Agreed! I like the way all the Discovery ships look.
While I personally feel that they have remained relatively faithful to the original design (certainly much more so than the non-Prime Connies we've seen over the past decade), and it is a pretty nice look... He's still wrong.
There's a distinction between "major in-universe overhaul" and "major out-of-universe overhaul" - the TMP Connie was portrayed as the former, the DSC Connie is portrayed as the latter.
I think what he was saying is that he feels that it's NOT realistic to try and say that TMP Enterprise was a refit at all. The level of changes basically would have required them to dismantle the ship, recycle half of it and then reassemble it with enough new parts that it would have been quicker to build a new ship. Also, if it has less than 50% of the parts of the original can it be considered the same ship?
Is it? I think the picture of the Defiant in the Mirror Universe basically sets up the possibility that these ships will get refit a lot in-universe.
But in the end, it doesn't really matter.
I can just pretend that Sta Trek is a really existing alternate universe, and the shows that were made in our universe- they are just retelling the real story the best way they can with the budget and technology at hand.
Could Gene Roddenberry's team do regularly appearing holograms on screen during TOS or TNG? No. So they decided to omit them, because it's not really important to tell the story of how they figured out that the weird monster that threatened the miners was really just resonding to them killing its children.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
> @patrickngo said: > mhall85 wrote: » > > patrickngo wrote: » > > mhall85 wrote: » > > darakoss wrote: » > > The TNG viewscreen was a window???? The TMP viewscreen was a window? Oh...okay then. > > > > > Well, TNG literally had a window on the ceiling, so... > > Aside from that, I actually think this modern interpretation is more practical. It's NOT merely a window. It's NOT merely a viewscreen. It's both. It's a large piece of transparent aluminum, augmented by a sophisticated HUD system. And the reason why this wasn't explicitly stated in canon before is because the writers/producers couldn't conceive of it like that, or because they couldn't afford to make it look like that. > > If it's just a big flat screen monitor built into a wall... that's not much different from what we have available in today's world. > > > > > thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc. > > a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc. > > a really good display is sensorily indistinguishable from a window, especially when you can't roll it down and let th e wind blow through your hair because Hey, we're in vacuum and opening the window is a BAD IDEA. > > so is having ten square meters of weak point right in the middle of your command and control hub. > > > > > > Except that "windows" in Trek are NOT MADE OF GLASS. > > Transparent Aluminum is a thing. You only assume it's a weak point, because of your current context as a 21st-century human that doesn't know what Transparent Aluminum really is. > > > > > It wouldnt matter if it was electron-aligned diamond sandwich, you've got an inherent vulnerability at the transition no matter WHAT you're making it out of, and a high inherent construction cost for something that is, essentially, only remotely useful when parked. > > It's kind of "Why don't Nuclear Submarines have windows on the bridge?" Deep-dive exploratory subs do, after all, and they operate below the range of the boomers... > > but there's a reason. That layered quartz is stronger than the steel surrounding it, but the need for a hole to put it in compromises the structure around the window. > > Second, you're putting the command and control centre near the outside of the ship, up against the outer skin of the ship, in order to HAVE that window-which can be BETTER simulated with a viewscreen since a viewer can compensate for red-shift, and windows can't, and provides a 'cut off' for overwhelming light input like, say, solar flares or Klingon Beacons. > > as well as (when necessary) acting as a rear view mirror, backup camera, side-view... > > The places you want windows, if you MUST have them, are areas you can afford to lose pressure in-recreation decks, telescope emplacements, and areas where your un pressure suited crew are working maybe 3 days out of 5. > > you do NOT want to put the vital nerve center and decision hub of the ship right up against t he outer hull unless you don't have enough space NOT to. Windows don't provide any enhanced situational awareness, do present inherent structural interruptions and weaknesses, and require putting the bridge as your first compartment exposed to vacuum in the event of an accident (or, ghu help us, hostile action.)
Normal windows can't compensate for red shifts and the like, but this is likely advanced star trek style smart window technology, capable of both being a view screen and window.
But if you don't put the bridge right on the outside with a big honking window how are they going to do those dramatic sweeping shots as they zoom in and out of the window to show the ship off? Does it make sense logically? Nope, but it looks cool.
Besides, once the shields are down it doesn't really matter where the bridge is, the ship isn't going to last long enough for anyone to regret the decision.
Agreed! I like the way all the Discovery ships look.
I like most of the new Fed designs, with the exception of the Hoover Class and, dare I say it, but the Crossfield design itself. I'm not remotely fond of the Klingon designs though, they all look terrible to me; especially that Bird of Prey.
Indeed - this scenario always reminds me of the metaphor about the old broom:
"You take an old broom and replace the handle, and then you replace the brush. Is it still the same broom?"
If you take ones consciousness and implant it into another body, is it the same person? I'm thinking Data & Tyler here...
Agreed! I like the way all the Discovery ships look.
I like most of the new Fed designs, with the exception of the Hoover Class and, dare I say it, but the Crossfield design itself. I'm not remotely fond of the Klingon designs though, they all look terrible to me; especially that Bird of Prey.
