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.
That is a very good point I've nearly forgotten. What really screwed up the Trek franchise is the Viacom split.
Also, who was the genius that decided to name Discovery DSC?
Following all the naming schemes in the past, it should be DIS.
All the one-word series names are shortened to the first three letters.
Voyager isn't VGR, Enterprise isn't ETP.
Honestly, that was the very first thing about that show that irritated me.
I can say that in the Timelines game participation in events has quadrupled since Discovery began. Granted that's a mobile game with probably a younger audience, but any increase would be good for us here.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Also, it is the Stock Market abbreviation for the Disney Corporation.
'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.'
I thought discovery meant some kind of expansion about like exploring or something. Didn't know there was a new series out, till right now. I really like the new show, cant wait for this expansion.
Oh the keypad may not be TOUCH screen, but the way it does context-sensitive menus is as far as you can get from hard wired controls while still having actual buttons.
Woah!
The keys do not press directly onto the printed circuit board?
How do they work?
Most analog keypads are like this one:
That's what the physical components do. Logically though... what the keys do depends on what order you push them in. The interface requires you to know what the functions of the buttons change to when you push the buttons. It'd be easier to use if it was a touch pad display since those can have the labels of the buttons change when the menu changes. Guess what change I'm expecting them to make to the device next? Replace the context-sensitive menu you have to memorize with a touch screen that changes the button labels every time the menu changes.
An interesting aspect of touch screens in Star Trek - they might actually have haptic feedback. With today's technology, we can use vibrations to create something like t hat, but usually that would be over the entire touch screen, not individual buttons. But in Star Trek, they could probably use force fields or other more advanced tech to create button-specific feedback. So a button could be harder to press, o rif you get close to it, you feel a light resistance, or a prickling sensation, or something like that.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
It would've been easier to reprogram that 'Yellow Alert' touch screen button above to do 'Red Alert' stuff like jettison the Ion Pod in 'Court Martial' than having to rejigger the never before or since seen overhead recording cameras with their really fantastic zoom capabilities.
'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.'
All the Discovery haters seem to be missing a big point - there were legal reasons that stuff from TOS could NOT be used in Discovery. Their hands were tied on that matter. Those of us paying attention picked up on the fact that the Discovery version of the Enterprise had to be at least 10% different, or it couldn't be used. Right off the bat they knew they were not going to be allowed to make things look like they had pre-TOS (Cage era).
Story wise, Discovery has introduced nothing that doesn't tie in with what we know is to come. Spock not talking about an adopted sister? Not a surprise. We didn't know he had a half brother until Star Trek V.
As for visual rebooting, it's been done many times in Trek over the years. Visual consistency isn't followed as closely as you think: The Motion Picture was a visual reboot, everything was given a new look - not only did the Klingons get a new look, they got a language as well. TNG Changed how the Romulans looked, an oddly enough in Enterprise, Romulans used the TNG look - NOT the TOS look (and we don't have a fancy reason as to WHY). Speaking of Enterprise, they changed how the Andorians and Tellerites looked, conflicting with the look of TOS. DS9 opted for a different look for Trills from how they had looked in TNG. I guess the Cardassians that appeared in TNG's The Wounded were a subspecies that we never got to see again? Don't even get me started on how Chekov knew Khan in Star Trek II, lol
But all those things are somehow forgotten and forgiven... Yeah, Enterprise tried to throw the fans a bone about why the Klingons looked different. But a virus affecting an entire spacefaring race, and not a single member escaping it? That I find hard to believe. Yeah the Enterprise, and by extension all of Starfleet and the rest of the Galaxy had been refit in TMP... As for the rest, take your pick of fan theories as to why those things changed.
I like the new look for the Klingons - FINALLY, they have a more alien feel to them. FINALLY their technology and ships look different, they have an otherworldly feel. Discovery's take on technology makes sense given how our own technology has changed in the last fifty years. Of course they are going to have touch screens. What, we abandoned that technology before the 22nd Century and didn't think about using it again until the 24th Century, because buttons made more sense during that time?
