test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Reasons why Star Trek is better than star wars:
stodatapiocard
Member Posts: 187 Arc User
Sure this has been around forever, but I'm just seeing how many people think star wars is better and what their excuse is for playing a Star Trek game instead of one of star wars' many sucky games, so without further ado:
Reasons Star Trek is better than star Wars:
Troi discarded the bun after one season. Princess Leia still has those donut braids.
Worf's speech is at least intelligible, but Harrison Ford has to translate for Chewbacca.
Star Trek villains do NOT have asthma.
Star Wars spawned "Battlestar Galactica." The worst Star Trek ever did was "Babylon Five."
Spock-- 'nuff said.
Star Trek-- the first space shuttle. Star Wars-- a hare-brained nuclear defense system.
Kirk met "God" and told him off; Sisko met Q and decked him flat; Luke Skywalker met Yodaand was speechless.
Star Wars androids look like electronic trash cans on wheels. Star Trek androids look like somepeople's ideal in masculine beauty.
Star Wars: Princess Leia. Star Trek: Lt. Uhura, Nurse Chapel, Yeo. Rand, Lt. Saavik, Cmr.Troi, Dr. Crusher, Lt. Yar, Ens. Ro, Dr. Pulaski, Nurse Ogawa, Amb. K'ehleyr, Amb. Lwaxana Troi, Maj. Kira, Lt. Dax, Kai Winn, Lursa, B'etor, Cmr. Sela, Vash, Adm. Netcheyev, Cpn. Janeway, Lt. Torres, Kes. Hmm. . .
Star Trek consists of 7 movies and 4 TV series, a total of approximately 375 hours, a figure climbing at warp speed. Star Wars, despite its following, is limited to 3 movies, a total of about 6 hours.
Reason One: There is more of Star Trek than Star Wars.
What with Star Trek: The Original Series, The Next Generation, Voyager, Deep Space 9, Enterprise, and soon-to-be-12 movies, the total runtime of all canon Star Trek material is over 22 days. Star Wars has three moviessix, if you count the prequels. The total runtime of all six movies is less than 14 hours. Though both franchises also boast a healthy extended universe in the form of novels, comics, and games, Star Trek handily beats Star Wars in screen time by more than 21 days. Let me rephrase that. Star Trek has over 37 times the material available for your viewing pleasure than Star Wars does. That is pretty much unbeatable.
Reason Two: Star Trek came first, and it looks like itll last longer.
The Star Trek franchise has the wonderful ability to both summon tremendous nostalgia and still produce sexy new stuff. To compare with Star Wars, the original Star Trek series debuted in 1966, and A New Hope came eleven years later in 1977. The Revenge of the Sith came out in 2006 and has a respectable 80% on Rotten Tomatoes, but in 2009 Star Trek starring Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto was released, and that holds an impressive Rotten-Tomatoes 95%. But wait, theres more! There is a highly anticipated sequel to Star Trek coming out next year, which will have Benedict Cumberbatch as the villain. Squee!
Reason Three: Time travel!
Pop quiz! In Star Trek, has time travel been used to:
Save whales
Meet Mark Twain
Rescue Earth from the Borg
All of the above.
Spoiler alert: the answer is d. If you dont know what Im talking about, go watch Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home for the whales, The Next Generation episode Times Arrow for Mark Twain, and Star Trek: First Contact for the Borg. If you do know what Im talking about, pop some popcorn and watch them anyway. Youre in for a treat either way.
Reason Four: Star Trek has more nonor parthuman main characters.
Worf. Data. BElanna. Tpol. Kes. Seven of Nine. Q. And most prominently, Spock. Star Trek explores the mentality and inner lives of aliens far more than Star Wars ever did. We cant even understand what Chewbacca and R2D2 are saying in the Star Wars films, but Star Trek gives loads of time to its alien and half-alien characters to develop their characters. A prime example (haha, get it? Prime?) is the reboot Star Trek, in which we get some delicious insight into Spocks backstory. Most of Star Wars examples of non-human characters (excluding Yoda, may he rest in peace) speak in incomprehensible noises or are fat ugly crime lords.
Reason Five: Star Trek functions as an allegorical tool.
Gene Roddenberrys original intent with Star Trek was to purposefully discuss issues and ideas that were cloaked in the allegory of futuristic space exploration. Though Roddenberry died in 1991, his tradition has been handed down through all of the series. Star Trek has discussed racism, homosexuality, death, AIDS, sentience, and more, and though it was sometimes heavy-handed or overdone, they often made for interesting discussions on the morality of characters actions.
Reason Six: Star Trek is geekier than Star Wars.
If youve seen Star Wars, congrats. Youre a normal member of society. However, if you are into Star Trek, you are part of a special community of people who share a deep bond. The geekier, the better! Not everyone has the stomach for a wriggling plate of gagh (live Klingon serpent worms, yum), but if you do, you can hobnob with the best of the geeks.