Indeed - this scenario always reminds me of the metaphor about the old broom:
"You take an old broom and replace the handle, and then you replace the brush. Is it still the same broom?"
If you take ones consciousness and implant it into another body, is it the same person? I'm thinking Data & Tyler here...
What's interesting is some fellow out there took photos of the original TOS model in the Smithsonian, shortly after it's recent restoration, and then he did some hardcore photoshopping with screen shots of various trek movies....the original 6 TOS films and the 3 Kelvin films, and the they looked REAL NICE.
What's interesting is some fellow out there took photos of the original TOS model in the Smithsonian, shortly after it's recent restoration, and then he did some hardcore photoshopping with screen shots of various trek movies....the original 6 TOS films and the 3 Kelvin films, and the they looked REAL NICE.
Whilst they may look nice, especially the space dock scene, time presents an opportunity for change, and without change, we're all stuck in the past.
Both the JJ films, and DSC offer up an opportunity to make things more modern looking, because as nice as the TOS model may look, it doesn't (in my opinion at least) look modern.
Space Barbie Extraordinaire. Got a question about Space Barbie? Just ask.
Things I want in STO:
1) More character customization options such as more clothing options, letting the toon complexion affect the entire body, not just the head. Also a true RGB color picker applied to all costume and appearance options, which would allow for true appearance customization and homogenous colors instead of "this same exact color looks vastly different on two different pieces."
2) Bridge customization, not bridge packs. Let us pick a general layout and adjust the color palette, console appearance, and chair types, as well as more ready room layout options.
3) Customizable ground weapons, i.e. The aesthetic look of phaser dual pistols but they shoot antiproton bolts. For obvious reasons this would only apply to standard ground weapons.
4) For the love of Q please revamp Plasma Ground Weapons. They look like demented Supersoakers right now.
5) True Vanity Impulse and Deflector effects similar to Vanity Shields.
6) A greater payout for hitting T6 Reputations. Currently it takes more time and resources to get from T5 to T6 than it does to get from nothing to T5. Make that grind really pay out at the end.
7) Mirrorverse Refugee event similar to AoY/Delta/Gamma, complete with new Mirrorverse recruits for all factions.
8) Independent Faction, because yo ho yo ho a pirate's life for me!
What's interesting is some fellow out there took photos of the original TOS model in the Smithsonian, shortly after it's recent restoration, and then he did some hardcore photoshopping with screen shots of various trek movies....the original 6 TOS films and the 3 Kelvin films, and the they looked REAL NICE.
Whilst they may look nice, especially the space dock scene, time presents an opportunity for change, and without change, we're all stuck in the past.
Both the JJ films, and DSC offer up an opportunity to make things more modern looking, because as nice as the TOS model may look, it doesn't (in my opinion at least) look modern.
Define modern......to ME, something piled with kibble and greebles, like star wars, aliens, etc...is not what I called advanced or modern. To me, modern and advanced will look VERY smooth, sleek and simple.
I got my chica's tablet here.......ONE BUTTON. And it's gonna be to the point of NO BUTTONS, and getting thinner and thinner....you'll soon have tablets you can roll up like piece of paper or a fruit roll up. Discovery and JJ stuff does not look modern to me....be it on the inside or outside. Bulking things up and sticking greebles, or using a beer factory for an interior, don't make it modern to me.
Define modern......to ME, something piled with kibble and greebles, like star wars, aliens, etc...is not what I called advanced or modern. To me, modern and advanced will look VERY smooth, sleek and simple.
I got my chica's tablet here.......ONE BUTTON. And it's gonna be to the point of NO BUTTONS, and getting thinner and thinner....you'll soon have tablets you can roll up like piece of paper or a fruit roll up. Discovery and JJ stuff does not look modern to me....be it on the inside or outside. Bulking things up and sticking greebles, or using a beer factory for an interior, don't make it modern to me.
To define what is modern, it would (for me) have to be relatable to the times.
Back when TOS was being developed, we used flip and push buttons (in factories and in engineering terms) so we had them on the Enterprise. Come TNG & DS9, we were on to touchscreen and so that was represented on the shows with LCards - moving with the times. Now we have better touch screen and to some extent, holographic inerfaces, and so that's further reflected by a science fiction show.
The DSC Constitution is at least sleeker than he TOS Constitution. It doesn't need to look simple; it needs to look impressive without taking away from the core design, which I'd say it's done very well. The JJ Constitution is however, another matter; I'm not overly fond of that design, but the DSC one I have zero complains over.
Define modern......to ME, something piled with kibble and greebles, like star wars, aliens, etc...is not what I called advanced or modern. To me, modern and advanced will look VERY smooth, sleek and simple.
I got my chica's tablet here.......ONE BUTTON. And it's gonna be to the point of NO BUTTONS, and getting thinner and thinner....you'll soon have tablets you can roll up like piece of paper or a fruit roll up. Discovery and JJ stuff does not look modern to me....be it on the inside or outside. Bulking things up and sticking greebles, or using a beer factory for an interior, don't make it modern to me.
To define what is modern, it would (for me) have to be relatable to the times.