I am a True fan of Trek, for fifty years I have watched the show grow, change, evolve and manage to stay relevant to the time it's being made. TOS was how we thought the future was going to look in 1966. TMP was how we though the future was going to look in 1979. TNG was how we thought the future was going to look in 1987. DIS is how we think the future is going to look in 2017.
I am looking forward to this expansion, I am glad that the Mods are letting us play Trek the way we want to play it and giving the player base a wider choice. No one is going to force you to play the new content. It's up to you if you do, but that doesn't mean you have a right to deny others the right to play it. Get off your high horses. As for what's canon and what isn't in Trek - that isn't up to us to decide. We don't own the show, we don't get a say in that. If CBS says it's canon, then it is. If they say it's Prime Timeline, then it is.
For Spock's sake - take a chill pill, and remember: Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
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.
Obviously it is still 'everything is subject to change' but I find it interesting that the STO wiki Upcoming Content page states the following: Major update (fall 2018): Age of Discovery - More time travel and parallel universe related story content, specifically related to Star Trek: Discovery[1]
Time travel is a given, considering that STO is set in 2410 and Age of Discovery won't be, but parallel universes? Do the STO devs know things we don't?
I'll grant you that the ST:TOS controls needed updating and were silly at times, however, USS Discovery's controls are not appealing as the consoles or controls of a military vessel of the 23rd century in my opinion (and this is a matter of personal tastes). That said, I think it needs pointing out here the obvious reason why USS Discovery has "soft" controls. Isn't it supposed to be a science vessel? It's not a warship like Enterprise is right? If Enterprise has "soft" controls, or any other Federation military starship of that era is shown to have "soft" controls, then that's going to be rather silly in my opinion.
Advanced should not mean lesser quality or "soft".
A good example of what I'm talking about can be expressed like this.
Take an old rotary phone and hit it with a 5-pound sledgehammer--once--and chances are it will still function.
Do that to a cell-phone and see what happens.
That is "hard" vs "soft".
ST:TUC had a very nice balance of "hard" and "soft" controls.
Enh, I see multiple keypads. I would characterize those as soft controls since pushing the button doesn't really do anything on it's own.
I have to ask, for the drölfzigst time, why does this debate rely so much on whataboutism (it is certianly a form of it)? What point are people trying to do when they always and endlessly state that other incarnations of the franchise were also disliked? How does this affect criticism people voice right now? Does it make it invalid? I seriously would like to know! I just want to understand!
^ 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
> @valoreah said: > > > > I wouldn't say it invalidates criticism. What it does (IMO) invalidate is that Discovery is going to "kill the franchise" or "isn't canon" and such because it's different.
Both of these points are moot any way. The franchise (which is more than the shows) has been at terrible places before, the myriad of mediocre and bad games for instance. And the canon point is simple since DSC is defined as canon. I just feel the "nobody liked TNG" thing is often used in retaliation to criticism but it adresses nothing.
> @madhatch1971 said: > All the Discovery haters seem to be missing a big point - there were legal reasons that stuff from TOS could NOT be used in Discovery. Their hands were tied on that matter.(...)
That is false. I know youbare referring to a earlier trekmovie.com (?) article, but that turned out to be untrue. DSC's visuals are purely chosen for aesthetic/artistic reasons as stated by - I think - Kurtzmann. I am on my phone and can't source it right now but it should not be hidden too deep.
^ 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
I still find it amusing how many of the complaints are really little more than " I don't like it."
In another recent feedback thread somebody also said that simply stating "I don't like it" wasn't sufficient. It's still feedback. You don't don't state why you find it amusing
Btw, I like it.
My Vanguard Jem'hadar Dominion toon who wears a Discovery outfit will pretend that AoD is a continuation of the short lived ViL.
Comments
That is a very good point I've nearly forgotten. What really screwed up the Trek franchise is the Viacom split.
Also, who was the genius that decided to name Discovery DSC?
Following all the naming schemes in the past, it should be DIS.
All the one-word series names are shortened to the first three letters.
Voyager isn't VGR, Enterprise isn't ETP.
Honestly, that was the very first thing about that show that irritated me.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
slang : to treat with disrespect or contempt
Also, it is the Stock Market abbreviation for the Disney Corporation.
