test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

star trek discovery would be added to star trek online someday

1356789

Comments

  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,867 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    gannadene wrote: »
    Fans are ready to reject it, because it's been a very long time since there's been a "proper" Trek series. Enterprise wasn't it, as it came during the "dirty sci fi" TV era. Voyager spent more time being a silly action series than actually discussing politics or philosophy, due to the old TNG "writing family" being broken up over time in favor of Brennan and Braga's choice picks. So in a lot of ways, there hasn't been recognizable Trek since DS9, nearly 20 years ago. .

    DS9 flipped the format on its head and spent a lot more time dealing with season-arcing personal drama than the larger (more generalized) questions that TNG tended to focused on episode-to-episode, especially during the later seasons. You could (if you wanted to reflex a personal opinion as a sweeping dictate of the masses, which I don't see as a productive exercise) argue that it wasn't "proper trek" either (dark, moody, and not much to do with space exploration, to play devil's advocate), and I'm sure the point was made when TNG/TOS fans were approaching the new series with their rigid expectations. You could also repeat the exercise with TNG following TOS.

    Basically, if you entertain the question that there is an absolute "proper Trek" then you have to exclude everything besides TOS (because no series perfectly emulated the style and content of this series, though arguably Enterprise came closest in the first two seasons. See. Dear Doctor.) If you don't, then you're making special allowances and to do that for some series but not others (when the question is simply their flavor of deviation from the TOS "norm") is a very personal choice (which others, like myself, won't follow because we respect the fact of divergent viewpoints. We'll keep to ours while you go your own way.)

    But then even within TOS, there's incredible variation that bounces between different genres of Sci-fi, episode to episode (it's difficult to reconcile Trouble with Tribbles and City of the Edge of Forever, except that they were both made for the same TV show). The point here is that there has never been a single, recognizable " Proper Trek" (except as it relates to personal dogma). There've just been many attempts to create space-based sci-fi with at least a touch of introspection. A shared universe gives a sense of continuity, and writers over generations have now used that as a platform for sci-fi story telling.

    Discovery is no different. It's simply the latest iteration.
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,867 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Oh no...it's different alright. The other series for examples, other than enterprise is moving forwards in time. So the advancement of the tech look makes sense. The other series other than enterprise is moving forwards in time so the changes to races can make sense. The other series other than enterprise is moving forwards in time so anything that happens in the series does not muck up what has happened before. This is why, we haven't had real trek since voyager ended.

    You may want to look again at what quality I'm referring to by saying "Discovery is no different." It's not that it's an invariant re-hammering of old principles and styles. It is making significant changes, that's why it's no different (in approach, at some level) from previous iterations of Star Trek. Each has been shaped by its own writing, cultural context, and production limitations.

    Also, stuff changing as you move forward with time suggests quite strongly that things should also change as you move backwards in time as well. Otherwise you're going to get some truly weird temporal effects. :tongue:
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • tigerariestigeraries Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    they are klingons... the original series look was limited due to $ and technology at the time... which is why when the movies and came out we had the ridge look. also going black/dark face is not very pc these days... even if you were to dress up in Halloween, you'd get slaughtered. this is pre-kirk so pre augment look?
  • evilmark444evilmark444 Member Posts: 6,950 Arc User
    tigeraries wrote: »
    they are klingons... the original series look was limited due to $ and technology at the time... which is why when the movies and came out we had the ridge look. also going black/dark face is not very pc these days... even if you were to dress up in Halloween, you'd get slaughtered. this is pre-kirk so pre augment look?

    We saw pre-augment virus Klingons in Enterprise, they look exactly like TNG Klingons.
    Lifetime Subscriber since Beta
    eaY7Xxu.png
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 12,569 Arc User
    From what I read hear, I guess Enterprise should have been filmed in Black and White and use salt shakers (or something more primitive as a prop) as medical tricorders. TOS tried to update any digital background stuff that they could with the digital remastering in 2009 or whatever.

    Star Wars also remastered itself from first showing, but there only so much you can do. For something contemporaneous to Star Trek, check out the consoles and such from 2001: A Space Odyssey.

    As far as Enterprise is concerned, I liked it as the best or just slightly behind TOS. While we were introduced to Elachi, Romulans, and Ferengi, we (as in-show Characters) don't know what they look like (Romulans), or if we did see them, who they actually were. Enterprise did not disrupt the Timeline©®, other than when the in-story line was about the Timeline©® and the machinations about it, with all settling back in in the end.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
    Judge Dan Haywood
    'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
    l don't know.
    l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
    That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
    Lt. Philip J. Minns
  • hanover2hanover2 Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    You can't have the sets look less modern than the stuff found in the average western living room today, nor can you build your sets with the expectation that the low-res broadcast will mask any flaws.
  • hanover2hanover2 Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    hanover2 wrote: »
    You can't have the sets look less modern than the stuff found in the average western living room today, nor can you build your sets with the expectation that the low-res broadcast will mask any flaws.