Back when TOS was being developed, we used flip and push buttons (in factories and in engineering terms) so we had them on the Enterprise. Come TNG & DS9, we were on to touchscreen and so that was represented on the shows with LCards - moving with the times. Now we have better touch screen and to some extent, holographic inerfaces, and so that's further reflected by a science fiction show.
The DSC Constitution is at least sleeker than he TOS Constitution. It doesn't need to look simple; it needs to look impressive without taking away from the core design, which I'd say it's done very well. The JJ Constitution is however, another matter; I'm not overly fond of that design, but the DSC one I have zero complains over.
You also have got consider that production designers have more "toys" to play with. Budgets are bigger, resources are better, and we have more influences to draw from. And we, as consumers, have better screens to enjoy these works on, so it's not that surprising to see more detail added to the models.
It's called progress, LOL... whether or not you like the final product is subjective, but I'd be willing to bet Matt Jeffries would have drooled over the possibilities of today's production design... and the Connie would have been influenced by that, for sure.
And personally speaking, I agree that Discovery's Connie is better, and it took me getting the KT Connie in STO to really appreciate it. (Still not a fan of the size of the KT ships, but it doesn't kill the movies for me.) I do like both ships, though.
Define modern......to ME, something piled with kibble and greebles, like star wars, aliens, etc...is not what I called advanced or modern. To me, modern and advanced will look VERY smooth, sleek and simple.
I got my chica's tablet here.......ONE BUTTON. And it's gonna be to the point of NO BUTTONS, and getting thinner and thinner....you'll soon have tablets you can roll up like piece of paper or a fruit roll up. Discovery and JJ stuff does not look modern to me....be it on the inside or outside. Bulking things up and sticking greebles, or using a beer factory for an interior, don't make it modern to me.
To define what is modern, it would (for me) have to be relatable to the times.
Back when TOS was being developed, we used flip and push buttons (in factories and in engineering terms) so we had them on the Enterprise. Come TNG & DS9, we were on to touchscreen and so that was represented on the shows with LCards - moving with the times. Now we have better touch screen and to some extent, holographic inerfaces, and so that's further reflected by a science fiction show.
The DSC Constitution is at least sleeker than he TOS Constitution. It doesn't need to look simple; it needs to look impressive without taking away from the core design, which I'd say it's done very well. The JJ Constitution is however, another matter; I'm not overly fond of that design, but the DSC one I have zero complains over.
You also have got consider that production designers have more "toys" to play with. Budgets are bigger, resources are better, and we have more influences to draw from. And we, as consumers, have better screens to enjoy these works on, so it's not that surprising to see more detail added to the models.
It's called progress, LOL... whether or not you like the final product is subjective, but I'd be willing to bet Matt Jeffries would have drooled over the possibilities of today's production design... and the Connie would have been influenced by that, for sure.
And personally speaking, I agree that Discovery's Connie is better, and it took me getting the KT Connie in STO to really appreciate it. (Still not a fan of the size of the KT ships, but it doesn't kill the movies for me.) I do like both ships, though.
Ironic since you say budget...Disc feels like a very claustrophobic show....each time they say a ship is nearby or sending a hail t them...we hardly ever see said ships....just on the bridge, nothing seen on the viewer. Same goes for the sets a lot of times. Where's the budget going to?
And how, smooth and sleek is always going to be what I see in advanced. I mean look at cars....a car, like a 'vet from the 50's has more greeble and kibble than one from, say, the late 90's.
I'm OKAY with the Disc connie, just don't like those pylons......
Ironic since you say budget...Disc feels like a very claustrophobic show....each time they say a ship is nearby or sending a hail t them...we hardly ever see said ships....just on the bridge, nothing seen on the viewer. Same goes for the sets a lot of times. Where's the budget going to?
Why exactly do we need to see each and every ship that is hailing us?
Define modern......to ME, something piled with kibble and greebles, like star wars, aliens, etc...is not what I called advanced or modern. To me, modern and advanced will look VERY smooth, sleek and simple.
I got my chica's tablet here.......ONE BUTTON. And it's gonna be to the point of NO BUTTONS, and getting thinner and thinner....you'll soon have tablets you can roll up like piece of paper or a fruit roll up. Discovery and JJ stuff does not look modern to me....be it on the inside or outside. Bulking things up and sticking greebles, or using a beer factory for an interior, don't make it modern to me.
To define what is modern, it would (for me) have to be relatable to the times.
Back when TOS was being developed, we used flip and push buttons (in factories and in engineering terms) so we had them on the Enterprise. Come TNG & DS9, we were on to touchscreen and so that was represented on the shows with LCards - moving with the times. Now we have better touch screen and to some extent, holographic inerfaces, and so that's further reflected by a science fiction show.
The DSC Constitution is at least sleeker than he TOS Constitution. It doesn't need to look simple; it needs to look impressive without taking away from the core design, which I'd say it's done very well. The JJ Constitution is however, another matter; I'm not overly fond of that design, but the DSC one I have zero complains over.
You also have got consider that production designers have more "toys" to play with. Budgets are bigger, resources are better, and we have more influences to draw from. And we, as consumers, have better screens to enjoy these works on, so it's not that surprising to see more detail added to the models.
