I also think it is a fail expansion, just due to the fact that it kills the faction balance. Now FED will be super overpowered and KDF will continue to drown. Thing is, in this game your faction does not matter in pvp. Its not WOW where one side is always better at pvp the other at pve. The problem with this game is that KDF and FED are to unbalanced, FEDs have WAY to many ships only available to them. Fix it by releasing an equal number of KDF ships to counter balance this huge FED swing.
Star Trek has always been rather Fed Centric as a franchise.
I am really dreading the day Cryptic finally drops even the thin charade of actually caring about Trek and just starts shoe horning JJ Verse ships into the C-Store in their desperate quest to cash in before everything goes TRIBBLE up.,
I mean hell, JJ is working on Star Wars these days, they could probably get in touch and get permission to put Star Destroyers and X-Wings and lightsabers on the C-Store. It would make about as much sense.
What does JJ Abrams have to do with anything?
Star Wars stuff will not come into STO. The closest we will ever have to lightsabers are the Nanopulse Lirpas and Bat'leths from the Winter Event and maybe the Tholian Crystaline Sword after it absorbs energy.
As for AR content... It won't come via C-Store. If there is a movie tie in thing, it will be promo or lockbox. Besides... I think you forgot about the Narada inspired Tal Shiar Adapted ships from the Tal Shiar lockbox.
Umm, Ok,, lets bring you up to speed.. It was JJ Abrams in 2009 that destroyed Romulus, and gave the enterprise a windshield.
You can legitimately blame Abrams for the windshield, but it was Orci and Kurtzman (shining examples of why Ascended Fanboys are sometimes a bad thing for a franchise - see also Stephen Moffat and Doctor Who) who blew up Romulus and then destroyed most of mid-23rd-century Starfleet with a jumped-up mining ship. Credit (or discredit) where it is due, please.
I'm not going to split straws with anyone on this.. Abrams was the producer and director. He had full control and responsibility for the content and story line of that movie.. The whole of the matter and the blame lies expressly on his shoulders..
The Cardassian origin story does not have to tie in directly with the current game events,
So after making the origin sorties of the previous 3, and upcoming 4th, faction tied directly into the game's overall narrative, Cryptic is just going to pull a 180 and make the Cardassian origin story not tie into the overall narrative despite that being poor writing defined.
How does the Romulan origin story directly relate to current events? It doesn't until you chose between UFP and KDF.
How does the TOS origin story directly relate? It won't until we jump forward into the 25th century.
Are these two points jokes?
The Romulan story begins with the Elachi, and Iconian servitor race, attacking and destroying your colony, as well as a meet up with Hakeev, the leader of the Tal Shair, who are allied with the Iconians, and most of the Rom's early missions involve dealing with the Tal Shiar and Elachi, which, are previously pointed out, work for the Iconians.
Similarly, the new ToS origin story ties directly into the Temporal Cold war events before you jump to the current day when you come into contact with agents of the Temporal Cold War in the ToS era.
both added factions plots tie directly into the game's current events beginning from the tutorial and introductory mission sequence.
And we have to remember that there is a wide gap between the end of Deep Space Nine and the onset of STO's evnt. A cardassian origin story could be set anywhere in that gap. When it drops into the Cardassian Front portion of the core game, a blank screen with "X years later..." could set it off.
A time skip of years is totally not going to happen for reasons that should be immediately obvious.
Yeahhh, I'll give em that much. It doesnt matter which factions storyline you follow, Cryptic keeps its ducks all in a row.. The story telling may not be great, but the conceptualization and planning are brilliant..
There is really nowhere to add Cardassian pre-borg, since those stroylines are already complete and developed, and theres no mention of Cardassians being involved. Even the Cardassian missions were the Feds/Klingons doing stuff because the Cardassians and Bajorans couldn't do it themselves. So it wouldn't make sense for the Cardassians to be playable during that.
The storyline has been tweaked, revised and retconned quite a bit since the game launched. For instance I no longer have to take a jum jum stick from DS9 to Memory Alpha. The borg story arc is vastly different from when I took my first three toons through it 6 years ago. So if they make a new mini-faction they can tweak, revise and retcon it to fit what's out there now.
I also think it is a fail expansion, just due to the fact that it kills the faction balance. Now FED will be super overpowered and KDF will continue to drown. Thing is, in this game your faction does not matter in pvp. Its not WOW where one side is always better at pvp the other at pve. The problem with this game is that KDF and FED are to unbalanced, FEDs have WAY to many ships only available to them. Fix it by releasing an equal number of KDF ships to counter balance this huge FED swing.
Star Trek has always been rather Fed Centric as a franchise.