    Right...but NOBODY IS SAYING THAT THEY SHOULD DO THAT.

    You are if you're demanding a TOS aesthetic in a 2017 series.
    For frak sake, stop with the strawman. Look at axanar. It looks like ToS trek, yet you mean to tell me that looks like a cardboard set made with stuff from a living room? That was what they should have done with this series if they wanted it set in ToS era. If they wanted whatever it is they spewed out for TRIBBLE, they should have set it decades in the future after voyager.

    Axanar died on the vine, and it's not coming back. Let it go. TOS wouldn't look like "TOS" if it were made today, either.
  • hanover2hanover2 Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Once again, COMPLETE STRAWMAN. Please stop. Axanar has the ToS look, but still looks modern.

    1) "Looks modern" is your subjective opinion.
    2) Axanar is irrelevant. It is nonexistent as far as the franchise is concerned.
    So it can be done.

    Can != should, and yours is not the deciding vote.
    By an amateur thief no less. So if CBS who has BILLIONS can't do better...well...that's just sad. And yeah Axanar is dead because Peters was a thief...a greedy one...and a bad one on top of that. So what? It shows what could be done...which is leaps and bounds better than what CBS did.

    More opinions. You are not victimized by disagreement.

  • hanover2hanover2 Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    At least Axanar made the fans happy. This fails at even that. Wanna show off the new shinies? Great. Set it in the future.

    YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE ENTIRETY OF FANDOM.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    hanover2 wrote: »
    Axanar died on the vine, and it's not coming back. Let it go. TOS wouldn't look like "TOS" if it were made today, either.
    ^This

    TOS looked the way it did due to the budgetary, and technological, limitations of the era it was made.

    Axanar looks the way it does because it was a poor attempt at shameless nostalgia pandering by purposely making the tech look worse then it actually would have been in the era, simply to ape the visual limitations of TOS.

    Discovery looks the way it does because this is 2017, we have far better technology then we did back in the 60's, and we now have a far easier time showing things being as "high tech" as they would actually b in the 2200s, the era in which Trek takes place, then we did back in the 60's, when TOS was made.
    Or rather, showing things being what people in 2017 think "high tech" would look like in the 2200s. 50 years from now, people will see TRIBBLE as just as "nostalgic" as we see TOS now.

    It's not just the production technology or budged. People's expectations of what "high tech" should look like have changed dramatically since the 60's and will continue to change.

  • captainperkinscaptainperkins Member Posts: 379 Arc User
    I might be one of the biggest star trek fan around. I just bought a 200 dollar Anovos uniform... I watch trek EVERY DAY.

    I think Discovery looks great. I think it'll please fans young and old. Star Trek Online has ALWAYS included cannon trek, all trek in it. I'm still hoping for Thomas Marrone will be allowed to redo the constitution refit as beautifully as he just did the Miranda, I am flying a fleet T6 Miranda, and it's GORGEOUS. The Connie deserves a redo.

    I am excited to get the Discovery in game next year, and the Shenzhou I already created my Captain Han Bo as her hair style is actually in STO!

  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,820 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    Seems to me either way it would be a win/win.....

    If the show is successful they prove the old trek is dead and they don't have to work on anything else other then JJTrek based junk.

    If it fails...well they can use it as a blanket excuse as why they refuse to produce anything other than JJTrek movies (Because lets face it...generally more profitable than a series)
  • hanover2hanover2 Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    Sadly, that staggeringly dumb paywall is going to invalidate any assessment of the show's appeal. The only question being answered is whether people are going to pay a monthly subscription to watch the one show they want to see.
  • darakossdarakoss Member Posts: 850 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Okay..... this is going to sound ridiculous, but you know what bothered me most about that trailer?

    Women.

    Now, please don't interpret that as some sort of sexist remark - it REALLY isn't. But that trailer....... well, this is what I took from it:

    Look everyone, a woman!
    The woman has authority!
    Another women - she's the Captain!
    Women in a desert!
    Look - two women in Command - women can be in charge!
    Woman saying something bada***
    Pretty woman in a space suit!

    You get the idea.