It's called progress, LOL... whether or not you like the final product is subjective, but I'd be willing to bet Matt Jeffries would have drooled over the possibilities of today's production design... and the Connie would have been influenced by that, for sure.
And personally speaking, I agree that Discovery's Connie is better, and it took me getting the KT Connie in STO to really appreciate it. (Still not a fan of the size of the KT ships, but it doesn't kill the movies for me.) I do like both ships, though.
Ironic since you say budget...Disc feels like a very claustrophobic show....each time they say a ship is nearby or sending a hail t them...we hardly ever see said ships....just on the bridge, nothing seen on the viewer. Same goes for the sets a lot of times. Where's the budget going to?
Can't tell ya, don't know.
My guess is that, even though Discovery's budget is significantly bigger, it's not unlimited. They probably pick and choose where to use the budget. Whether it is the revamped Connie, or the Mirror Flagship, or the dramatic zoom-in shots (the Earth-to-QonoS sequence, or the zoom-in to Paris at the end of the finale)... those are the spots they chose to spend the budget on, instead of a ship we'd see for five seconds.
Best I can give you. You'll have to ask the producers for more info.
Having seen the finale now I have to say in my conclusion DSC S1 is incredibly... Unnecessary. That's the best I can come up with. I have no idea why it exists, why it chose to be what it is and why anyone thought we need that. Nothing in it is of consequence - naturally, as retcons cannot change existing things - which makes it just not important in the grand scheme.
Putting down the bickering about completely unnecessary changes to existing iconography and just looking at the plot and characters they cramped multiple seasons worth of ideas into 15 episodes ending up playing none of these out. It feels rushed, unfocused, and sort of random. What is not helping is the tone of the show. It is so serious. Why so serious? It is exhausting, so much that the Mudd episodes were welcomed breathers.
I liked the final scene and think this is what should be taken away from it. The score is fantastic but the few little moments of joy don't save it for me.
DSC makes me feel like I felt thinking about STO all these years. So many wasted opportunitues.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Having seen the finale now I have to say in my conclusion DSC S1 is incredibly... unnecessary. That's the best I can come up with. I have no idea why it exists, why it chose to be what it is and why anyone thought we need that. Nothing in it is of consequence - naturally, as retcons cannot change existing things - which makes it just not important in the grand scheme.
Star Trek (generally) is unnecessary. It's a show, set in a fictional universe to entertain the masses, and it does that well enough - or so I thought!
I would agree that they could have focused on something different, maybe even as another reboot (of which this definitely isn't), but likewise I wouldn't have wanted a show post VOY/Nemesis as was otherwise craved by so many people, but the show as a whole I thought was executed rather well. The only element of DSC I didn't quite appreciate was the way in which the war arc ended; it was far too convenient and didn't make a whole lot of sense. There was a lot more potential for that arc to roll over into another season.
I think someone else said it elsewhere, but the two arcs (the war front and the mirror universe front) could have been covered separately and in two seasons, rather than throwing it all into one. This way, the war element could have been expanded and concluded better, and the terran arc could have had an episode involving the [now ISS] Defiant and Tholians.
The KT Conni is far more smooth and sleek than the TOS one. And the bridge is certainly in line with what is considered modern now, all bright lights and clean whites like it was in TMP (gods, I despise every single visual in that film, TMP not 09).
The ISS looks far more advanced than a V1 despite being covered in all sorts of greebles and not being smooth or sleek. Basically smokebailey you just need to outright say your personal preference is for smooth, featureless, bland coloured things and not to try make out as though that implies modernity in any way.
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
The KT Conni is far more smooth and sleek than the TOS one. And the bridge is certainly in line with what is considered modern now, all bright lights and clean whites like it was in TMP (gods, I despise every single visual in that film, TMP not 09).
The ISS looks far more advanced than a V1 despite being covered in all sorts of greebles and not being smooth or sleek. Basically smokebailey you just need to outright say your personal preference is for smooth, featureless, bland coloured things and not to try make out as though that implies modernity in any way.
Having seen the finale now I have to say in my conclusion DSC S1 is incredibly... Unnecessary. That's the best I can come up with. I have no idea why it exists, why it chose to be what it is and why anyone thought we need that. Nothing in it is of consequence - naturally, as retcons cannot change existing things - which makes it just not important in the grand scheme.
Putting down the bickering about completely unnecessary changes to existing iconography and just looking at the plot and characters they cramped multiple seasons worth of ideas into 15 episodes ending up playing none of these out. It feels rushed, unfocused, and sort of random. What is not helping is the tone of the show. It is so serious. Why so serious? It is exhausting, so much that the Mudd episodes were welcomed breathers.
I liked the final scene and think this is what should be taken away from it. The score is fantastic but the few little moments of joy don't save it for me.
DSC makes me feel like I felt thinking about STO all these years. So many wasted opportunitues.
Nailhead, meet hammer.
Everyone wants to cheer the final Burnham monologue, and how it "returns to Gene's vision," blah blah blah... but, I'm left still scratching my head. It just feels... off. Unsatisfying.