I am really dreading the day Cryptic finally drops even the thin charade of actually caring about Trek and just starts shoe horning JJ Verse ships into the C-Store in their desperate quest to cash in before everything goes TRIBBLE up.,
I mean hell, JJ is working on Star Wars these days, they could probably get in touch and get permission to put Star Destroyers and X-Wings and lightsabers on the C-Store. It would make about as much sense.
What does JJ Abrams have to do with anything?
Star Wars stuff will not come into STO. The closest we will ever have to lightsabers are the Nanopulse Lirpas and Bat'leths from the Winter Event and maybe the Tholian Crystaline Sword after it absorbs energy.
As for AR content... It won't come via C-Store. If there is a movie tie in thing, it will be promo or lockbox. Besides... I think you forgot about the Narada inspired Tal Shiar Adapted ships from the Tal Shiar lockbox.
Umm, Ok,, lets bring you up to speed.. It was JJ Abrams in 2009 that destroyed Romulus, and gave the enterprise a windshield.
You can legitimately blame Abrams for the windshield, but it was Orci and Kurtzman (shining examples of why Ascended Fanboys are sometimes a bad thing for a franchise - see also Stephen Moffat and Doctor Who) who blew up Romulus and then destroyed most of mid-23rd-century Starfleet with a jumped-up mining ship. Credit (or discredit) where it is due, please.
I'm not going to split straws with anyone on this.. Abrams was the producer and director. He had full control and responsibility for the content and story line of that movie.. The whole of the matter and the blame lies expressly on his shoulders..
There is no blame to be laid, it was a great movie, much better than ST4, 5, Generations, and Insurrection.
It is obviously better than Insurrection, but certainly not much better than Star Trek 4 and Generations. Star Trek 5 doesn't exist so I don't know why you are including it. For some strange reason, they went straight from Star Trek 4 to Star Trek 6.
Whether it is better than Star Trek 4 and Generations depends on the fan. Star Trek 2 is undeniably the best Star Trek movie yet while the others are based on the best, worst, and medium. First Contact, Star Trek 4, Star Trek 6, and Star Trek 2009 are considered within the Best category after Star Trek 2. Generations and Star Trek 3 are in the middle category. Into Darkness, Insurrection, Nemesis, and Star Trek 1 are considered the worst. Personally, I would rate Star Trek 2009 as 5th place with Star Trek 4 in 2nd place and Star Trek Generations as 6th place. Last place would be Into Darkness and Nemesis in 10th place.
The storyline has been tweaked, revised and retconned quite a bit since the game launched. For instance I no longer have to take a jum jum stick from DS9 to Memory Alpha. The borg story arc is vastly different from when I took my first three toons through it 6 years ago. So if they make a new mini-faction they can tweak, revise and retcon it to fit what's out there now.
The difference was that all of the stuff you mention was release, or shortly after release, content that even the Devs admitted sucked, and that they were going to redo anyways.
Altering at that point to fit the new narrative of the Roms was an easy thing to do, because they were going to redo it anyways even if the Roms weren't there.
However, going back and redoing the redo, when they think the first redo is fine, just for a Cardassian faction, when its far more logical to just make them start at level 50ish, and insert an introductory arc to get them into whatever the current events are, makes zero sense.
Its a total false comparison that totally ignores everything about why that stuff was redone.tweaked in the first place.
The Cardassian arc itself is radically different from the first time I took characters through it. But the missions themselves are mostly the same. The Borg arc combined the Undine and Borg missions. But they're mostly the same. All that's really different is the story boxes tying it together and the narrative. The stuff I actually do on the maps is very similar to the original missions.
Altering the Cardassian arc AGAIN wouldn't be any harder than any other time they've revised missions. If they tie it to a new expansion to fit in a new mini-faction, it becomes the exact same process they've used in the past.
In short, not only is it a reasonable idea, it's safe to assume that based on how they've worked out stuff so far, that if they were to do a Cardassian mini-faction like a Romulan mini-faction, that would include tweaks to the story arc. Since that's what they do.
It's really not that hard. For a Cardassian origin story, they simply need to create some Cardi-centric content that brings them into whatever point in the game's current timeline as they see fit. They did it with the Romulans. They are doing it with the TOSers. And they can tweak the origin story however needed to make it fit without overhauling the current mission structure. Why are people trying to come up with all the reasons why it would be so hard to do? An yes, I saw the comment about ther just being no point. Well the point is the same as it was for adding playable Romulans and now TOSers. If you have to ask what that point is, then I don't know what to say...
If people play romulans, and if they will play TOSers... They will play Cardasians... Thst's reason enough, IMHO.
It's how many people will play Cardassians, and how much they will spend to do it. The Romulan faction is the least popular, the Cardassian would be even less so since they were mostly (only?) in DS9. Romulans and Klingons appeared from TOS onward.
