test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Star Trek Online: Age of Discovery

191012141536

Comments

  • jexsamxjexsamx Member Posts: 2,803 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    Nary a level head in the entire thread. If it isn't a delusional post from someone who thinks they can dictate canon, it's a dismissive and patronizing handwave about any criticism directed at Discovery.

    This thread is a dumpster fire, and I'm makin' s'mores.

    EDIT: It occurs to me the links in my signature could be mistaken for being supportive of Discovery. While I do not hate Discovery, neither would I claim it is either "love" or "life". Those links are a relic from the introduction of party balls. Incidentally, one of the dances in said links is actually in the game now, which is pretty great.

    I suppose I should make my stance clear. I support the inclusion of Discovery content and am curious to see what Cryptic can do to adapt it to STO's tone. I suspect we won't be getting any F-bombs or Klingon nipples, at the very least. My opinions on Discovery as a whole have little to do with my acceptance of this mini-expac.
  • tousseautousseau Member Posts: 1,484 Arc User
    khan5000 wrote: »
    Just a question: if Cryptic can’t use anything from a series or movies that some fans hate...what would be in this game?
    I think we could all agree that a game based on jaunty banter with Q would be a huge seller...
  • This content has been removed.
  • chrisedallen89chrisedallen89 Member Posts: 17,293 Arc User
    Not excited at all for this.
  • sennahcheribsennahcherib Member Posts: 2,823 Arc User
    interesting, wait & see
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    trekgate0 wrote: »
    Discovery. TRIBBLE? Really? Here I thought the greater community of fandom and Trek had settled in DIS or Disco...

    Yeah, its called Star Trek: Discovery... TRIBBLE; blame the advertising department.
    Actually I find calling it Disco even more derogatory than TRIBBLE. :D

    If you want to argue that "Star Trek: Enterprise" should be STE instead of ENT, I'll entertain that argument more than one for 'Disco'. ;)

    This 'reasoning' makes me laugh, especially since you just managed to prove a point.

    Yeah, Star Trek Enterprise was abbreviated as 'Ent'. Not STENT. And guess what? The Original Series is ALWAYS referred to as TOS when abbreviated, not STTOS. In fact....

    TNG
    DS9
    VOY

    What do all of these have in common?
    NONE of them use 'ST' in the abbreviation. I have NEVER seen The Next Generation abbreviated as STTNG or Voyager referred to as STVOY, and if they were it'd be the exception rather than the rule.

    Still, let those who hate the show keep referring to it as TRIBBLE - it stopped being either funny or clever over a year ago, but whatever gives you cheap laughs or makes you feel as if you're making a point.

    Although I have to admit I find it even more amusing that you have the same people saying 'Discovery is not Star Trek' using the TRIBBLE (STAR TREK Discovery) abbreviation. Way to contradict yourselves :D


    I suggest that henceforth, whenever we see TRIBBLE, we should assume they are talking about Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • leceterleceter Member Posts: 196 Arc User
    Discovery????
    I am here to play a SCI FI game. not fantasy.
  • vorwodavorwoda Member Posts: 698 Arc User
    Personally, I look forward to TRIBBLE in STO with precisely the same enthusiasm with which I would look forward to being diagnosed with an TRIBBLE in real life - less than nil. If you don't, you have that right, and I won't belittle you for it. I just hope there's a Skip Mission button for any episodes.
    But other than style/visual differences, can you make TRIBBLE fit into established Prime w/o a hundred 'yeah but...' exceptions?
    The answer to that is No.

    Which is, of course, asking a modern TV show to ape the aesthetics of its decades old predecessor without considering how replicating an aesthetic outside of its original cultural context might play outside that context, and simply to hammer narrative continuity according to the barest possible interpretation of what visuals in fictional media represent (ie. the world literally as the characters see it, not the world of the characters as translated to fit the scope of a production and cultural point of view of the creators and audience.)