And I can point to many things I liked, or think shows potential. Still, you could easily delete this season from canon, and it wouldn't impact things one way or another. Hopefully, Burham's relationship to the House of Sarek will get paid off more next season (which is why we saw the Connie, according to the PTBs). Even that storyline, while adding nice depth... why is it there at all?
You want to know something I realized and find really funny in a dark disturbing way about Lorca?
He's absolutely right, the tolerance he warned against was a threat to the Terran Empire, Spock installed Federation values into the Terran Empire and that not only lead to the destruction of the Terran Empire, it lead to Terrans becoming slaves for generations.
So every time Isaac compares Lorca to Trump he should remember that.
(Not a Trump supporter, I don't like him, but its funny how little they thought throught the implications of comparing Lorca to Trump given what we know about the Mirror Universes future).
Also funny is that what occurred in Discovery + what happens in TOS + DS9 Mirrir episodes combined makes STOs Mirror Universe plot make more sense.
Why do the Terrans revert to an Empire instead of something more like the Federation? They tried that and it wad a disaster, so Lorca's words would echo through time to the newly freed Terrans terrified of being slaves again.
It also adds an element of grey into what was a black and white war between the Federation and the Terran Empire. The Terran Empire is not completely unjustified in attacking the Federation, their influence destroyed the first Terran Empire, leaving to decades of enslavement for Terrans, Discovery destroyed the most powerful ship the Terran Empire ever had, Dethroned a successful Empress, and help ruin Lorca.
> @fakemirage#8763 said: > The hypocritic morality of Discovery and Burnham exposed
Another unintended consquence of the plotlinely that is darkly funny, but only because its fictional.
I'll add another, hiding the greatest scientific and spiritual discovery in Star Trek, the Mycilia Network and the multiverse, is to deny every human facing death the peace of knowing that death is not the end for them.
I mean its the kind of secret that no one would have the right to keep, its an act of cruelity to hide and cover up that knowledge.
It also leaves the federation defenceless against possible incursions from other realities.
You want to know something I realized and find really funny in a dark disturbing way about Lorca?
He's absolutely right, the tolerance he warned against was a threat to the Terran Empire, Spock installed Federation values into the Terran Empire and that not only lead to the destruction of the Terran Empire, it lead to Terrans becoming slaves for generations.
So every time Isaac compares Lorca to Trump he should remember that.
(Not a Trump supporter, I don't like him, but its funny how little they thought throught the implications of comparing Lorca to Trump given what we know about the Mirror Universes future).
Also funny is that what occurred in Discovery + what happens in TOS + DS9 Mirrir episodes combined makes STOs Mirror Universe plot make more sense.
Why do the Terrans revert to an Empire instead of something more like the Federation? They tried that and it wad a disaster, so Lorca's words would echo through time to the newly freed Terrans terrified of being slaves again.
It also adds an element of grey into what was a black and white war between the Federation and the Terran Empire. The Terran Empire is not completely unjustified in attacking the Federation, their influence destroyed the first Terran Empire, leaving to decades of enslavement for Terrans, Discovery destroyed the most powerful ship the Terran Empire ever had, Dethroned a successful Empress, and help ruin Lorca.
More like Karma to me, live by the sword, die by the sword. And I don't feel sorry for the Terrans, or their sad, pathetic empire.
The KT Conni is far more smooth and sleek than the TOS one. And the bridge is certainly in line with what is considered modern now, all bright lights and clean whites like it was in TMP (gods, I despise every single visual in that film, TMP not 09).
The ISS looks far more advanced than a V1 despite being covered in all sorts of greebles and not being smooth or sleek. Basically smokebailey you just need to outright say your personal preference is for smooth, featureless, bland coloured things and not to try make out as though that implies modernity in any way.
TMP's my fav of the films.
To me, greebles scream primitive.
Form follows function. If it performs modern functions then, by definition, it looks modern.
Having seen the finale now I have to say in my conclusion DSC S1 is incredibly... Unnecessary. That's the best I can come up with. I have no idea why it exists, why it chose to be what it is and why anyone thought we need that. Nothing in it is of consequence - naturally, as retcons cannot change existing things - which makes it just not important in the grand scheme.
Putting down the bickering about completely unnecessary changes to existing iconography and just looking at the plot and characters they cramped multiple seasons worth of ideas into 15 episodes ending up playing none of these out. It feels rushed, unfocused, and sort of random. What is not helping is the tone of the show. It is so serious. Why so serious? It is exhausting, so much that the Mudd episodes were welcomed breathers.
I liked the final scene and think this is what should be taken away from it. The score is fantastic but the few little moments of joy don't save it for me.
DSC makes me feel like I felt thinking about STO all these years. So many wasted opportunitues.
The problems with DSC was that it tried to be everything at once, that's all.
It tried to have a normal series with a changing episode count.
It tried to have both an ongoing story arc like DS9 but then put in filler episodes to feel more like the war wasn't all consuming.
Tried to give several characters three series worth of development in one to offset the usual Trek series one problem but at the expense of the other characters.
Tried to give us something radically new but kept giving us random fanservice that just distracts for the fans of DSC and irritates the whining fanbois.
And so on.