If STO had ten times as many players as it does now, side projects like more KDF-only or Romulan-only content makes business sense. Even then Cardassian-only content might not.
Even if you personally would buy a $130 Cardassian Expansion Pack, Cryptic needs many thousands of people willing to buy it to pay for the development.
I also think it is a fail expansion, just due to the fact that it kills the faction balance. Now FED will be super overpowered and KDF will continue to drown. Thing is, in this game your faction does not matter in pvp. Its not WOW where one side is always better at pvp the other at pve. The problem with this game is that KDF and FED are to unbalanced, FEDs have WAY to many ships only available to them. Fix it by releasing an equal number of KDF ships to counter balance this huge FED swing.
Star Trek has always been rather Fed Centric as a franchise.
I am really dreading the day Cryptic finally drops even the thin charade of actually caring about Trek and just starts shoe horning JJ Verse ships into the C-Store in their desperate quest to cash in before everything goes TRIBBLE up.,
I mean hell, JJ is working on Star Wars these days, they could probably get in touch and get permission to put Star Destroyers and X-Wings and lightsabers on the C-Store. It would make about as much sense.
What does JJ Abrams have to do with anything?
Star Wars stuff will not come into STO. The closest we will ever have to lightsabers are the Nanopulse Lirpas and Bat'leths from the Winter Event and maybe the Tholian Crystaline Sword after it absorbs energy.
As for AR content... It won't come via C-Store. If there is a movie tie in thing, it will be promo or lockbox. Besides... I think you forgot about the Narada inspired Tal Shiar Adapted ships from the Tal Shiar lockbox.
Umm, Ok,, lets bring you up to speed.. It was JJ Abrams in 2009 that destroyed Romulus, and gave the enterprise a windshield.
You can legitimately blame Abrams for the windshield, but it was Orci and Kurtzman (shining examples of why Ascended Fanboys are sometimes a bad thing for a franchise - see also Stephen Moffat and Doctor Who) who blew up Romulus and then destroyed most of mid-23rd-century Starfleet with a jumped-up mining ship. Credit (or discredit) where it is due, please.
I'm not going to split straws with anyone on this.. Abrams was the producer and director. He had full control and responsibility for the content and story line of that movie.. The whole of the matter and the blame lies expressly on his shoulders..
There is no blame to be laid, it was a great movie, much better than ST4, 5, Generations, and Insurrection.
It is obviously better than Insurrection, but certainly not much better than Star Trek 4 and Generations. Star Trek 5 doesn't exist so I don't know why you are including it. For some strange reason, they went straight from Star Trek 4 to Star Trek 6.
Whether it is better than Star Trek 4 and Generations depends on the fan. Star Trek 2 is undeniably the best Star Trek movie yet while the others are based on the best, worst, and medium. First Contact, Star Trek 4, Star Trek 6, and Star Trek 2009 are considered within the Best category after Star Trek 2. Generations and Star Trek 3 are in the middle category. Into Darkness, Insurrection, Nemesis, and Star Trek 1 are considered the worst. Personally, I would rate Star Trek 2009 as 5th place with Star Trek 4 in 2nd place and Star Trek Generations as 6th place. Last place would be Into Darkness and Nemesis in 10th place.
Your entire list is subjective and I do not agree with it at all. For me, the best is First Contact, TWOK is down about #4 or 5 due to rampant bad science. I am not fond of "fish out of water comedies" which is what ST4 is, thus its low ratings for me. ST5, which does exist sorry, looses ground for being a rehash of "The Way to Eden" but still rates higher than TMP, Search for Spock rates higher than ST6. Basically the way fans rate the films changes by the fan talked to.
Star Trek 5 doesn't exist. It is impossible for there to be a Star Trek movie so bad that I would subconsciously remove all traces of it from my mind. TWOK is undeniably the most popular Star Trek movie in Top Star Trek Movies rankings. This is not subjective, this is fact. 9 out of 10 Top Star Trek Movies rankings or even higher will have TWOK in first place. IMO, it is the reason why Into Darkness gets such a low score. All those reversed Star Trek 2 references just feels nauseating. Just the magic blood and interstellar transporter that removes any need for starships or danger would push it to around a 8. I tried to put the Best, Medium, and Worst based on the various rankings that I have seen which is why didn't give a ranking for most.