    Ie. that Star Trek is real, not media entertainment. The aesthetics at any point are a translation for both the benefit of the production team and audience, hence why every series looks like its host decade's own interpretation of what life in the future will be like. DSC is part of its time, hence stylistic changes that are both conscious and unconscious retranslations of "Star Trek of this era" (see. impact of 3D printing on prop design.) Nominally some design cues will carry over (which is all that's necessary to establish narrative continuity, ie. visual language through identifiable symbology), but the effect will always be unmistakable.

    I think you missed the point of what dracounguis was saying, which you quoted. Here, I'll bold it.
    "]
    But other than style/visual differences, can you make TRIBBLE fit into established Prime w/o a hundred 'yeah but...' exceptions?
    The answer to that is No.

    He's asking about justification of OTHER canon violations, not visual ones.

    However, I'll talk to your point.

    Please correct me if I've misinterpreted you, but your argument against "asking a modern TV show to ape the aesthetics of its decades old predecessor without considering how replicating an aesthetic outside of its original cultural context might play outside that context" would also seem to be dismissive of the entire genre of period pieces (or costume dramas, or historical dramas, if you prefer). You can't do a show about Vikings and show them wearing Armani suits and using Uzis and expect to be taken seriously. Or do a documentary about the Battle of Trafalgar and stick in nuclear submarines. If you're doing the "Life of Benjamin Disraeli", you've got to budget for a certain amount of wing collars and top hats, and no Google Glasses or Crocs. I maintain that if you're going to claim something is set in the Prime Star Trek Universe in the mid-23rd century, it's basically a period piece at this point. The look has been established.

    To me, worrying about how replicating the aesthetic would play to an audience who are not part of its original context is irrelevant: the audience is either interested in the time and place you covering, or they aren't; and if they ARE, they expect it to be consistent with what is known about it. TNG's "Relics", DS9's "Trials and Tribbleations", and Voyager's "Flashback", all successfully recreated the aesthetics of TOS (or TOS movies, in the case of the last named). To set up a faithful recreation from the beginning of a new series would involve more research and effort than just doing one's own thing, but visible evidence of respect and love for the milieu in which one claims to be operating shows, and is always appreciated. The first two of the examples cited above were made WELL after TOS (the last wasn't made MUCH later than ST:VI), but they all went to admirable lengths to remain true to the original, and received much praise for their efforts, rather than being mocked for looking dated or cheesy.

    If you want to make something set in The Original Series era, than you ought to go to the trouble of making it comply with the established look. If you aren't, than call it something else: Mirror Universe, Alternate Universe, Parallel Time, whatever. Or set it in the future. Or make your own new IP. But if you're going to set something in a certain setting/time period you MUST remain faithful to what is known about that setting, if you are to retain any credibility.

    That's my biggest gripe with TRIBBLE. Since I have only seen excerpts and stills, I can't comment on the storyline or characters. But regardless of the quality (or lack thereof) of the writing, acting, etc., I DO know that I cannot accept TRIBBLE as being set in the same Federation and Klingon Empire in the same time and universe as TOS.

    However, I DO understand that the real reasons TRIBBLE isn't compliant with canon are legal copyright issues, not artistic ones (and I think most of us realize that). I'm not willing to forgive it, but I do understand it.


  • marty123#3757 marty123 Member Posts: 674 Arc User
    I’m tired of everyone complaining, if you don’t like discovery then don’t waste your time posting in the forums and go and play another game, do you not have lives?
  • furiontassadarfuriontassadar Member Posts: 475 Arc User
    Ugh, following up an expansion about my favorite Star Trek series with one about that...abomination.

    And adding yet another Federation mini-faction, to boot.

    I occasionally feel bad about the fact that I tend to do what I have to for unlocks and then just shelve alts from recruitment events, but this will be one alt that I will gladly never play again, assuming I can even manage to stomach making it through the tutorial missions.