Reason Seven: Jar Jar Binks.
'Nuff said.
So live long and prosper, Trekkies. Lets go re-watch The Wrath of Khan!
Where do you fall in the Star Trek vs. Star Wars debate?
Reasons Star Trek is better than star Wars:
Troi discarded the bun after one season. Princess Leia still has those donut braids.
Worf's speech is at least intelligible, but Harrison Ford has to translate for Chewbacca.
Star Trek villains do NOT have asthma.
Star Wars spawned "Battlestar Galactica." The worst Star Trek ever did was "Babylon Five."
Spock-- 'nuff said.
Star Trek-- the first space shuttle. Star Wars-- a hare-brained nuclear defense system.
Kirk met "God" and told him off; Sisko met Q and decked him flat; Luke Skywalker met Yodaand was speechless.
Star Wars androids look like electronic trash cans on wheels. Star Trek androids look like somepeople's ideal in masculine beauty.
Star Wars: Princess Leia. Star Trek: Lt. Uhura, Nurse Chapel, Yeo. Rand, Lt. Saavik, Cmr.Troi, Dr. Crusher, Lt. Yar, Ens. Ro, Dr. Pulaski, Nurse Ogawa, Amb. K'ehleyr, Amb. Lwaxana Troi, Maj. Kira, Lt. Dax, Kai Winn, Lursa, B'etor, Cmr. Sela, Vash, Adm. Netcheyev, Cpn. Janeway, Lt. Torres, Kes. Hmm. . .
Star Trek consists of 7 movies and 4 TV series, a total of approximately 375 hours, a figure climbing at warp speed. Star Wars, despite its following, is limited to 3 movies, a total of about 6 hours.
Reason One: There is more of Star Trek than Star Wars.
What with Star Trek: The Original Series, The Next Generation, Voyager, Deep Space 9, Enterprise, and soon-to-be-12 movies, the total runtime of all canon Star Trek material is over 22 days. Star Wars has three moviessix, if you count the prequels. The total runtime of all six movies is less than 14 hours. Though both franchises also boast a healthy extended universe in the form of novels, comics, and games, Star Trek handily beats Star Wars in screen time by more than 21 days. Let me rephrase that. Star Trek has over 37 times the material available for your viewing pleasure than Star Wars does. That is pretty much unbeatable.
Reason Two: Star Trek came first, and it looks like itll last longer.
The Star Trek franchise has the wonderful ability to both summon tremendous nostalgia and still produce sexy new stuff. To compare with Star Wars, the original Star Trek series debuted in 1966, and A New Hope came eleven years later in 1977. The Revenge of the Sith came out in 2006 and has a respectable 80% on Rotten Tomatoes, but in 2009 Star Trek starring Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto was released, and that holds an impressive Rotten-Tomatoes 95%. But wait, theres more! There is a highly anticipated sequel to Star Trek coming out next year, which will have Benedict Cumberbatch as the villain. Squee!
Reason Three: Time travel!
Pop quiz! In Star Trek, has time travel been used to:
Save whales
Meet Mark Twain
Rescue Earth from the Borg
All of the above.
Spoiler alert: the answer is d. If you dont know what Im talking about, go watch Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home for the whales, The Next Generation episode Times Arrow for Mark Twain, and Star Trek: First Contact for the Borg. If you do know what Im talking about, pop some popcorn and watch them anyway. Youre in for a treat either way.
Reason Four: Star Trek has more nonor parthuman main characters.
Worf. Data. BElanna. Tpol. Kes. Seven of Nine. Q. And most prominently, Spock. Star Trek explores the mentality and inner lives of aliens far more than Star Wars ever did. We cant even understand what Chewbacca and R2D2 are saying in the Star Wars films, but Star Trek gives loads of time to its alien and half-alien characters to develop their characters. A prime example (haha, get it? Prime?) is the reboot Star Trek, in which we get some delicious insight into Spocks backstory. Most of Star Wars examples of non-human characters (excluding Yoda, may he rest in peace) speak in incomprehensible noises or are fat ugly crime lords.
Reason Five: Star Trek functions as an allegorical tool.
Gene Roddenberrys original intent with Star Trek was to purposefully discuss issues and ideas that were cloaked in the allegory of futuristic space exploration. Though Roddenberry died in 1991, his tradition has been handed down through all of the series. Star Trek has discussed racism, homosexuality, death, AIDS, sentience, and more, and though it was sometimes heavy-handed or overdone, they often made for interesting discussions on the morality of characters actions.
Reason Six: Star Trek is geekier than Star Wars.
