test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Possible for the JJ Enterprise to be in STO?

1246710

Comments

  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    It's not a matter of whether or not Abrams Star Trek is canon, it's part of the franchise now so it is canon, but it is not a part of the history in which we are playing.
    We've all seen the movie so we know about what happens but these events did not occur in the timeline in which STO is taking place, the JJ Prise is part of that altered timeline, there is no history of it's existence in our time line.
    There is no way to bring the ship over without creating some story about it crossing timelines and dimensions to explain it's presence in our timeline.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    maxvitor wrote: »
    It's not a matter of whether or not Abrams Star Trek is canon, it's part of the franchise now so it is canon, but it is not a part of the history in which we are playing.
    We've all seen the movie so we know about what happens but these events did not occur in the timeline in which STO is taking place, the JJ Prise is part of that altered timeline, there is no history of it's existence in our time line.
    There is no way to bring the ship over without creating some story about it crossing timelines and dimensions to explain it's presence in our timeline.

    The Galaxy X is from a timeline that did not occur, and the end of All Good Things wiped its memory from existence. And yet ...
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • psycoticvulcanpsycoticvulcan Member Posts: 4,160 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    The Galaxy X is from a timeline that did not occur, and the end of All Good Things wiped its memory from existence. And yet ...

    Again, who's to say the person who designed it in that timeline didn't also design it in ours?
    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
  • xigbargxigbarg Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Reminds of Silver still existing even though Sonic 06 retconned itself.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Picard was moved to a timeline where the X exists, that is the story that connects that timeline with our own and that may well have been the final configuration planned for the ship had it not been destroyed. Since relations with the Klingons have clearly deteriorated a design to content with them would be inevitable. A 3 Nacelle dreadnaught is part of Star Trek soft canon though it was based on the Constitution class, given that the Galaxy class evolved from the Constitution class, a 3 Nacelle Dreadnaught following a similar design evolution isn't unreasonable. No such story as Picard's adventure, that connects the Abrams universe with our own exists and that is what would be needed to explain any technology crossing over, even if it is something as silly and stupid as Q pulling it across timelines to amuse himself.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    khan5000 wrote: »
    There are things called opinions and facts.
    People don't like the JJ Star Trek...this is what we call an opinion.
    Fact canon is anything that is made by the IP owners regardless if it is an alternate reality or reboot.
    Example James Bond
    The series was rebooted with the Daniel Craig movies. Even though it is a reboot and part of Bond's early missions these movies are part of the canon.

    People don't have to like the new Trek but it's officially part of Trek....it's funny because these are the same remarks I heard at Star Trek conventions when TNG first came out.

    Didn't watch the new casino royal but did it stay true to the original version just modernized or did it throw everything out of the past few decades of Bond. that will point out the difference
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    It's a darker Bond, more action less toys, and so far, no gimmicks.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    For those bringing the Gal X into this let's take a note here.

    The Galx from all good things is technically alternate timeline for these simple facts. One E-D is destroyed 2372 and Denna and Riker got married stopping the hostility between Riker and worf. Also in this timeline the Klingon Empire took over the Romulan Star Empire.

    Now thew Gal X of STO. The first encounters with the Dominion showed some problems with the tactical abilites of the Galaxy. Their first solutuion is the TRUE Venture refit with the addition phaser strips. Then we jump to the STO era(Which is roughly the time of the E-D GalX) and look at the situation. Fed and Klingons at war, Romluns split, Dominion being more active again, and the borg showing up. Not to different to ALL Good things Future. So is it logical to assume that the GalX would be developed, not to mention Picard copuld have mention the concept to Starfleet after All Good Things.