    To think, with how good Victory of Life was and with the wrapping up of various storylines, I was actually kind of excited to see where STO was going next. That's what you get for being optimistic, it seems. At least I have other stuff to occupy my attention while I wait and foolishly hope that we eventually move on from this Discovery nonsense....
    "There will never be enough blood to wash away my need for vengeance! A single world...I could destroy a million worlds and it would not be enough! Your existence is an insult to the memory of my people! I will continue my fight, even if I must fight alone!"
  • leceterleceter Member Posts: 196 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    tousseau wrote: »
    LOL... Discovery feels like Disney?

    You want Disney? Look no further than LoR... What was done to the Romulans, was no less forgivable...
    "Epohhs! Get your epohhs here. Would you like an Epohh friend?"

    This is the Winter Event created by Q.
  • oldkhemaraaoldkhemaraa Member Posts: 1,039 Arc User
    I am NOT excited about this. Please don't mess up the Klingons with the garbage from that show. I think we klingon players have suffered quite sufficiently. I recall way back when D. Stahl saying, what do you want WOW trek? Um we said yes, but WOW has fully realized factions with their own distinct story lines and goals.. STO never even got close.
    "I aim to misbehave" - Malcolm Reynolds
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 3,215 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    There's quite a lot of bias going on here from both sides.
    I stream on Twitch, look for Avoozl_
  • spacecatz#6038 spacecatz Member Posts: 69 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Still, I guess this was inevitable considering the fact that elements of the so-called fanbase think they have the ability and authority to declare what is and isn't canon/Prime Universe/Star Trek.
    The fanbase doesn't think they have the authority to declare what is canon, they are pointing out the inconsistencies the new show is having with the previous established canon.
  • dmtdmt Member Posts: 194 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    So let's also talk about the discussions to remove TOS from the Star Trek Canon because of differences with Discovery
    Post edited by dmt on
  • anyajenkinsanyajenkins Member Posts: 56 Arc User
    In the general discussion section of the forum in the post "STO: AGE OF DISCOVERY - EXCITED YEAH/NAY" Ibukee say something very very interesting :

    "some months ago there were a second f2p MMO who had the same kind of economic model (mostly fanservice shop )
    the devs suddenly decided they wouldnt listen to their whales and did a thing everybody hate
    now this game disappeared ( marvel heroes ) , in 2018 devs aren't allmighty gods anymore , people are vocal and it can be fast to boycott a MMO
    take 2seconds to think , who are the whales ? the teenagers fans of DSC or the true fans who support this game since beta because it's the only way to see prime universe stories"
    coffee the finest organic suspension ever devised - Janeway
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,005 Arc User
    > @spacecatz#6038 said:
    > reyan01 wrote: »
    >
    > Still, I guess this was inevitable considering the fact that elements of the so-called fanbase think they have the ability and authority to declare what is and isn't canon/Prime Universe/Star Trek.
    >
    >
    >
    > The fanbase doesn't think they have the authority to declare what is canon, they are pointing out the inconsistencies the new show is having with the previous established canon.

    The fanbase confuses "canon" with "stuff I like" which results in the opinion that there is no canon other than headcanon.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • spcsiscospcsisco Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    > @allyoftheforce said:
    > bubblegirl2015 wrote: »
    >
    > Does this mean a Discovery recruit event? Sure smells like it ​​
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > I sure as hell hope not, I'm sick of making a new toon for the sake of making a new toon. No I don't want to experience another fracking profession, no I don't want to sink millions of EC and Dil into another toon that I WON'T PLAY past account unlocks and no I don't care what you think or say. It's TRIBBLE, not Disco, Disco died in the 70s and should remain there. I have my main toon, with all the dumb alts for account unlocks, I don't play them anymore and don't want to, I play my main and let my alts rot.
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    And that's the great "success" of Discovery: alienating big part of fanbase, dividing people, making conflicts... And destroying the universe, because you can't "redesign" classic TOS look - it's classic TOS look! JJ Abrams at least made his own timeline - I can hate his Treks, but they don't interefere with "my" Treks, so he respected classic series. Creators of Discovery obviously don't respect anything and they will continue that chainsaw massacre. And it's not only about visuals - it's much more, it's about the "spirit", the story, the characters, everything.
    I don't care about this expansion. Just hold it seperate from rest of the content. I don't want to hear Martok talking about T'Kuvma again. Never.
    Waiting for "The Orville Online"... They know, what we liked in Star Trek.