Everything is in place for a much more focused series two. But even as unfocused as it was it was still better than DS9, VGR, and ENTs TNG-clones of first series (in VGRs case they never left the TNG-clone phase to their detriment). DSC may have been tripping over its feet all the time but at least they were their own feet and not TNGs.
Just, for the love of all the gods, give us some shots of other ships in the show. Viewscreen hails as well. It's not like TNG or early DS9 where the only ships you have are the Galaxy, Excelsior, Miranda, and Defiant. You have seven fully rigged and animated CGI models of (mostly) fantastic looking ships. USE THEM!
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
and while we're at it...either give us technical details IN-UNIVERSE about those same ships, or at least a camera pan over a readout with weapons listed - it isn't that hard; worf did the former in nemesis and it took him 3 seconds to do it
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
My only real gripe is the changes to the Klingons. I just don't see the necessity for having to completely redesign them from the ground up as they did in both appearance and mannerism.
Part of me still thinks the Klinks look fine, if you just add hair.
Aside from that, though... I think one way they could have gotten length out of the Klingon storyline was to embrace the time period in which the show was set. Have T'Kuvma's house look the most radical, have Klingons with hair, have Augment-Virus-riddled Klingons, have Voq be the albino Klingon no one likes... right there, you have a TON of nuance to play with, especially if these Klingons were to be the Trumpian allegories the PTBs were aiming for. T'Kuvma Klingons look down on Augment Klingons, because they're "impure." Both of those groups look down on Voq, for the same reason. And, personally, I would have made House Gorkon a part of the final solution to the war (even if we don't see a young Gorkon himself).
All of this would have gone a long way to massage this story into canon.
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
But in the end, it doesn't really matter.
I can just pretend that Sta Trek is a really existing alternate universe, and the shows that were made in our universe- they are just retelling the real story the best way they can with the budget and technology at hand.
Could Gene Roddenberry's team do regularly appearing holograms on screen during TOS or TNG? No. So they decided to omit them, because it's not really important to tell the story of how they figured out that the weird monster that threatened the miners was really just resonding to them killing its children.
> mhall85 wrote: »
>
> patrickngo wrote: »
>
> mhall85 wrote: »
>
> darakoss wrote: »
>
> The TNG viewscreen was a window???? The TMP viewscreen was a window? Oh...okay then.
>
>
>
>
> Well, TNG literally had a window on the ceiling, so...
>
> Aside from that, I actually think this modern interpretation is more practical. It's NOT merely a window. It's NOT merely a viewscreen. It's both. It's a large piece of transparent aluminum, augmented by a sophisticated HUD system. And the reason why this wasn't explicitly stated in canon before is because the writers/producers couldn't conceive of it like that, or because they couldn't afford to make it look like that.
>
> If it's just a big flat screen monitor built into a wall... that's not much different from what we have available in today's world.
>
>
>
>
> thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
>
> a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
>
> a really good display is sensorily indistinguishable from a window, especially when you can't roll it down and let th e wind blow through your hair because Hey, we're in vacuum and opening the window is a BAD IDEA.
>
> so is having ten square meters of weak point right in the middle of your command and control hub.
>
>
>
>
>
> Except that "windows" in Trek are NOT MADE OF GLASS.
>
> Transparent Aluminum is a thing. You only assume it's a weak point, because of your current context as a 21st-century human that doesn't know what Transparent Aluminum really is.
>
>
>
>
> It wouldnt matter if it was electron-aligned diamond sandwich, you've got an inherent vulnerability at the transition no matter WHAT you're making it out of, and a high inherent construction cost for something that is, essentially, only remotely useful when parked.
>
> It's kind of "Why don't Nuclear Submarines have windows on the bridge?" Deep-dive exploratory subs do, after all, and they operate below the range of the boomers...
>
> but there's a reason. That layered quartz is stronger than the steel surrounding it, but the need for a hole to put it in compromises the structure around the window.
>
> Second, you're putting the command and control centre near the outside of the ship, up against the outer skin of the ship, in order to HAVE that window-which can be BETTER simulated with a viewscreen since a viewer can compensate for red-shift, and windows can't, and provides a 'cut off' for overwhelming light input like, say, solar flares or Klingon Beacons.
>
> as well as (when necessary) acting as a rear view mirror, backup camera, side-view...
>
> The places you want windows, if you MUST have them, are areas you can afford to lose pressure in-recreation decks, telescope emplacements, and areas where your un pressure suited crew are working maybe 3 days out of 5.
>
> you do NOT want to put the vital nerve center and decision hub of the ship right up against t he outer hull unless you don't have enough space NOT to. Windows don't provide any enhanced situational awareness, do present inherent structural interruptions and weaknesses, and require putting the bridge as your first compartment exposed to vacuum in the event of an accident (or, ghu help us, hostile action.)
Normal windows can't compensate for red shifts and the like, but this is likely advanced star trek style smart window technology, capable of both being a view screen and window.
Besides, once the shields are down it doesn't really matter where the bridge is, the ship isn't going to last long enough for anyone to regret the decision.
If you take ones consciousness and implant it into another body, is it the same person? I'm thinking Data & Tyler here...
