test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Possible for the JJ Enterprise to be in STO?

uss917019uss917019 Member Posts: 182 Arc User
edited June 2013 in Federation Discussion
Hey guys just wanted to ask if its possible that in the future they will make the alternate version of the Enterprise the one from JJ Abrams one.

If they do put that one I would certainly buy it:D
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Post edited by uss917019 on
«13456710

Comments

  • Options
    dashuk2381dashuk2381 Member Posts: 230 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    There is a way to make something similar using the Exeter cruiser plus some parts from the other cruisers(Connie/Vesper/Excalibur) but I can't remember the exact set up off the top of my head. I think the STOwiki page for the Exeter class lists the parts and hull pattern/color to use to get as close to the JJprise as possible.
  • Options
    shar487ashar487a Member Posts: 1,292 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    This addition would require CBS's permission, and it's doubtful that they will grant this if the ship is still being used in the current movies.
  • Options
    jam3s1701jam3s1701 Member Posts: 1,825 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Why would you want that in a CANON time line game!!!!!!

    Plus I don't want that joke of a ship anywhere near the last true trek environment
    JtaDmwW.png
  • Options
    admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,560 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Nononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononono!
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    jam3s1701 wrote: »
    Why would you want that in a CANON time line game!!!!!!

    Are you saying the movies aren't canon?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,560 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Are you saying the movies aren't canon?

    the JJ ones aren't
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    the JJ ones aren't

    Yes they are. They don't take place in the same timeline as TNG took place in. But they're definitely canon. Here's some added research for you.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,560 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    yes They Are. They Don't Take Place In The Same Timeline As Tng Took Place In. But They're Definitely Canon. Here's Some added Research For You.

    They Are Not!
  • Options
    agentexeideragentexeider Member Posts: 180 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    jam3s1701 wrote: »
    Why would you want that in a CANON time line game!!!!!!

    Plus I don't want that joke of a ship anywhere near the last true trek environment


    I'm sorry did you just say that......In a a game where Federation players are flying around in Cardassian, Ferengi, hell, even Dominion ships, grinding for bits of Dilithium, while min/maxing bug ships for PvP and the endless grinding for stuff. Keys, Lobi Crystals, and store after store of TRIBBLE, with only the new content of any worth being locked behind a luck based pay wall called a Lockbox.

    Sorry, this place stopped being Trek a LONG time ago.

    -AE
  • Options
    bubblygumsworthbubblygumsworth Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Anything from CBS can be used (when agreed upon) anything from Paramount can not be used. So that means anything "Trek" after nemesis that has been filmed by Paramount and not CBS will not be in the game. IP and copyright issues as the two studios spit from one another...



    (I think, its been a while since I had read up on the whole CBS/Paramount BS).
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    I drink, I vote, and I PvP!
  • Options
    shockwave85shockwave85 Member Posts: 1,040 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    It's not a matter of CBS wanting to, even if they did. CBS controls the rights to things within the realm of TV, and Paramount things within the realm of films. Since the JJ stuff only exists in the films, CBS can't grant rights for it.
    ssog-maco-sig.jpg
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    They Are Not!

    I don't think you understand what canon means.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    sasheriasasheria Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    the JJ ones aren't

    I think we are far from cannon when Federation are flying Dominion ships ;)
    To grow old is inevitable, to grow up is optional.
    Please review my campaign and I'll return the favor.
  • Options
    welshavengerwelshavenger Member Posts: 30 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Nononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononono!

    ^ so very much this.
    Fall-of-the-Babbage_zpsa9omaksh.jpg
  • Options
    deano65ehgdeano65ehg Member Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Dont forget we had it in beta n it was OP
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    With all the threads floating around the forums complaining about Cruisers and DPS and beam weapons, I'd have thought a lot more people would be chomping at the bit to fly THIS ship, with DHCs and Rapid Fire and Scatter Volley melting faces left and right.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    psycoticvulcanpsycoticvulcan Member Posts: 4,160 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    No, for three reasons.

    1) It's ugly.

    2) It belongs in a different universe.

    3) It's ugly.


    #1 and 3 are my personal opinion, of course.
    NJ9oXSO.png
    "Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
    -Thomas Marrone
  • Options
    snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    No, for three reasons.

    1) It's ugly.

    So's the Fek'hiri Carrier.
    2) It belongs in a different universe.

    So does the Galaxy X.
    3) It's ugly.

    So's the Nomad skin. Actually all of the star cruiser skins are like flying spoons from planet to planet. Completely ugly and annoying to look at.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    psycoticvulcanpsycoticvulcan Member Posts: 4,160 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    So's the Fek'hiri Carrier.

    That one's supposed to be ugly. It's from the underworld, remember?
    So does the Galaxy X.

    Who's to say the same person who designed it in that timeline didn't design it in ours?
    So's the Nomad skin. Actually all of the star cruiser skins are like flying spoons from planet to planet. Completely ugly and annoying to look at.