Rotten Tomatoes would probably be the best way to rank Star Trek movies since it relies on thousands of people for its rating. On Rotten Tomatoes for the Critic scores, Star Trek 2 is at 88%, First Contact is at 93%, Star Trek 4 is at 85%, Star Trek 6 is at 83%, Star Trek 2009 is at 95%, Into Darkness is at 87%, Star Trek 3 is at 78%, Generations is at 48%, Insurrection is at 55%, Nemesis is at 37%, and the Motion Picture is at 47%. For the Audience scores on Rotten Tomatoes, Star Trek 2 is at 90%, First Contact is at 89%, Star Trek 4 is at 80%, Star Trek 6 is at 83%, Star Trek 2009 is at 91%, Into Darkness is at 90%, Star Trek 3 is at 61%, Generations is at 57%, Insurrection is at 45%, Nemesis is at 50%, and Star Trek 1 is at 42%.
Aside from Into Darkness, my list is consistent with the Rotten Tomatoes Audience scores with Best being 80% and above, Medium being between 50% and 80%, and Worst being 50% and below. Not sure how Nemesis beat Insurrection and Star Trek 1 since it is classified as the movie that ended Star Trek for years, but it might be due to the amount of action in Nemesis compared to Insurrection and Star Trek 1. Into Darkness can be explained through not having those negative reactions that I have mentioned. It is probably the difference between an Old Star Trek fan and New Star Trek fan. If Into Darkness wasn't a Star Trek movie, then it would be much higher on my list of Science Fiction movies.
For anyone interested,
Rotten Tomato's Critic Scores
1. Star Trek 2009
2. First Contact
3. The Wrath of Khan
4. Into Darkness
5. The Voyage Home
6. The Undiscovered Country
7. The Search for Spock
8. Insurrection
9. Generations
10. The Motion Picture
11. Nemesis
Rotten Tomato's Audience Scores
1. Star Trek 2009
2. The Wrath of Khan
2. Into Darkness
4. First Contact
5. The Undiscovered Country
6. The Voyage Home
7. The Search for Spock
8. Generations
9. Nemesis
10. Insurrection
11. The Motion Picture
I never said it would be harder for them to do, only that there is no reason to do it.
The reason to do it would be to facilitate the creation of another mini-faction.
Again, you ignore the entire context and reason behind why the stuff was changed in the first place, i.e. that is sucked and thus the devs were willing to spend money to make it better. Now that its good, they have no reason to spend the money to change it for a sideways quality change just for Cardassians.
Again, the missions themselves haven't changed much. So if the content "sucked" ... it STILL sucks. Boldly They Rode is the exact same mission it always was. The story bits around how you end up IN Boldly They Rode changed.
the entire climax of the film is built on a flat impossibility, particle density in a nebula is too low to obscure anything, they only look like clouds from light years away.
I agree with everything you say about ratings and reviews. But this one point I have to nit pick.
You are ready to toss out the plot of The Wrath of Khan because of a fanciful, fictional take, on a nebula, but in that same film you are completely ready to believe in ...
Warp Drive, The Genesis Device, Subspace, Subspace communications, Transporters, the existence of Vulcans, who have green blood, and so very much more.
I mean, as a plot device the Nebula is there to add drama and make the combat scene like a very tense submarine combat, breaking away from the Horatio Hornblower model of tall ships combat that Roddenberry laid out for Star Trek back in its TV show days. It was a chance to give a backdrop to Kirk and his crew to outsmart a better armed, more powerful foe in a game of space-cat-and-mouse.
It required some suspension of disbelief.
But so does almost everything else in Star Trek. From the transporter device, to the sound effects you see in that very scene of phasers going off and torpedoes exploding.
I think the dense nebula is the least of the things that stretch belief in the story.
The particulate density in the nebula wasn't the issue (and incidentally, the Coal Sack Nebula would like to have a word with you about that whole "only looks like a cloud from a distance" thing). The issue was with the energy flux in the nebula - it was, apparently, a stellar nursery, and the protostars forming threw out enough radiation across a broad-enough band that sensors were useless. Those ship designs didn't have actual physical windows in the bridge, as you may recall, so if the sensors were scrambled, vague images were the best they could hope for. (You should have brought up planets exploding, and other planets "shifting orbits" as a result, as if the famed thought-experiment of ball bearings rolling around on a rubber sheet were an accurate depiction of orbital mechanics.)
And if you're going to complain about bad science, well, I think that pretty much does for all the Trek movies, but First Contact is certainly no less an offender. I mean, if the Borg had gone backtime and assimilated Earth before Vulcan First Contact, thus turning the entire surface of Earth into a mass of machinery - where did the Sovereign-class Enterprise and her crew come from? Why were they immune to the changing of history, when Earth wasn't? Why does the Enterprise have changing deck totals? Are the two lowest decks in fact virtual? (Dialog at one point specifies the ship has 24 decks; later dialog claims the Borg are invading through Deck 26.) If Data is in fact immune to warp plasma (except for that one patch of "skin" installed by the Queen), why has he never been assigned to work with the warp engines during dangerous situations? And so forth.