    What does JJ Wreck do? takes all the decades of Star Trek, wrap it all up and chucks it. Thus NOT CANON
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    maxvitor wrote: »
    It's a darker Bond, more action less toys, and so far, no gimmicks.

    okay but did it toss out the past or just retells it in a more modern light?
  • maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    okay but did it toss out the past or just retells it in a more modern light?
    That's hard to say, it's much more realistic, this Bond has the bearing of a man that kills for a living but doesn't seem to like his job, this Bond has demons and has closed himself off from part of his humanity, he's not the jovial womanizer of the Roger Moore days, he is much more stoic. There are no gimmicks, no Lotus submarines or gyrocopters in a dufflebag, Q seems to have been put out of business so the Bond surrounded by techno-wizardry that fans may be familiar with isn't there. I don't know if you would refer to that as tossing out the past, it would seems it's closer to the original authors intent before it was turned almost campy with all of the sci fi gimmickry and comedic nonsense.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    maxvitor wrote: »
    Picard was moved to a timeline where the X exists, that is the story that connects that timeline with our own and that may well have been the final configuration planned for the ship had it not been destroyed. Since relations with the Klingons have clearly deteriorated a design to content with them would be inevitable. A 3 Nacelle dreadnaught is part of Star Trek soft canon though it was based on the Constitution class, given that the Galaxy class evolved from the Constitution class, a 3 Nacelle Dreadnaught following a similar design evolution isn't unreasonable. No such story as Picard's adventure, that connects the Abrams universe with our own exists and that is what would be needed to explain any technology crossing over, even if it is something as silly and stupid as Q pulling it across timelines to amuse himself.

    I guess you are forgetting about Prime Spock
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited March 2013

    What does JJ Wreck do? takes all the decades of Star Trek, wrap it all up and chucks it. Thus NOT CANON

    Still has nothing to do with making it canon or not.
    I think Abrams version is very respectful to Star Trek. He could have done a movie that tosses out everything but he made it in an alternate reality. Everything that happened before still happened. This game is proof of that. Instead of thinking of the new universe replacing the old think of it like the Mirror Universe. A timeline that occurs alongside the Prime one.
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • psycoticvulcanpsycoticvulcan Member Posts: 4,160 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    okay but did it toss out the past or just retells it in a more modern light?

    The new Bond movies are a straight-up reboot. JJ made a deliberate effort to make sure his movies, while new, don't overwrite what came before.
    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
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    khan5000 wrote: »
    Still has nothing to do with making it canon or not.
    I think Abrams version is very respectful to Star Trek. He could have done a movie that tosses out everything but he made it in an alternate reality. Everything that happened before still happened. This game is proof of that. Instead of thinking of the new universe replacing the old think of it like the Mirror Universe. A timeline that occurs alongside the Prime one.
    Exactly this

    That's what you still don't get to understand admiralq1732: JJ's Trek did not, repeat NOT, overwrite or toss out any of the original Star Trek. Everything that we saw happen in TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT, happened.

    The only thing JJ's Trek did to the original timeline, was have Romulus explode, and have Prime Spock and Nero 'disappear' when they really went into the alternate timeline. Result? The timeline we see in JJ's Trek exists alongside the Prime Universe, instead of replacing or overwriting it.

    It's not that hard to get 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.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    trek21 wrote: »
    Exactly this

    That's what you still don't get to understand admiralq1732: JJ's Trek did not, repeat NOT, overwrite or toss out any of the original Star Trek. Everything that we saw happen in TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT, happened.

    The only thing JJ's Trek did to the original timeline, was have Romulus explode, and have Prime Spock and Nero 'disappear' when they really went into the alternate timeline. Result? The timeline we see in JJ's Trek exists alongside the Prime Universe, instead of replacing or overwriting it.

    It's not that hard to get imo

    Still not canon. also there's no reason for the ship to be in here and final fact you think the Temperal people would notice such an event but they are not seen. It's JJ trying to reboot the series in his own way and failing. If he screws up Star Wars as well God help him.
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Still not canon. also there's no reason for the ship to be in here and final fact you think the Temperal people would notice such an event but they are not seen. It's JJ trying to reboot the series in his own way and failing. If he screws up Star Wars as well God help him.
    Well, I tried :( *sighs* I don't think there's anything I can do to cure such desperate delusions imo... at least I hope it's not that (I'd prefer it being simple denial)

    Still, however much you think otherwise, you're still wrong: JJ Trek is canon, end of story and discussion.
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • meurikmeurik Member Posts: 856 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Still not canon. also there's no reason for the ship to be in here and final fact you think the Temperal people would notice such an event but they are not seen. It's JJ trying to reboot the series in his own way and failing. If he screws up Star Wars as well God help him.

    Having a bit of Deja Vu here. I know I was part of a similar discussion about the JJ Enterprise and the JJ movies in general, less than an hour ago in TTS chat.

