> @colonelmarik said:
> Not my cup of tea. The visuals from Discovery are not really appropriate to the time it's supposedly set, so I can't get very excited about these ships. Also, don't care for the name of the ship being on the sides of the saucer, I prefer it on the bow. Still, the workmanship appears to be good.
Except it is a visual reboot. Anyone expecting a ship that looked like a low budget 1960s tv show was deluding themselves.
Never mind that that "low budget 1960s TV show" look was validated as Canon on both DS9 (they actually inserted Sisko & Co into a actual TOS episode with the original cast, for Christ's sake...I thought it was well done, for the record) and ENT. They could have modernized it a bit but chose not to. Barring some sort of major temporal TRIBBLE-up in the future that alters the TRIBBLE Timeline into the canon prime universe...I'm sure Burnham could make a decision that epicly catastrophic...they are aiming to retcon TOS away entirely. Whatever you Millenials think, that won't bode well for the long term prospects of the franchise.
The games graphical engine has managed to make the Crossfield class look even fuglier.
How!? It looks an accurate representation to me.
"You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
The visuals from Discovery are not really appropriate to the time it's supposedly set
They reimagined the visual language of Star Trek through DIS. Inappropriate? No. Inappropriate would be to try to simulate the visuals of TOS as faithfully as possible. Why? Because TOS was an ultra-low-budget production with very cheap sets made from as-cheap-as-possible materials. DIS has a huge budget though, and audiences nowadays wouldn't "buy" TOS-style sci-fi anymore, except for the laughs at the cheap sets and the lousy costumes. We're almost in 2020, so even a sorta-pre-quel HAS to go with the times.
DIS is meant to be enjoyable by people who didn't necessarily watch TOS beforehand.
The visuals from Discovery are not really appropriate to the time it's supposedly set
They reimagined the visual language of Star Trek through DIS. Inappropriate? No. Inappropriate would be to try to simulate the visuals of TOS as faithfully as possible. Why? Because TOS was an ultra-low-budget production with very cheap sets made from as-cheap-as-possible materials. DIS has a huge budget though, and audiences nowadays wouldn't "buy" TOS-style sci-fi anymore, except for the laughs at the cheap sets and the lousy costumes. We're almost in 2020, so even a sorta-pre-quel HAS to go with the times.
DIS is meant to be enjoyable by people who didn't necessarily watch TOS beforehand.
The visuals from Discovery are not really appropriate to the time it's supposedly set
They reimagined the visual language of Star Trek through DIS. Inappropriate? No. Inappropriate would be to try to simulate the visuals of TOS as faithfully as possible. Why? Because TOS was an ultra-low-budget production with very cheap sets made from as-cheap-as-possible materials. DIS has a huge budget though, and audiences nowadays wouldn't "buy" TOS-style sci-fi anymore, except for the laughs at the cheap sets and the lousy costumes. We're almost in 2020, so even a sorta-pre-quel HAS to go with the times.
DIS is meant to be enjoyable by people who didn't necessarily watch TOS beforehand.
Yes, Star Trek TOS is the future through the lense of the 1960s. DIS is the future through the lense of the 2010s. There's nothing wrong about that.
Also very true on the old sets being cheap... a bunch of those buttons were jelly beans... jelly beans!
♪ I'm going around not in circles but in spirographs.
It's pretty much this hard to keep just one timeline intact. ♪
Comments
didn't really mind the shenzhou from the get go.
Never mind that that "low budget 1960s TV show" look was validated as Canon on both DS9 (they actually inserted Sisko & Co into a actual TOS episode with the original cast, for Christ's sake...I thought it was well done, for the record) and ENT. They could have modernized it a bit but chose not to. Barring some sort of major temporal TRIBBLE-up in the future that alters the TRIBBLE Timeline into the canon prime universe...I'm sure Burnham could make a decision that epicly catastrophic...they are aiming to retcon TOS away entirely. Whatever you Millenials think, that won't bode well for the long term prospects of the franchise.
We get it. You don't like DIS. Some people however do like it, oddly enough.
How!? It looks an accurate representation to me.
Haters gonna hate, mate.
It is even harder now to resist the urge to get the Crossfield for one of my scis.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Thank you for your kind feedback
Just admit you were always going to get it anyway lol
They reimagined the visual language of Star Trek through DIS. Inappropriate? No. Inappropriate would be to try to simulate the visuals of TOS as faithfully as possible. Why? Because TOS was an ultra-low-budget production with very cheap sets made from as-cheap-as-possible materials. DIS has a huge budget though, and audiences nowadays wouldn't "buy" TOS-style sci-fi anymore, except for the laughs at the cheap sets and the lousy costumes. We're almost in 2020, so even a sorta-pre-quel HAS to go with the times.
DIS is meant to be enjoyable by people who didn't necessarily watch TOS beforehand.
Very well stated.
Yes, Star Trek TOS is the future through the lense of the 1960s. DIS is the future through the lense of the 2010s. There's nothing wrong about that.
Also very true on the old sets being cheap... a bunch of those buttons were jelly beans... jelly beans!
It's pretty much this hard to keep just one timeline intact. ♪