the rocker switches are mainly just on/off toggles the jewel switches are smart switches that sense pressure direction in an analog spectrum and do not just have two positions.
Take a close look at Sulu at the helm, he does not just press them like they are typewriter keys, he uses them a bit like joystick tophats (which is undoubtedly how he is making smooth manual turns when he has to). There is nothing like a keyboard to input typed commands, everything is complex precise gestures across the glowing "fishtank stone" insets instead. Also, in interviews Takei mentions that they are not pushbuttons, they are fixed to the panel and do not move, like the rings some realworld elevators use instead of moving buttons, and he had a kind of self-choreographed routine of touching them at slightly different angles that were different for each kind of maneuver and consistent from session to session.
In essence, except for a few rocker switches toggling functions the control panels in TOS WERE touch screens but with topography instead of flat, and color patterns instead of pictures. In fact, the crew were supposed to be able to read those weird lights just above the control panels, Roddenberry was quite a bit into the "techno-glyphs" idea that was mildly popular in science fiction at the time (Dune is a kind of extreme example of that kind of thing for instance) that compressed information into glanceable chunks instead of having to keep track of rapidly scrolling text. The Matrix movies have a vaguely similar concept where the operators keeping watch on the Matrix would look at the rapidly scrolling and overlapping kanji and "see" what is going on in more detail than watching it as video.
Really, Discovery looks less advanced in many ways, as the fashion for the last few decades in Hollywood is to dumb things down to contemporary levels as much as possible so people can just watch without having to use any imagination. Is that a bad thing? Not really it is just a different style if done right, but the change does make people who are unfamiliar with "raw" old-school science fiction that often dealt with concepts like new-human vs. transhuman vs. posthuman think TOS looks weird and silly which has caused a lot of trouble in Trek fandom.
AoD isn't an expansion in the sense of the ones we've had before. It'll be more like an update, it won't even be on the scale of either AoY or ViL. It sounds like at most 3-4 missions, if you count the new tutorial as 1 mission. There may be more added on later of course, as there was with ViL, so the AoD run of content could likely end up being larger, but at launch it won't be.
Also, I wouldn't have put Delta Rising in that list of mini expansions as DR had more content than AoY and ViL combined. It may not have been on the scale of LoR, but I believe it was the games second largest expansion.
As many faults as I have with ST:D, I can't say I hate the show. I'm willing to at least give the STO Devs a chance at making this update 'good'.
Also, as I was typing that last bit, something interesting came to mind. It might be a nitpick, but it's how my mind works.
Somewhere, someone was saying how TRIBBLE isn't the 'proper' abbreviation for Discovery, that it's insulting. Well, yes, I understand how it could be interpreted that way, which is why I use the colon between the ST and the D. If we're not meant to use ST to denote Star Trek, then what does this game become? Online? ONL? Nope, not for me. STO has been and always shall be my abbreviation.
Can "we", the folks here on a forum for a Star Trek Game, get away with just using TNG, ENT, DSC? Yes, because we're already in the mindset of knowing we're talking Star Trek so the "ST" becomes redundant. However, outside of Star Trek forums, folks may not know what those abbreviations may mean, so I add the "ST:" and it's habit for me now.
I'm sorry if my use of ST:D offends, but I don't see myself changing my use of it.
Losing faith in humanity, one person at a time.
Clarification here: no, Age of Discovery will not ship as a single expansion. But also no, they won't reach the size of an expansion as others have and simply add more episodes within the few month run of that release. AoD will consist of multiple connected seasons which should (from what we've been told) build to form a big, recognizable content block. But, over the course of those multiple seasons (be they sequential or not.)
Basically, Cryptic's setting out on another building arc (like the lead-up to the Iconian War) but rather than shooting for a particular story point they're working to build a big chunk of Discovery content without having to wait until expansion 5 to do it. More broadly, "Age of Discovery" seems to me more like an official announcement of the support Cryptic is getting from CBS and how that's opened the doors on using the new stuff in the Star Trek universe. Day to day operations: big season coming up with more seasons to follow.
I've been using DSC off the forums. There hasn't been any confusion to note and the only problem I can envision is if I opened a discussion with DSC and no clear indication that I'm talking about Star Trek. In which case, TRIBBLE is far more perilous.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
"DSC; No bloody TRIBBLE, no bloody DIS, no bloody Disco!" -Anonymous Redshirt
Yeah I'm going with DSC.
Okay that does it! My Captains are gonna be launching as many Orvilles in STO as possible! LOL!!!
Also the fact that the shirts on the show say Disco on them just seems unprofessional and makes no sense since Disco is not a shortened version of the word Discovery, there's no such thing as a shortened version of that word. There's clearly no reason why they can't say Discovery in full on the shirts.