I also think it is a fail expansion, just due to the fact that it kills the faction balance. Now FED will be super overpowered and KDF will continue to drown. Thing is, in this game your faction does not matter in pvp. Its not WOW where one side is always better at pvp the other at pve. The problem with this game is that KDF and FED are to unbalanced, FEDs have WAY to many ships only available to them. Fix it by releasing an equal number of KDF ships to counter balance this huge FED swing.
Star Trek has always been rather Fed Centric as a franchise.
I am really dreading the day Cryptic finally drops even the thin charade of actually caring about Trek and just starts shoe horning JJ Verse ships into the C-Store in their desperate quest to cash in before everything goes TRIBBLE up.,
I mean hell, JJ is working on Star Wars these days, they could probably get in touch and get permission to put Star Destroyers and X-Wings and lightsabers on the C-Store. It would make about as much sense.
What does JJ Abrams have to do with anything?
Star Wars stuff will not come into STO. The closest we will ever have to lightsabers are the Nanopulse Lirpas and Bat'leths from the Winter Event and maybe the Tholian Crystaline Sword after it absorbs energy.
As for AR content... It won't come via C-Store. If there is a movie tie in thing, it will be promo or lockbox. Besides... I think you forgot about the Narada inspired Tal Shiar Adapted ships from the Tal Shiar lockbox.
Umm, Ok,, lets bring you up to speed.. It was JJ Abrams in 2009 that destroyed Romulus, and gave the enterprise a windshield.
You can legitimately blame Abrams for the windshield, but it was Orci and Kurtzman (shining examples of why Ascended Fanboys are sometimes a bad thing for a franchise - see also Stephen Moffat and Doctor Who) who blew up Romulus and then destroyed most of mid-23rd-century Starfleet with a jumped-up mining ship. Credit (or discredit) where it is due, please.
I'm not going to split straws with anyone on this.. Abrams was the producer and director. He had full control and responsibility for the content and story line of that movie.. The whole of the matter and the blame lies expressly on his shoulders..
There is no blame to be laid, it was a great movie, much better than ST4, 5, Generations, and Insurrection.
It is obviously better than Insurrection, but certainly not much better than Star Trek 4 and Generations. Star Trek 5 doesn't exist so I don't know why you are including it. For some strange reason, they went straight from Star Trek 4 to Star Trek 6.
Whether it is better than Star Trek 4 and Generations depends on the fan. Star Trek 2 is undeniably the best Star Trek movie yet while the others are based on the best, worst, and medium. First Contact, Star Trek 4, Star Trek 6, and Star Trek 2009 are considered within the Best category after Star Trek 2. Generations and Star Trek 3 are in the middle category. Into Darkness, Insurrection, Nemesis, and Star Trek 1 are considered the worst. Personally, I would rate Star Trek 2009 as 5th place with Star Trek 4 in 2nd place and Star Trek Generations as 6th place. Last place would be Into Darkness and Nemesis in 10th place.
Your entire list is subjective and I do not agree with it at all. For me, the best is First Contact, TWOK is down about #4 or 5 due to rampant bad science. I am not fond of "fish out of water comedies" which is what ST4 is, thus its low ratings for me. ST5, which does exist sorry, looses ground for being a rehash of "The Way to Eden" but still rates higher than TMP, Search for Spock rates higher than ST6. Basically the way fans rate the films changes by the fan talked to.
Star Trek 5 doesn't exist. It is impossible for there to be a Star Trek movie so bad that I would subconsciously remove all traces of it from my mind. TWOK is undeniably the most popular Star Trek movie in Top Star Trek Movies rankings. This is not subjective, this is fact. 9 out of 10 Top Star Trek Movies rankings or even higher will have TWOK in first place. IMO, it is the reason why Into Darkness gets such a low score. All those reversed Star Trek 2 references just feels nauseating. Just the magic blood and interstellar transporter that removes any need for starships or danger would push it to around a 8. I tried to put the Best, Medium, and Worst based on the various rankings that I have seen which is why didn't give a ranking for most.
Rotten Tomatoes would probably be the best way to rank Star Trek movies since it relies on thousands of people for its rating. On Rotten Tomatoes for the Critic scores, Star Trek 2 is at 88%, First Contact is at 93%, Star Trek 4 is at 85%, Star Trek 6 is at 83%, Star Trek 2009 is at 95%, Into Darkness is at 87%, Star Trek 3 is at 78%, Generations is at 48%, Insurrection is at 55%, Nemesis is at 37%, and the Motion Picture is at 47%. For the Audience scores on Rotten Tomatoes, Star Trek 2 is at 90%, First Contact is at 89%, Star Trek 4 is at 80%, Star Trek 6 is at 83%, Star Trek 2009 is at 91%, Into Darkness is at 90%, Star Trek 3 is at 61%, Generations is at 57%, Insurrection is at 45%, Nemesis is at 50%, and Star Trek 1 is at 42%.