What's interesting is some fellow out there took photos of the original TOS model in the Smithsonian, shortly after it's recent restoration, and then he did some hardcore photoshopping with screen shots of various trek movies....the original 6 TOS films and the 3 Kelvin films, and the they looked REAL NICE.
https://www.theverge.com/2015/3/10/8185787/star-trek-original-enterprise-new-movies Personally, I love the images seen, and feel the TOS looked just fine and was fine as it was. ~shrugs and plops on a hard hat for any objects thrown her way~
Both the JJ films, and DSC offer up an opportunity to make things more modern looking, because as nice as the TOS model may look, it doesn't (in my opinion at least) look modern.
It has actually been a thing for FAR longer than you think.
Aluminum oxide (AKA corundum) has a variant mineral that we call... ruby.
Also, Trek transparent aluminum is a reality now as well.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_oxynitride
Things I want in STO:
1) More character customization options such as more clothing options, letting the toon complexion affect the entire body, not just the head. Also a true RGB color picker applied to all costume and appearance options, which would allow for true appearance customization and homogenous colors instead of "this same exact color looks vastly different on two different pieces."
2) Bridge customization, not bridge packs. Let us pick a general layout and adjust the color palette, console appearance, and chair types, as well as more ready room layout options.
3) Customizable ground weapons, i.e. The aesthetic look of phaser dual pistols but they shoot antiproton bolts. For obvious reasons this would only apply to standard ground weapons.
4) For the love of Q please revamp Plasma Ground Weapons. They look like demented Supersoakers right now.
5) True Vanity Impulse and Deflector effects similar to Vanity Shields.
6) A greater payout for hitting T6 Reputations. Currently it takes more time and resources to get from T5 to T6 than it does to get from nothing to T5. Make that grind really pay out at the end.
7) Mirrorverse Refugee event similar to AoY/Delta/Gamma, complete with new Mirrorverse recruits for all factions.
8) Independent Faction, because yo ho yo ho a pirate's life for me!
Define modern......to ME, something piled with kibble and greebles, like star wars, aliens, etc...is not what I called advanced or modern. To me, modern and advanced will look VERY smooth, sleek and simple.
I got my chica's tablet here.......ONE BUTTON. And it's gonna be to the point of NO BUTTONS, and getting thinner and thinner....you'll soon have tablets you can roll up like piece of paper or a fruit roll up. Discovery and JJ stuff does not look modern to me....be it on the inside or outside. Bulking things up and sticking greebles, or using a beer factory for an interior, don't make it modern to me.
Back when TOS was being developed, we used flip and push buttons (in factories and in engineering terms) so we had them on the Enterprise. Come TNG & DS9, we were on to touchscreen and so that was represented on the shows with LCards - moving with the times. Now we have better touch screen and to some extent, holographic inerfaces, and so that's further reflected by a science fiction show.
The DSC Constitution is at least sleeker than he TOS Constitution. It doesn't need to look simple; it needs to look impressive without taking away from the core design, which I'd say it's done very well. The JJ Constitution is however, another matter; I'm not overly fond of that design, but the DSC one I have zero complains over.
You also have got consider that production designers have more "toys" to play with. Budgets are bigger, resources are better, and we have more influences to draw from. And we, as consumers, have better screens to enjoy these works on, so it's not that surprising to see more detail added to the models.
It's called progress, LOL... whether or not you like the final product is subjective, but I'd be willing to bet Matt Jeffries would have drooled over the possibilities of today's production design... and the Connie would have been influenced by that, for sure.
And personally speaking, I agree that Discovery's Connie is better, and it took me getting the KT Connie in STO to really appreciate it. (Still not a fan of the size of the KT ships, but it doesn't kill the movies for me.) I do like both ships, though.
Ironic since you say budget...Disc feels like a very claustrophobic show....each time they say a ship is nearby or sending a hail t them...we hardly ever see said ships....just on the bridge, nothing seen on the viewer. Same goes for the sets a lot of times. Where's the budget going to?
And how, smooth and sleek is always going to be what I see in advanced. I mean look at cars....a car, like a 'vet from the 50's has more greeble and kibble than one from, say, the late 90's.
I'm OKAY with the Disc connie, just don't like those pylons......
Is that because they're at a slight angle and not straight up?
Can't tell ya, don't know.
My guess is that, even though Discovery's budget is significantly bigger, it's not unlimited. They probably pick and choose where to use the budget. Whether it is the revamped Connie, or the Mirror Flagship, or the dramatic zoom-in shots (the Earth-to-QonoS sequence, or the zoom-in to Paris at the end of the finale)... those are the spots they chose to spend the budget on, instead of a ship we'd see for five seconds.
Best I can give you. You'll have to ask the producers for more info.
Putting down the bickering about completely unnecessary changes to existing iconography and just looking at the plot and characters they cramped multiple seasons worth of ideas into 15 episodes ending up playing none of these out. It feels rushed, unfocused, and sort of random. What is not helping is the tone of the show. It is so serious. Why so serious? It is exhausting, so much that the Mudd episodes were welcomed breathers.
I liked the final scene and think this is what should be taken away from it. The score is fantastic but the few little moments of joy don't save it for me.