    I kind of like the Emissary, but to each his own.
    NJ9oXSO.png
    "Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
    -Thomas Marrone
  • Options
    thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    I would like a little clarity on the issue.

    To everyone who hates the new Enterprise, do you like the movies but dislike the design? Do you hate the design and the movies? Or do you hate the design because of how much you dislike the movies?

    I feel like the same sort of people who dislike the new movies would dislike STO, and yet the forums are full of people hissing and spitting at anything from the new Trek films like a vampire in sunlight. They both have the same types of criticism leveled against them (emphasis on violence and action over story, a low-ranking officer immediately promoted to captain of a starship), and yet lots of people sit around STO as the last bastion of old Trek.

    The only difference between JJ Abrams's Star Trek and STO is a lot of lens flares, and the new Enterprise is a fine design. Not perfect, but it looks great on film and in motion.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    sander233sander233 Member Posts: 3,992 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    I would love to see JJ's Enterprise as the Tier-5 Constitution refit, just for the unholy ragefest it would create.

    DO IT, CRYPTIC!! DO IT!!!
    16d89073-5444-45ad-9053-45434ac9498f.png~original

    ...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
    - Anne Bredon
  • Options
    trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    thratch1 wrote: »
    I would like a little clarity on the issue.

    To everyone who hates the new Enterprise, do you like the movies but dislike the design? Do you hate the design and the movies? Or do you hate the design because of how much you dislike the movies?

    I feel like the same sort of people who dislike the new movies would dislike STO, and yet the forums are full of people hissing and spitting at anything from the new Trek films like a vampire in sunlight. They both have the same types of criticism leveled against them (emphasis on violence and action over story, a low-ranking officer immediately promoted to captain of a starship), and yet lots of people sit around STO as the last bastion of old Trek.

    The only difference between JJ Abrams's Star Trek and STO is a lot of lens flares, and the new Enterprise is a fine design. Not perfect, but it looks great on film and in motion.
    There's a lot of opinions about that... but as for the forums having 'hissing and spitting', that's not unusual in MMO's :D

    Star Trek fans have mixed reactions to the film, for a multitude of reasons, some logical... some not nearly so. Best left at that, but I will tell that those who have a corrosive illogical hatred for this movie (for whatever reason) will always find reasons to dislike everything about it, including the ship.

    And some are in denial that it's nothing like what they want... okay, really done now.

    I wouldn't mind having the JJprise in-game, personally. If we have the Galaxy-X, which is also from an alternate timeline, why not that one? Plus the JJ movies, like it or not, are canon so they can used with permission... if they ever sort out who'd Cryptic have to talk to for the rights XD
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • Options
    admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,560 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    trek21 wrote: »
    There's a lot of opinions about that... but as for the forums having 'hissing and spitting', that's not unusual in MMO's :D

    Star Trek fans have mixed reactions to the film, for a multitude of reasons, some logical... some not nearly so. Best left at that, but I will tell that those who have a corrosive illogical hatred for this movie (for whatever reason) will always find reasons to dislike everything about it, including the ship.

    And some are in denial that it's nothing like what they want... okay, really done now.

    I wouldn't mind having the JJprise in-game, personally. If we have the Galaxy-X, which is also from an alternate timeline, why not that one? Plus the JJ movies, like it or not, are canon so they can used with permission... if they ever sort out who'd Cryptic have to talk to for the rights XD

    THEY ARE NOT CANNON. Why it was a good movie, it wasn't a TREK Movie. and First off the JJprise is to TMPish for the time.
  • Options
    trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    THEY ARE NOT CANNON. Why it was a good movie, it wasn't a TREK Movie. and First off the JJprise is to TMPish for the time.
    What part of 'all movies are canon, no conditions or requirements needed' do you not get? :rolleyes:

    And about it not being a Trek movie, first off... it's not in the Prime Universe, so they don't follow the same rules that the original did. So of course it'd be different than a film set in the Prime Universe.

    Long story short, it IS a Trek film, but simply a different kind of Trek film.

    And lastly, it's canon, not cannon :P
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • Options
    captainamericaxcaptainamericax Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    I don't understand all the hate for the JJ Trek. I personally love the new Star Trek more than the old. First off, before the JJ Trek, I rarely watched Star Trek, maybe a little when my dad would (He's a huge Trekkie), but after watching the 2009 Star Trek, I fell in love with it all. I like the older movies and such, but I still like the newer one. And to all the people complaining about it being non canon or atrocious, please think about what you are saying and look at the current year.

    Its 2013, people like CGI and realism in films. And with the JJ Trek being set in an alternate timeline, they can do whatever than want. I am almost willing to bet if a Star Trek EXACTLY like the old one was released, full of all the slow space combat scenes and quietness, no one would like it. Now i'm not saying the older Treks are bad, but things have to change after awhile, they need to update and improve.