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.'
Ah, I stand corrected. A link would have been useful, but I found it myself.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Trek:_Discovery#Abbrev
It was confusing, as MA also uses DIS, but there was only the one sentence explaining why.
My character Tsin'xing
My character Tsin'xing
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.'
Story wise, Discovery has introduced nothing that doesn't tie in with what we know is to come. Spock not talking about an adopted sister? Not a surprise. We didn't know he had a half brother until Star Trek V.
As for visual rebooting, it's been done many times in Trek over the years. Visual consistency isn't followed as closely as you think: The Motion Picture was a visual reboot, everything was given a new look - not only did the Klingons get a new look, they got a language as well. TNG Changed how the Romulans looked, an oddly enough in Enterprise, Romulans used the TNG look - NOT the TOS look (and we don't have a fancy reason as to WHY). Speaking of Enterprise, they changed how the Andorians and Tellerites looked, conflicting with the look of TOS. DS9 opted for a different look for Trills from how they had looked in TNG. I guess the Cardassians that appeared in TNG's The Wounded were a subspecies that we never got to see again? Don't even get me started on how Chekov knew Khan in Star Trek II, lol
But all those things are somehow forgotten and forgiven... Yeah, Enterprise tried to throw the fans a bone about why the Klingons looked different. But a virus affecting an entire spacefaring race, and not a single member escaping it? That I find hard to believe. Yeah the Enterprise, and by extension all of Starfleet and the rest of the Galaxy had been refit in TMP... As for the rest, take your pick of fan theories as to why those things changed.
I like the new look for the Klingons - FINALLY, they have a more alien feel to them. FINALLY their technology and ships look different, they have an otherworldly feel. Discovery's take on technology makes sense given how our own technology has changed in the last fifty years. Of course they are going to have touch screens. What, we abandoned that technology before the 22nd Century and didn't think about using it again until the 24th Century, because buttons made more sense during that time?
I am a True fan of Trek, for fifty years I have watched the show grow, change, evolve and manage to stay relevant to the time it's being made. TOS was how we thought the future was going to look in 1966. TMP was how we though the future was going to look in 1979. TNG was how we thought the future was going to look in 1987. DIS is how we think the future is going to look in 2017.
I am looking forward to this expansion, I am glad that the Mods are letting us play Trek the way we want to play it and giving the player base a wider choice. No one is going to force you to play the new content. It's up to you if you do, but that doesn't mean you have a right to deny others the right to play it. Get off your high horses. As for what's canon and what isn't in Trek - that isn't up to us to decide. We don't own the show, we don't get a say in that. If CBS says it's canon, then it is. If they say it's Prime Timeline, then it is.
For Spock's sake - take a chill pill, and remember: Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
Time travel is a given, considering that STO is set in 2410 and Age of Discovery won't be, but parallel universes? Do the STO devs know things we don't?
My character Tsin'xing
This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Victory is Life!"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
>
>
>
> I wouldn't say it invalidates criticism. What it does (IMO) invalidate is that Discovery is going to "kill the franchise" or "isn't canon" and such because it's different.
Both of these points are moot any way. The franchise (which is more than the shows) has been at terrible places before, the myriad of mediocre and bad games for instance. And the canon point is simple since DSC is defined as canon. I just feel the "nobody liked TNG" thing is often used in retaliation to criticism but it adresses nothing.
> @madhatch1971 said:
> All the Discovery haters seem to be missing a big point - there were legal reasons that stuff from TOS could NOT be used in Discovery. Their hands were tied on that matter.(...)
That is false. I know youbare referring to a earlier trekmovie.com (?) article, but that turned out to be untrue. DSC's visuals are purely chosen for aesthetic/artistic reasons as stated by - I think - Kurtzmann. I am on my phone and can't source it right now but it should not be hidden too deep.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
My character Tsin'xing
Well, that is what complaint means: "a statement that something is wrong or not satisfactory".
Btw, I like it.
My Vanguard Jem'hadar Dominion toon who wears a Discovery outfit will pretend that AoD is a continuation of the short lived ViL.