Aside from Into Darkness, my list is consistent with the Rotten Tomatoes Audience scores with Best being 80% and above, Medium being between 50% and 80%, and Worst being 50% and below. Not sure how Nemesis beat Insurrection and Star Trek 1 since it is classified as the movie that ended Star Trek for years, but it might be due to the amount of action in Nemesis compared to Insurrection and Star Trek 1. Into Darkness can be explained through not having those negative reactions that I have mentioned. It is probably the difference between an Old Star Trek fan and New Star Trek fan. If Into Darkness wasn't a Star Trek movie, then it would be much higher on my list of Science Fiction movies.
For anyone interested,
Rotten Tomato's Critic Scores
1. Star Trek 2009
2. First Contact
3. The Wrath of Khan
4. Into Darkness
5. The Voyage Home
6. The Undiscovered Country
7. The Search for Spock
8. Insurrection
9. Generations
10. The Motion Picture
11. Nemesis
Rotten Tomato's Audience Scores
1. Star Trek 2009
2. The Wrath of Khan
2. Into Darkness
4. First Contact
5. The Undiscovered Country
6. The Voyage Home
7. The Search for Spock
8. Generations
9. Nemesis
10. Insurrection
11. The Motion Picture
No one else on this planet gets to tell me how "I" rate the movies, no one. I don't give a half a damn about critics or rotten tomatoes, never have, never will. I also do not care about how "popular" TWOK is when the entire climax of the film is built on a flat impossibility, particle density in a nebula is too low to obscure anything, they only look like clouds from light years away. Your personal bias against Star Trek The Final Frontier also does not remove it from reality. Nor does altering the lists you present by removing Final Frontier reinforce your opinion.
Where did I tell you how to rate the movies? I merely mentioned how I would rate the movies according to my personal opinion and how the movies are rated according to public consensus instead of just one person or a small group of people giving their opinion. So what if you disagree with my opinion of what Star Trek movies are good or bad? You post your opinion and I post mine. It is how the Internet works for good or bad.
I have no right to tell you how to rate the movies according to your personal beliefs just like you have no right to say that I have to believe in a certain movie that doesn't exist as far as I know. If someone believes that the Star Wars prequels don't exist or that they are the best Star Wars movies ever, then good for them. Surprisingly enough, the Phantom Menace has done better than Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis considering the amount of hatred that it gets with 56% for its Critic Score and 60% for its Audience score.
Delusions make life tolerable. It could be something as simple as a terrible movie that you forgot or something complex like Justice, Mercy, and Love. You can either believe that Justice, Mercy, and Love exist and not everything can be explained through science or you can believe that they are merely delusions that allow people to cope with a cruel reality. As long as a Delusion doesn't negatively affect other people, then they can believe whatever they want.
Boldly they rode was never changed though. What the flying TRIBBLE did you smoke?
Boldy They Rode began as a Dominion based Featured Episode Arc. The Cardassian missions that are now part of the Cardassian Arc that now features the Dominion Arc were originally part of the captain rank levelling band and the Dominion Featured Episode Arc came much later and was its own separate thing. They RETCONNED the storyline, smooshing the Dominion Arc into the Cardassian missions.
The first time I did the mission in the Badlands it was not part of a story arc that led to Boldly They Rode.
Now? It is.
That's what I am saying all along. They can RETCON their storylines to fit a Cardassian Mini-Faction.
It's the same with the Borg story arc. When that thing debuted there wasn't a single Fluidic space map in any of it (because the Fluidic space maps and the Undine stories weren't there yet, they came much later). Now there is.
It's all been retconned to fit their overall storyline. And if they want to keep making more mini-factions, they will keep retconning their own storyline.
Umnnn stop dreaming , there is no new faction , no new story line , nothing you have hoped for , its just a few ToS related missions , after that you „join” the federation in 25th century and play as a normal fed caracter , with rewards for completing objectives , thats it. So make new charater , level up , and keep it for dilithium farm , end of AoY story.
I think if one wanted to introduce a Cardassian mini-faction, the avenue for that with a low degree of retconning might be the mirror universe stuff. The evil Cardies work together with the Terran Empire and the Alpha Quadrant Founders. Maybe it would actually be an opportunity to see the Iconian War from the Mirror perspective, more as a spectator than a participant perhaps. Unfortuately the MIrror Universe might be so different in that regard that there is no actionable intel to use against the Iconians here, but at least the Cadassians can deliver information about the threat of the Mirror Universe forces. Maybe one could tie all this also together with Obisek, who for some reason is heading the station in the Mirror Invasion event.