DSC makes me feel like I felt thinking about STO all these years. So many wasted opportunitues.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I would agree that they could have focused on something different, maybe even as another reboot (of which this definitely isn't), but likewise I wouldn't have wanted a show post VOY/Nemesis as was otherwise craved by so many people, but the show as a whole I thought was executed rather well. The only element of DSC I didn't quite appreciate was the way in which the war arc ended; it was far too convenient and didn't make a whole lot of sense. There was a lot more potential for that arc to roll over into another season.
I think someone else said it elsewhere, but the two arcs (the war front and the mirror universe front) could have been covered separately and in two seasons, rather than throwing it all into one. This way, the war element could have been expanded and concluded better, and the terran arc could have had an episode involving the [now ISS] Defiant and Tholians.
The ISS looks far more advanced than a V1 despite being covered in all sorts of greebles and not being smooth or sleek. Basically smokebailey you just need to outright say your personal preference is for smooth, featureless, bland coloured things and not to try make out as though that implies modernity in any way.
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!
TMP's my fav of the films.
To me, greebles scream primitive.
Nailhead, meet hammer.
Everyone wants to cheer the final Burnham monologue, and how it "returns to Gene's vision," blah blah blah... but, I'm left still scratching my head. It just feels... off. Unsatisfying.
And I can point to many things I liked, or think shows potential. Still, you could easily delete this season from canon, and it wouldn't impact things one way or another. Hopefully, Burham's relationship to the House of Sarek will get paid off more next season (which is why we saw the Connie, according to the PTBs). Even that storyline, while adding nice depth... why is it there at all?
He's absolutely right, the tolerance he warned against was a threat to the Terran Empire, Spock installed Federation values into the Terran Empire and that not only lead to the destruction of the Terran Empire, it lead to Terrans becoming slaves for generations.
So every time Isaac compares Lorca to Trump he should remember that.
(Not a Trump supporter, I don't like him, but its funny how little they thought throught the implications of comparing Lorca to Trump given what we know about the Mirror Universes future).
Also funny is that what occurred in Discovery + what happens in TOS + DS9 Mirrir episodes combined makes STOs Mirror Universe plot make more sense.
Why do the Terrans revert to an Empire instead of something more like the Federation? They tried that and it wad a disaster, so Lorca's words would echo through time to the newly freed Terrans terrified of being slaves again.
It also adds an element of grey into what was a black and white war between the Federation and the Terran Empire. The Terran Empire is not completely unjustified in attacking the Federation, their influence destroyed the first Terran Empire, leaving to decades of enslavement for Terrans, Discovery destroyed the most powerful ship the Terran Empire ever had, Dethroned a successful Empress, and help ruin Lorca.
> The hypocritic morality of Discovery and Burnham exposed
Another unintended consquence of the plotlinely that is darkly funny, but only because its fictional.
I'll add another, hiding the greatest scientific and spiritual discovery in Star Trek, the Mycilia Network and the multiverse, is to deny every human facing death the peace of knowing that death is not the end for them.
I mean its the kind of secret that no one would have the right to keep, its an act of cruelity to hide and cover up that knowledge.
It also leaves the federation defenceless against possible incursions from other realities.
More like Karma to me, live by the sword, die by the sword. And I don't feel sorry for the Terrans, or their sad, pathetic empire.
Form follows function. If it performs modern functions then, by definition, it looks modern.
The problems with DSC was that it tried to be everything at once, that's all.
It tried to have a normal series with a changing episode count.
It tried to have both an ongoing story arc like DS9 but then put in filler episodes to feel more like the war wasn't all consuming.
Tried to give several characters three series worth of development in one to offset the usual Trek series one problem but at the expense of the other characters.
Tried to give us something radically new but kept giving us random fanservice that just distracts for the fans of DSC and irritates the whining fanbois.
And so on.
Everything is in place for a much more focused series two. But even as unfocused as it was it was still better than DS9, VGR, and ENTs TNG-clones of first series (in VGRs case they never left the TNG-clone phase to their detriment). DSC may have been tripping over its feet all the time but at least they were their own feet and not TNGs.
Just, for the love of all the gods, give us some shots of other ships in the show. Viewscreen hails as well. It's not like TNG or early DS9 where the only ships you have are the Galaxy, Excelsior, Miranda, and Defiant. You have seven fully rigged and animated CGI models of (mostly) fantastic looking ships. USE THEM!
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!
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Burnham is definitely one of the biggest hypocrites in Trek.
Part of me still thinks the Klinks look fine, if you just add hair.
Aside from that, though... I think one way they could have gotten length out of the Klingon storyline was to embrace the time period in which the show was set. Have T'Kuvma's house look the most radical, have Klingons with hair, have Augment-Virus-riddled Klingons, have Voq be the albino Klingon no one likes... right there, you have a TON of nuance to play with, especially if these Klingons were to be the Trumpian allegories the PTBs were aiming for. T'Kuvma Klingons look down on Augment Klingons, because they're "impure." Both of those groups look down on Voq, for the same reason. And, personally, I would have made House Gorkon a part of the final solution to the war (even if we don't see a young Gorkon himself).
All of this would have gone a long way to massage this story into canon.