    The JJ movies are no more or less canon than the previous 5 tv-series and 10 movies. The only difference is, while the previous Trek canon is part of one timeline, the JJ movie is a new timeline.

    "Anything that can happen, does happen, in parallel realities to our own."

    You may substitute reality for timeline as you see fit. The meaning is ultimately the same. The JJ timeline exists parallel to the "Prime timeline". It did not replace or overwrite the existing one as we know it. Unlike the "Back to the Future" concept of time, with just 1 timeline that can be altered, the JJ movie(s) chose the multiverse concept of time, where there are literally an infinite amount of timelines each co-existing with our own.

    The shape of each reality is based on what choices we make, and their following outcomes. The best way to describe it, is as such:

    You come to a fork in the road. Do you turn left, or do you turn right? In this reality you choose to turn left. After turning left, you end up getting hit by a car, and die.

    In another reality, you instead chose to turn right at the fork. This time, you aren't hit by a car, and you aren't killed. You go on with your life for many many years after this event, ultimately reshaping the "universe" around you, much different from the one in which you may have chosen to turn left. In that universe, you died, and were unable to effect much change on the universe as a whole.
    HvGQ9pH.png
  • psycoticvulcanpsycoticvulcan Member Posts: 4,160 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Still not canon. also there's no reason for the ship to be in here and final fact you think the Temperal people would notice such an event but they are not seen. It's JJ trying to reboot the series in his own way and failing. If he screws up Star Wars as well God help him.

    I don't think you quite understand what canon means.

    "\'ka-nen\ (n.) - a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works."

    The Abrams movie is accepted as official by the producers and 99.999% of the fanbase. So it's canon.

    There's really nothing more I can say that hasn't been said a dozen times before.
    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
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Still not canon. also there's no reason for the ship to be in here and final fact you think the Temperal people would notice such an event but they are not seen. It's JJ trying to reboot the series in his own way and failing. If he screws up Star Wars as well God help him.

    haha

    "failing"

    Right. Only if the universe revolves around you and what you think (it does not).
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Still not canon. also there's no reason for the ship to be in here and final fact you think the Temperal people would notice such an event but they are not seen. It's JJ trying to reboot the series in his own way and failing. If he screws up Star Wars as well God help him.

    Ok. I have been watching this thread mostly for my own amusement, but this post just played "the straw that broke the camel's back". I have one thing to say to you admiral.

    THIS. GAME. IS. NOT. CANON.

    Therefore... WAKE UP.

    If this movie wasn't canon, it doesn't matter. This game is FAR from canon, therefore, if anything, that would make this ship perfect for this game. I mean seriously, where in canon do you see federation captains flying Galor-class cardassian cruisers? Where in canon do you see KDF captains flying around in Tholian ships? Where in canon do you see ANYONE other than the Breen in a Chel'gret? And outside of one particularly SMALL portion of DS9 do you see anything but Jem'hadar and Vorta in Jem'hadar Attack Ships? You don't. Not in Canon.

    So... to reiterate... THIS GAME IS NOT CANON. Therefore any arguments against this ship appearing in game due to it not being canon DOESN'T MATTER. I have to keep telling age03 this as well, but you cannot apply a canon source to a non-canon entity. Therefore, regardless of whether or not JJ Abrams made a canon Star Trek or not, it doesn't matter.

    You know what the ultimate irony is? This game is BASED off of the time-line created by JJ Abrams. In this game, Romulus was destroyed by a supernova. And in this universe, Nero and Spock are both missing, presumed dead. Hm... SOUND FAMILIAR??? -.-

    Also previous posters are correct. All movies and series in Star Trek and all tech manuals that have been approved by the IP are considered hard canon sources. Books and novels are considered soft canon, and online websites and forums are considered amusing cannon fodder.

    And guess what... JJ Abrams Star Trek was approved by the IP... thus making it HARD CANON. Sorry.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    I don't think you quite understand what canon means.

    "\'ka-nen\ (n.) - a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works."

    The Abrams movie is accepted as official by the producers and 99.999% of the fanbase. So it's canon.

    There's really nothing more I can say that hasn't been said a dozen times before.