    Yep, I never understood WHY it seems they want, in some way, to sweep TOS under the rug for good. Don't understand the TOS hate, yet championing Enterprise, it seems.

    And I really don't get the fetishes for prequels, reboots and anything gloomy and doomy. I like to see something colorful, positive and optimistic. o.o
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • spcsiscospcsisco Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    (redacted flame/troll/objectionable material) - darkbladejk
    Post edited by darkbladejk on
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,668 Arc User
    jexsamx wrote: »
    Nary a level head in the entire thread. If it isn't a delusional post from someone who thinks they can dictate canon, it's a dismissive and patronizing handwave about any criticism directed at Discovery.

    This thread is a dumpster fire, and I'm makin' s'mores.

    EDIT: It occurs to me the links in my signature could be mistaken for being supportive of Discovery. While I do not hate Discovery, neither would I claim it is either "love" or "life". Those links are a relic from the introduction of party balls. Incidentally, one of the dances in said links is actually in the game now, which is pretty great.

    I suppose I should make my stance clear. I support the inclusion of Discovery content and am curious to see what Cryptic can do to adapt it to STO's tone. I suspect we won't be getting any F-bombs or Klingon nipples, at the very least. My opinions on Discovery as a whole have little to do with my acceptance of this mini-expac.

    Works for me.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • spacecatz#6038 spacecatz Member Posts: 69 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    reyan01 wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    Still, I guess this was inevitable considering the fact that elements of the so-called fanbase think they have the ability and authority to declare what is and isn't canon/Prime Universe/Star Trek.
    The fanbase doesn't think they have the authority to declare what is canon, they are pointing out the inconsistencies the new show is having with the previous established canon.

    Look back through this thread, or on ANY discussion pertaining to DSC on FB.

    "It's NOT Star Trek"
    "It's NOT canon"
    "It's Kelvin Timeline"
    "It's NOT Prime timeline"

    All quotes.
    You said "fanbase" you didn't specify which fanbase, I assumed you meant the entire fanbase not just the people on the forum and FB for STO.

  • madhatch1971madhatch1971 Member Posts: 196 Arc User
    Fantastic news about Age of Discovery. Something to look forward to!
    People ask how long have I been playing STO - well the answer is simple: I have been here since the beginning. I just haven't always had a lot to say.
  • spacecatz#6038 spacecatz Member Posts: 69 Arc User
    Yeah because making prequel after prequel is definitely moving forward and not staying in the past.
  • ivana5ivana5 Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    reyan01 wrote: »
    > @ivana5 said:
    > They can insist all that they wish that Discovery is in the Prime Timeline but it shall never be. The only reason I'm going to be making a new character is to kill the Discovery klingnots and get whatever bonuses/unlocks I can for the ONE character that I do play with any regularity.

    Yes it will. You don't get to decide that.

    It is not in the Prime Timeline, no matter how much they insist that it is. We have seen the Prime Timeline in what is about a decades time, in all depictions it has been as TOS was styled. Scotty’s Enterprise, the nil, as seen in Relics (TNG) was as it looked on TOS; the Defiant went back in time to K7 as of The Trouble with the Tribbles, and guess what, it all looked as it did in TOS. Enterprise even had the Defiant in her mirror universe episode, a ship from TOS, and, baring some minor updates to take advantage of the advance of technology, it was the same.