    One, VERY brief, look at the ship, an alien being pessimistic, random Vulcan mumbo-jumbo and Klingons MkII. The rest of it was about shoving a pretty woman in our proverbial faces. This trailer didn't really TELL me anything other than 'the officers in charge are women'. Which is absolutely fine. But I'd like to see more of the ship, or the lower ranked officers - the emphasis on that particular character was OTT to the extreme.

    Besides the whole prime timeline issues...the 2 main things i noticed was the Lobot ripoff and the Grim Reaper officer guy alien dude. " I can sense death" nonsense. That why they had red shirts! And now that I think of it the Photon Torpedo display with the Call of Duty HUD with a bullet counter in the corner. A bullet counter.
    i-dont-always-funny-meme.jpg
    original join date 2010

    Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,820 Arc User
    Star Wars, Ghost Busters, Fury Road, and now Star Trek.
    But Star Wars and Fury Road did it well, Ghost buster was garbage though.

    I never saw Fury Road so I can't speak on that...but Star Wars I can...and I want to ask? How did Star Wars do it well?

    They basically took a female and made her the epitome of *god mode*? How is that a role model? Telling girls they can do anything they want with no training or skill at all?

    That she...some random girl who had no experience at anything but scavenging becomes a master at everything without any skill. That she could pick up anything and everything...even the force...something that they typically learn to use from a very young age, and she picked it up in no time at all. How does that teach young girls any lessons?

    Male or female...you don't just pick up a trade and instantly a master at it with no skill.
  • evilmark444evilmark444 Member Posts: 6,950 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    hanover2 wrote: »
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    hanover2 wrote: »
    You can't have the sets look less modern than the stuff found in the average western living room today, nor can you build your sets with the expectation that the low-res broadcast will mask any flaws.

    Right...but NOBODY IS SAYING THAT THEY SHOULD DO THAT.

    You are if you're demanding a TOS aesthetic in a 2017 series.
    For frak sake, stop with the strawman. Look at axanar. It looks like ToS trek, yet you mean to tell me that looks like a cardboard set made with stuff from a living room? That was what they should have done with this series if they wanted it set in ToS era. If they wanted whatever it is they spewed out for TRIBBLE, they should have set it decades in the future after voyager.

    Axanar died on the vine, and it's not coming back. Let it go. TOS wouldn't look like "TOS" if it were made today, either.

    Once again, COMPLETE STRAWMAN. Please stop. Axanar has the ToS look, but still looks modern. So it can be done. By an amateur thief no less. So if CBS who has BILLIONS can't do better...well...that's just sad. And yeah Axanar is dead because Peters was a thief...a greedy one...and a bad one on top of that. So what? It shows what could be done...which is leaps and bounds better than what CBS did.

    If today's teens, and even young adults, tuned into a "new" show and saw a ship and computers that looked even remotely like TOS, their average reaction would be "wtf is this? Let's watch something else"

    Star Wars was able to do it, as was Alien: Isolation, only because their old looking future tech didn't look as absolutely ridiculous as TOS. The Falcon and Nostromo's cockpit and bridge were industrial looking, with most items colored in shades of grey and brown, while the bridge of the pre-refit 1701 was dominated by bright colors and flat surfaces. I'm sure the 1701 looked great back in it's day (I was born in the mid 80's), but now it looks overly cheesy in addition to really old, while the other examples I gave just look old without all the cheese.
    Lifetime Subscriber since Beta
    eaY7Xxu.png
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,867 Arc User
    edited May 2017

    CBS could easily have used Ralph McQuarrie's greebling and other artists techniques to create a TOS look that would be believable. That is what the Axanar artists did and they did an amazing job of it (despite the fan-film creator's actions). The argument against the overly-advanced look in Discovery is a valid one at this point.

    But it isn't TOS, it's 10 years before TOS. Aping the same look isn't particularly appropriate even from an in-canon standpoint. Here's what the same timescale can do to Starfleet ship design.

    th?id=OIP.YNeRst62j7iMsCa_CZGElgEsCr&pid=15.1
    th?id=OIP.kqCuM3z3olRQq1J4rENjeAEsCB&pid=15.1

    Axanar was being overly conservative (because it was simply fan service, it wasn't challenging expectations or trying to establish a setting that could live outside of existing box sets). It's not a standard that we should be hoping to see from Discovery.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • lordgyorlordgyor Member Posts: 2,820 Arc User
    "I still say locking behind a subscription service is a HUGE mistake. It's going to be the most pirated ST series ever, then the suits will blame the tanking ratings and not their own appallingly dumb $trategy when they cancel it."

    Being pirated I'd the least of their concerns for the look of the trailer, the need a miracle.
This discussion has been closed.