Mustrum "Not that I am a fan of the excessive Mirror Universe stuff" RIdcully
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Comments
I'm not going to split straws with anyone on this.. Abrams was the producer and director. He had full control and responsibility for the content and story line of that movie.. The whole of the matter and the blame lies expressly on his shoulders..
Yeahhh, I'll give em that much. It doesnt matter which factions storyline you follow, Cryptic keeps its ducks all in a row.. The story telling may not be great, but the conceptualization and planning are brilliant..
The storyline has been tweaked, revised and retconned quite a bit since the game launched. For instance I no longer have to take a jum jum stick from DS9 to Memory Alpha. The borg story arc is vastly different from when I took my first three toons through it 6 years ago. So if they make a new mini-faction they can tweak, revise and retcon it to fit what's out there now.
It is obviously better than Insurrection, but certainly not much better than Star Trek 4 and Generations. Star Trek 5 doesn't exist so I don't know why you are including it. For some strange reason, they went straight from Star Trek 4 to Star Trek 6.
Whether it is better than Star Trek 4 and Generations depends on the fan. Star Trek 2 is undeniably the best Star Trek movie yet while the others are based on the best, worst, and medium. First Contact, Star Trek 4, Star Trek 6, and Star Trek 2009 are considered within the Best category after Star Trek 2. Generations and Star Trek 3 are in the middle category. Into Darkness, Insurrection, Nemesis, and Star Trek 1 are considered the worst. Personally, I would rate Star Trek 2009 as 5th place with Star Trek 4 in 2nd place and Star Trek Generations as 6th place. Last place would be Into Darkness and Nemesis in 10th place.
My character Tsin'xing
The Cardassian arc itself is radically different from the first time I took characters through it. But the missions themselves are mostly the same. The Borg arc combined the Undine and Borg missions. But they're mostly the same. All that's really different is the story boxes tying it together and the narrative. The stuff I actually do on the maps is very similar to the original missions.
Altering the Cardassian arc AGAIN wouldn't be any harder than any other time they've revised missions. If they tie it to a new expansion to fit in a new mini-faction, it becomes the exact same process they've used in the past.
In short, not only is it a reasonable idea, it's safe to assume that based on how they've worked out stuff so far, that if they were to do a Cardassian mini-faction like a Romulan mini-faction, that would include tweaks to the story arc. Since that's what they do.
It's how many people will play Cardassians, and how much they will spend to do it. The Romulan faction is the least popular, the Cardassian would be even less so since they were mostly (only?) in DS9. Romulans and Klingons appeared from TOS onward.
If STO had ten times as many players as it does now, side projects like more KDF-only or Romulan-only content makes business sense. Even then Cardassian-only content might not.
Even if you personally would buy a $130 Cardassian Expansion Pack, Cryptic needs many thousands of people willing to buy it to pay for the development.
Star Trek 5 doesn't exist. It is impossible for there to be a Star Trek movie so bad that I would subconsciously remove all traces of it from my mind. TWOK is undeniably the most popular Star Trek movie in Top Star Trek Movies rankings. This is not subjective, this is fact. 9 out of 10 Top Star Trek Movies rankings or even higher will have TWOK in first place. IMO, it is the reason why Into Darkness gets such a low score. All those reversed Star Trek 2 references just feels nauseating. Just the magic blood and interstellar transporter that removes any need for starships or danger would push it to around a 8. I tried to put the Best, Medium, and Worst based on the various rankings that I have seen which is why didn't give a ranking for most.
Rotten Tomatoes would probably be the best way to rank Star Trek movies since it relies on thousands of people for its rating. On Rotten Tomatoes for the Critic scores, Star Trek 2 is at 88%, First Contact is at 93%, Star Trek 4 is at 85%, Star Trek 6 is at 83%, Star Trek 2009 is at 95%, Into Darkness is at 87%, Star Trek 3 is at 78%, Generations is at 48%, Insurrection is at 55%, Nemesis is at 37%, and the Motion Picture is at 47%. For the Audience scores on Rotten Tomatoes, Star Trek 2 is at 90%, First Contact is at 89%, Star Trek 4 is at 80%, Star Trek 6 is at 83%, Star Trek 2009 is at 91%, Into Darkness is at 90%, Star Trek 3 is at 61%, Generations is at 57%, Insurrection is at 45%, Nemesis is at 50%, and Star Trek 1 is at 42%.
Aside from Into Darkness, my list is consistent with the Rotten Tomatoes Audience scores with Best being 80% and above, Medium being between 50% and 80%, and Worst being 50% and below. Not sure how Nemesis beat Insurrection and Star Trek 1 since it is classified as the movie that ended Star Trek for years, but it might be due to the amount of action in Nemesis compared to Insurrection and Star Trek 1. Into Darkness can be explained through not having those negative reactions that I have mentioned. It is probably the difference between an Old Star Trek fan and New Star Trek fan. If Into Darkness wasn't a Star Trek movie, then it would be much higher on my list of Science Fiction movies.