    It’s funny, one of the few things that they’re consistent about, over decades of work, and yet people ignore it. Heck, even Discovery gets very close in some places. Even in STO, which has a number of avenues in which it can be delivered from (probably going an alternate past, one which continues on, but with our new character brought forwards into STO. It works perfectly well with the capabilities of the Spore Drive), we have seen the TOS era, and it is (baring some things which had to be brought in, like player powers/abilities) the same as the TOS we have seen over four shows.

    -
    I shall say this, however, in spite of my dislike of DIS and rather open belligerence regarding its status I do welcome this to some degree. If it brings in more money and players, as well as keeps CBS happy then that keeps STO ticking, which is what I desire greatly.
  • marty123#3757 marty123 Member Posts: 674 Arc User
    > @reyan01 said:
    > anyajenkins wrote: »
    >
    > In the general discussion section of the forum in the post "STO: AGE OF DISCOVERY - EXCITED YEAH/NAY" Ibukee say something very very interesting :
    >
    > "some months ago there were a second f2p MMO who had the same kind of economic model (mostly fanservice shop )
    > the devs suddenly decided they wouldnt listen to their whales and did a thing everybody hate
    > now this game disappeared ( marvel heroes ) , in 2018 devs aren't allmighty gods anymore , people are vocal and it can be fast to boycott a MMO
    > take 2seconds to think , who are the whales ? the teenagers fans of DSC or the true fans who support this game since beta because it's the only way to see prime universe stories"
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Which is narrow-minded nonsense with a anti-DSC bias that is plain to see.
    >
    > Firstly because it assumes that the DSC fanbase is entirely teenagers. Rubbish.
    >
    > Secondly because of one statement- "true fans". Sick of hearing that. What IS a "true fan"?
    >
    > Thirdly because tunnel vision. No forward thinking. What that statement says is "this game needs to remain firmly rooted in he past and new blood is a BAD thing". Do you realise what a preposterous suggestion that is?

    Wouldn’t a “true fan” ironically be someone who does like Discovery and all of Star Trek?

    So everyone should stop using that as a point
  • lostmindfinditlostmindfindit Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    You want a TRIBBLE? fine (i could put in some joke here, but not in the mood), make it separate game, do NOT BRING THIS S..T into STO. I always saw STO as a last bastion of proper star trek, i overlooked the slight hints at TRIBBLE before now, but if you will incorporate that FAKE CASH GRAB show into the game, you will lose player base. Every Star trek show before now at least TRIED to keep in continuity, and at very least explain why diffrences (klingons from original series vs tng for example) or Enterprise that made actual effort to LOOK an FEEL as a predecessor to original series. even JJtrek at VERY least cut itself from actual startrek timeline to allow itself creative freedoms. TRIBBLE is NOT startrek and should not be mixed with it, you want game in it, separate it at very least, so those of us who dont want to have anything to do with it, can.
  • anyajenkinsanyajenkins Member Posts: 56 Arc User
    > @reyan01 said:

    Wouldn’t a “true fan” ironically be someone who does like Discovery and all of Star Trek?

    So everyone should stop using that as a point

    So a Star Wars fan MUST love Jar-Jar and the prequel triolgy because it's stars wars? A Terminator fan must love the 3 and genesys because it's terminator?

    NO it's not fan problem, the real problem is CBS/Paramount, trying to kill the franchise since 2009... in fact since 2006 with "It's A Wrap! sale and auction" when they trown away all material to be sure that no one can make a tv show or a movie in the TNG era, to be sure that the cost of recreate all the sets and props will be so huge, that a new TNG era show will never happen.

    The JJverse and DSC are not Star Trek, the franchise is sleeping since the last episode of ENT.... And that's why STO is so great, it let us live our dream, our dream about a show that takes place after the Bassen rift's events...

    And we don't want this dream to stop.
    coffee the finest organic suspension ever devised - Janeway
Sign In or Register to comment.