If youve seen Star Wars, congrats. Youre a normal member of society. However, if you are into Star Trek, you are part of a special community of people who share a deep bond. The geekier, the better! Not everyone has the stomach for a wriggling plate of gagh (live Klingon serpent worms, yum), but if you do, you can hobnob with the best of the geeks.
Reason Seven: Jar Jar Binks.
'Nuff said.
So live long and prosper, Trekkies. Lets go re-watch The Wrath of Khan!
Where do you fall in the Star Trek vs. Star Wars debate?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Post edited by stodatapiocard on
0
Comments
Thanks! I love when the weekend begins with threads like this! Let the forum PVP begin!!!!!!( Opens a beer, and turns on the popcorn maker.)
Star Wars: 6 movies and no series so far. They are now owned by kiddie channel aka Disney world
Guess which one wins when it comes to o air total time.
Ain't Nobody Got Time for That
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
So much misinfo in that list. Star Trek 7 movies and 4 seasons? Last time I counted it were 12 movies and 28 played seasons on Star Trek, with 2 animated. Star Wars has 6 movies, and (insert the correct number here since I boycot those series) animated seasons.
And all that other subjective stuff, such as the girl list.....
Now, once you bring real numbers that are not subjective, then we can debate.
(btw, Star Trek ftw. Star Wars is pretty cool, but Trek is simply way ahead of it.)
EDIT: also dated, still a 12th movie incoming and it doesn't know that Episode VII: The Search for Yoda is already in production.
Join the Deltas today!
Neither does Vader. That's a life-support system because his lungs got barbecued. Last I looked, Trip Tucker died of that.
Star Wars androids are mass-produced. Star Trek androids are one-off novelty items.
No argument here.
Whoever you quoted needs to check their facts, unless they're conveniently forgetting that the odd-numbered films happened.
The person who first came up with a time travel plot needs to have somebody go back in time and shoot him in the foot repeatedly until he burns the manuscript in question. Overuse of time travel basically killed ENT (granted, "A Night in Sickbay" was the deathblow).
Wesley Crusher. Neelix. Bashir before they toned him down.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Also, Trekkers and Warriors buried the hatchet when both fandoms found out JJ Abrams was directing in both franchises. They united against him and have called a Fed/Klingon style ceasefire. So this entire thread is pointless.
Also, I suspect you are an Undine Spy trying to sow discord among us. It will not work.
-Leonard Nimoy, RIP
Star Trek has far more movies than that. Star Wars has a few TV series with Droids, Ewoks, and the Clone Wars, but combined they probably lasted as long as one Star Trek TV series. Of course, they are all cartoons, but they are still TV series. Also, you are missing the Clone Wars animated movie. So it is a total of 7 Star Wars movies. So Star Trek has about twice as many movies and far more TV air time as Star Wars.
Why can't people like both?
Yes, I like Trek more, but I like Wars a lot too. I don't get why if someone like Wars more, they need and 'excuse' to play a Trek game. You also seemingly answer your own question here:
You call them sucky, so, wouldn't that be the reason to play a better Trek game?
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I'm not personally calling any games sucky, I'm just using what the OP stated to answer his question.
What this bloke said.
I get that they are not everybody's cup of tea, that's just how people are.
At any rate, this has been discussed to death for many years now, there's no "better" franchise here.
They aren't even the "same spectrum" of sci fi. Star Wars is more or less fantasy with tech involved. Millenia pass without greater technological or socilogical evlution or mutation. It's like fantasy with knights and dragons, etc. Star Trek is more of a "continuity" and closer to our time and sort of contemporary. It doesn't use any mystic or magic like ideas.
I love them both and I can't say I like one better than the other. They have different mindsets and tell different stories and they both excell in doing it, in light of my taste and preference.
I also like Babylon 5, Galactica, Stargate, and plenty more Sci fi. I really don't find any need to prioritize in terms of what is best. And I think that only people who feel the need to validate their own choices and preferences before others, do.
And we all saw Highlander, so we know there can be only one.
Indeed.
Ironically, I only ended up watching MacGyver after SG-1 because Anderson did a good job in the latter - wouldn't even have noticed it otherwise.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
this^^^^^^^
system Lord Baal is dead
Wrong.
They are both fantastic is massively different ways...
Ye gods this is one boring topic that's been going on since time immemorial.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I mean really we can like both, it's so stupid that people need to feel better about one winning over the other, you don't get money if your team wins, CBS, and Disney do. So who cares sit back and relax, and enjoy the shows.:P
To be real honest, more people like Star Wars more then Trek. According to the media. In star wars you don't have to worry about knowing what Transphsic Chroniton Torpedoes are. Stuff like that drives normal people away. Just look how crazy people are going over Episode 7, and it's not even close to being release.
Turbo lasers and light sabers are all you need to know in star wars.
Actually it does have a series. Six seasons of the clone wars anyone? I'm watching it right now.