For anyone interested,
Rotten Tomato's Critic Scores
1. Star Trek 2009
2. First Contact
3. The Wrath of Khan
4. Into Darkness
5. The Voyage Home
6. The Undiscovered Country
7. The Search for Spock
8. Insurrection
9. Generations
10. The Motion Picture
11. Nemesis
Rotten Tomato's Audience Scores
1. Star Trek 2009
2. The Wrath of Khan
2. Into Darkness
4. First Contact
5. The Undiscovered Country
6. The Voyage Home
7. The Search for Spock
8. Generations
9. Nemesis
10. Insurrection
11. The Motion Picture
The reason to do it would be to facilitate the creation of another mini-faction.
Again, the missions themselves haven't changed much. So if the content "sucked" ... it STILL sucks. Boldly They Rode is the exact same mission it always was. The story bits around how you end up IN Boldly They Rode changed.
I agree with everything you say about ratings and reviews. But this one point I have to nit pick.
You are ready to toss out the plot of The Wrath of Khan because of a fanciful, fictional take, on a nebula, but in that same film you are completely ready to believe in ...
Warp Drive, The Genesis Device, Subspace, Subspace communications, Transporters, the existence of Vulcans, who have green blood, and so very much more.
I mean, as a plot device the Nebula is there to add drama and make the combat scene like a very tense submarine combat, breaking away from the Horatio Hornblower model of tall ships combat that Roddenberry laid out for Star Trek back in its TV show days. It was a chance to give a backdrop to Kirk and his crew to outsmart a better armed, more powerful foe in a game of space-cat-and-mouse.
It required some suspension of disbelief.
But so does almost everything else in Star Trek. From the transporter device, to the sound effects you see in that very scene of phasers going off and torpedoes exploding.
I think the dense nebula is the least of the things that stretch belief in the story.
And if you're going to complain about bad science, well, I think that pretty much does for all the Trek movies, but First Contact is certainly no less an offender. I mean, if the Borg had gone backtime and assimilated Earth before Vulcan First Contact, thus turning the entire surface of Earth into a mass of machinery - where did the Sovereign-class Enterprise and her crew come from? Why were they immune to the changing of history, when Earth wasn't? Why does the Enterprise have changing deck totals? Are the two lowest decks in fact virtual? (Dialog at one point specifies the ship has 24 decks; later dialog claims the Borg are invading through Deck 26.) If Data is in fact immune to warp plasma (except for that one patch of "skin" installed by the Queen), why has he never been assigned to work with the warp engines during dangerous situations? And so forth.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
Where did I tell you how to rate the movies? I merely mentioned how I would rate the movies according to my personal opinion and how the movies are rated according to public consensus instead of just one person or a small group of people giving their opinion. So what if you disagree with my opinion of what Star Trek movies are good or bad? You post your opinion and I post mine. It is how the Internet works for good or bad.
I have no right to tell you how to rate the movies according to your personal beliefs just like you have no right to say that I have to believe in a certain movie that doesn't exist as far as I know. If someone believes that the Star Wars prequels don't exist or that they are the best Star Wars movies ever, then good for them. Surprisingly enough, the Phantom Menace has done better than Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis considering the amount of hatred that it gets with 56% for its Critic Score and 60% for its Audience score.
Delusions make life tolerable. It could be something as simple as a terrible movie that you forgot or something complex like Justice, Mercy, and Love. You can either believe that Justice, Mercy, and Love exist and not everything can be explained through science or you can believe that they are merely delusions that allow people to cope with a cruel reality. As long as a Delusion doesn't negatively affect other people, then they can believe whatever they want.
Boldy They Rode began as a Dominion based Featured Episode Arc. The Cardassian missions that are now part of the Cardassian Arc that now features the Dominion Arc were originally part of the captain rank levelling band and the Dominion Featured Episode Arc came much later and was its own separate thing. They RETCONNED the storyline, smooshing the Dominion Arc into the Cardassian missions.
The first time I did the mission in the Badlands it was not part of a story arc that led to Boldly They Rode.
Now? It is.
That's what I am saying all along. They can RETCON their storylines to fit a Cardassian Mini-Faction.
It's the same with the Borg story arc. When that thing debuted there wasn't a single Fluidic space map in any of it (because the Fluidic space maps and the Undine stories weren't there yet, they came much later). Now there is.
It's all been retconned to fit their overall storyline. And if they want to keep making more mini-factions, they will keep retconning their own storyline.
Mustrum "Not that I am a fan of the excessive Mirror Universe stuff" RIdcully