    Now I would DEFINITELY like a Tier 5 JJ Enterprise given to us. I would buy that in a heart beat and laugh at all the people raging over it. The argument of realism and STO is so sad, its not even funny. When we have people in Alien ships and a war against the Borg that has made 0 progress, the last thing I would be complaining about is allowing the JJ Enterprise or old Connie in the game.
    "The Easiest Day, was Yesterday"
  • Options
    trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    I don't understand all the hate for the JJ Trek. I personally love the new Star Trek more than the old. First off, before the JJ Trek, I rarely watched Star Trek, maybe a little when my dad would (He's a huge Trekkie), but after watching the 2009 Star Trek, I fell in love with it all. I like the older movies and such, but I still like the newer one. And to all the people complaining about it being non canon or atrocious, please think about what you are saying and look at the current year.

    Its 2013, people like CGI and realism in films. And with the JJ Trek being set in an alternate timeline, they can do whatever than want. I am almost willing to bet if a Star Trek EXACTLY like the old one was released, full of all the slow space combat scenes and quietness, no one would like it. Now i'm not saying the older Treks are bad, but things have to change after awhile, they need to update and improve.

    Now I would DEFINITELY like a Tier 5 JJ Enterprise given to us. I would buy that in a heart beat and laugh at all the people raging over it. The argument of realism and STO is so sad, its not even funny. When we have people in Alien ships and a war against the Borg that has made 0 progress, the last thing I would be complaining about is allowing the JJ Enterprise or old Connie in the game.
    That's kinda why you don't get all the hate... because you're not as big a fan of Star Trek as many of us are ;)

    Many believe that a Star Trek film should be set according to the Prime Universe's rules: peace, fighting-only-when-necessary, and otherwise be a thought-provoking type of thing. This is despite the fact that JJ's Trek takes place in an alternate reality, and therefore, it is not contractually bound to follow those rules.

    People have issues with that, in many different forms, quite simply I think.
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • Options
    maddog0000doommaddog0000doom Member Posts: 1,017 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    i wish JJ never got his hands on my trek.

    the guy him self said he dosnt like star trek but like star wars and wants to make it more star wars like. i despise jj dumbing down trek turning it into another pew pew lense flare peice of TRIBBLE.

    the sooner he moves on to some thing else the better star trek will be. he should stick to bad tv shows or star wars
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    farmallmfarmallm Member Posts: 4,630 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    I would not waste my $ on that junk. I hate the JJ Trek, I hate the ship. However I will love turning it into cannon fodder for my KDF cruiser. I will target it on sight.
    Enterprise%20C_zpsrdrf3v8d.jpg

    USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
    Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
  • Options
    trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    i wish JJ never got his hands on my trek.

    the guy him self said he dosnt like star trek but like star wars and wants to make it more star wars like. i despise jj dumbing down trek turning it into another pew pew lense flare peice of TRIBBLE.

    the sooner he moves on to some thing else the better star trek will be. he should stick to bad tv shows or star wars
    First, you thinking his tv shows and the film are terrible doesn't make them so, not for everyone.

    And second, Star Trek is still around, virtually untouched except for Spock and Nero 'disappearing', along with the destruction of Romulus. But still, pretty much everything we've seen in TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT happened.

    JJ Trek continues in it's timeline, alongside the Prime Universe, but unaffected by each other otherwise. So I highly doubt he 'contaminated' anything: he simply made a new, independent version imo.
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • Options
    captainamericaxcaptainamericax Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    trek21 wrote: »
    That's kinda why you don't get all the hate... because you're not as big a fan of Star Trek as many of us are ;)

    Many believe that a Star Trek film should be set according to the Prime Universe's rules: peace, fighting-only-when-necessary, and otherwise be a thought-provoking type of thing. This is despite the fact that JJ's Trek takes place in an alternate reality, and therefore, it is not contractually bound to follow those rules.

    People have issues with that, in many different forms, quite simply I think.

    I can see how what you guys mean. If you compare it to the Godzilla films, all of them were fairly similar until the 98' American Godzilla that we all hated. Thankfully that didn't turn into a new movie saga.

    Or the Bayformers, that would be another example. However, the extreme amount of hatred is almost uncalled for. Abrams didn't destroy Star Trek, far from that, he made it better for the current generation and era. Yes it is more similar to Star Wars, but people like action and explosions. Sadly the cries against the JJ Trek isn't loud enough to stop it and probably wont ever be. Same with Transformers.

    Godzilla on the other hand... Everyone hated that 98 remake besides the few Americans who had never seen the older ones before. And thankfully more Godzilla movies have been confirmed for 2014 and he'll actually look similar to the older version but more updated.

    Basically what i'm saying is that the ratio of People who hate JJ Trek to People who like it is a very unbalanced scale.
    "The Easiest Day, was Yesterday"
Sign In or Register to comment.