    Not 99.9999% I know of many who don't like it.
  • psycoticvulcanpsycoticvulcan Member Posts: 4,160 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Not 99.9999% I know of many who don't like it.

    I know plenty of people who hate Insurrection. Does that make it non-canon?
    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
  • cidstormcidstorm Member Posts: 1,220 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    The JJ prise is the worst Enterprise of all time and an affront to the Constitution class. I would only enjoy destroying it, but if it came with a tier 5 constitution refit I guess that would be ok.

    And I liked the new movie too, I just hate that piece of junk.
  • magusofborgmagusofborg Member Posts: 186 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    THIS. GAME. IS. NOT. CANON.

    Therefore... WAKE UP.

    If this movie wasn't canon, it doesn't matter. This game is FAR from canon, therefore, if anything, that would make this ship perfect for this game. I mean seriously, where in canon do you see federation captains flying Galor-class cardassian cruisers? Where in canon do you see KDF captains flying around in Tholian ships? Where in canon do you see ANYONE other than the Breen in a Chel'gret? And outside of one particularly SMALL portion of DS9 do you see anything but Jem'hadar and Vorta in Jem'hadar Attack Ships? You don't. Not in Canon.

    So... to reiterate... THIS GAME IS NOT CANON. Therefore any arguments against this ship appearing in game due to it not being canon DOESN'T MATTER. I have to keep telling age03 this as well, but you cannot apply a canon source to a non-canon entity. Therefore, regardless of whether or not JJ Abrams made a canon Star Trek or not, it doesn't matter.

    You know what the ultimate irony is? This game is BASED off of the time-line created by JJ Abrams. In this game, Romulus was destroyed by a supernova. And in this universe, Nero and Spock are both missing, presumed dead. Hm... SOUND FAMILIAR??? -.-

    Also previous posters are correct. All movies and series in Star Trek and all tech manuals that have been approved by the IP are considered hard canon sources. Books and novels are considered soft canon, and online websites and forums are considered amusing cannon fodder.

    And guess what... JJ Abrams Star Trek was approved by the IP... thus making it HARD CANON. Sorry.


    Nice, this needs to be in a sticky thread titled, "Before any idiot brings up canon in relation to this game...."
    Joined August 2009
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Please NO JJ.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Nice, this needs to be in a sticky thread titled, "Before any idiot brings up canon in relation to this game...."

    I'd have to modify it and remove a few elements, like named players and direct thread commentary, but yeah, it probably should XD.
    age03 wrote: »
    Please NO JJ.

    I thought you liked the old-school ship designs. The JJ Abrams Enterprise is just a Connie with modern CGI.

    If you actually look at it closely, other than a few tiny changes (like the Nacelles and Deflector Dish), they are almost the same.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • magusofborgmagusofborg Member Posts: 186 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    age03 wrote: »
    Please NO JJ.

    There's always that older generation that refuses to accept the current version of Trek.

    Can you believe there were people who refused to accept TNG as true Trek back when it first came out?
    Joined August 2009
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    @ hereticknight085 It is not the same and I ma still ignoring your posts.

    @magusofborg I couldn't agree with you further ToS,TMP rules.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
  • hevachhevach Member Posts: 2,777 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Canon doesn't matter in these things. It never matters. License does, which is what that quote from Stahl about CBS considering the fan's opinion to be canon and not their own - they don't deal in canon, they deal in licensing. And the JJ movies fall under a different license owned by a different company.
    You know what the ultimate irony is? This game is BASED off of the time-line created by JJ Abrams. In this game, Romulus was destroyed by a supernova. And in this universe, Nero and Spock are both missing, presumed dead. Hm... SOUND FAMILIAR??? -.-

    That was not created by JJ Abrams (to nitpick, JJ Abrams didn't actually create anything, he only directed it - the movie was created by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman). It was created by Mike Johnson of IDW Publishing and is, in fact, not canon to either timeline and exists as a licensed product itself separate from CBS or Paramount's Star Trek IPs.
  • thratch1thratch1 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    age03 wrote: »
    @ hereticknight085 It is not the same and I ma still ignoring your posts.

    @magusofborg I couldn't agree with you further ToS,TMP rules.

    I don't think you understood what Magus was getting at.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sign In or Register to comment.