Some reality for you here. If a show is tanking in the forst season you do not renew it for a second. You also do not hire the person in charge of the show to make multiple additional shows spun off of the "failing" show. Your entire post shows such an absymal lack of any connection to reality thats it literally reads like satire.
I guess you didn't read my post after the one you quoted. Ok. Yes, my subjective opinions on CBS's secret market research objectively proves I'm detached from reality.
Do we really need to start qualifying every sentence we make with "in my opinion" and "I see it this way, but fully understand, respect, and appreciate why others would not" and TRIBBLE like that? Really? I guess when it comes to TRIBBLE we do. What a waste of time.
Apparently since this fellow doesn't like ST:D, it therefore must be unpopular with everyone, because he has the very epitome of good taste.Netflix signed on for overseas distribution of Season 2 because they just love losing customers, obviously.
Also, there's a point that's been permitted to slide here, but The Orville is not a parody of Star Trek, despite the way that Fox has tried to sell it, and any insistence that it is shows that the one insisting hasn't watched much of it. Yes, MacFarlane used TNG as a stepping-off point (I usually describe it to folks who haven't seen it yet as "TNG with real humans instead of Roddenberry paragons"), but there's nothing in there that "parodies" anything, except for lazy sci-fi tropes (like the takedown of macho all-male militaristic aliens in "About a Girl").
Apparently only TRIBBLE lovers get to be sarcastic and hyperbolic, amirite? I think the difference is that I don't mind that stuff, but it seems the TRIBBLE fan backlash here is from people who abhor it (and yet, then commence doing it). Reminds me of a certain political persuasion I won't mention to keep the thread from being locked.
I've watched season one of The Orville, but nothing past that.
So Cbs has a 7 day free trial so i signed up and watched some of the episodes. there are some good things and some bad things. but overall its not to bad. So far im enjoying the show , i like the macco (war) feel to the show. the uniforms not to bad i can live with them . now the bad , hate the warp drive, hate the look of the klingons . Overall im just glad that trek is back on TV . this show may bring in some younger fans to trek and thats a good thing.
A little contradictory there. You refer to DSC's supposedly "abysmal" ratings. And in the next sentence you make refernce to season 2.
Guess what? If the ratings were REALLY as bad as you claim (evidence please) there wouldn't BE a second season.
That is not true. At all.
The first 12 episodes of Season 1 were paid for by Netflix. Only 3 episodes were paid for by CBS.
Then, you have the "future online strategy". It goes something like this: Neflix and Hulu are currently the largest streaming providers in the business (though they are starting to get fierce competition from Amazon). You make content for your network, but also lease it to Neflix, Hulu, etc for 10 cents a view.
So, to inflate the value of your product, you create your own online service. You keep the viewer numbers close to your chest. When you negotiate to lease your product you claim "well, our viewers pay 8 dollars a month for this content". Now, no one is going to give you 8 dollars per view, but maybe you can negotiate it up to 20 cents or 25 cents a view. Then, you bundle your content. You insist the streaming service take several of your programs. This gives the illusion that you have a large and diverse selection of shows, when only a few of them get significant views.
The only people who know just how well TRIBBLE is doing, is CBS. Most people wonder "if TRIBBLE is doing so well, why not release the view counts? they are not even telling their stockholders these numbers". The answer is "future online strategy". The less information is out there (or the more information they can manipulate) the more money they can get from streaming services.
I think that may be the biggest factor: the internet.
I think there's also a question of what the internet is most easily channeled to do now versus, say, the time of Enterprise and Voyager. Social media and the ubiquity of "nerd culture" in mainstream TV and movies has elevated fan complaints to the state of apparent power, even though the population demographics and how people generally appreciate the material hasn't changed. Thus the apparent stakes are greater, the methods for attack well honed, and media platforms generally resistant to filter garbage toxicity and harassment campaigns.
Result: anything whose function isn't the affirmation of fanboys (see. Discovery, Last Jedi, Thundercats) gets some amount of apparently meaningful backlash (if you simply look at the surface expression). Does it represent cogent criticisms? They might be in there, but mostly (IMO) its a power game for those who feel a sense of ownership over a media franchise. And that dialog has grown so distorted (through escalation) that even basic commentary on themes, world building, visual story telling, and narrative (see. the basic clarifications offered in this and other Discovery threads since the AoD announcement) is generally beyond the capacity of these fan circles to accurately identify (ex. the use of lore in Discovery.)
For it to be different, I think we'll need to wait for structural changes (via natural evolution) to both social media and franchise entertainment. Broken discourse isn't conducive to the maintenance of fan bases over the long term, people on the outside opt to not identify with the snarling trolls snapping at any apparent subversion of their selected source material, and this provides both an impetus for conscious decisions to decontextualize that "discussion" as discussion and the erosion of apathetic ones which take the snarling at face value (and adjust the franchise to suit those who can't accurately identify what does or doesn't in mass media.)
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Eating the heart of your enemies, to gain their strength, was not an uncommon practice among humans too; so I could see that, as a sort of victory ritual. Eating your enemies because you're hungry, though, that doesn't sound very Klingon to me.
I don't think eating your enemies because you're hungry is supposed to be particularly Klingon, but not everything a Klingon does is aimed at "being Klingon". I think that maybe they're willing to settle for "not starving to death". It seems pretty clear that they aren't eating people just because they like eating people, but if you gotta eat, and you eat people, they're not all that sad about it.
and yet, we have defenders of Discovery digging through one-off quotes in previous series to claim it's 'supported by canon' when the best explanation is...
...it's supported by the common sense of the situation. They have no food, have had none long enough that starving to death is a real threat, and the only chance they have, is to survive long enough to be rescued.
They're not just gonna eat the dead bodies of their enemies, they're gonna eat ALL the bodies tat aren't totally rotten, because death by starvation is that bad.
Being appropriate for more than one reasons is far short of a contradiction.
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
You ever been to a bar where people tell sea-stories, Som?
or war-stories. either one. Bullsh*tting while drinking practically IS a boasting contest. as much as people claim alcohol is a truth serum, the fact is, it's more or less a bullsh*t serum instead.
Except that the rules of morality don't get tossed in the trash. So if you're drunk in a bar and start boasting of things that your buddies think are morally reprehensible … great way to get the pointy end of a D'k tagh.
Primarily because the series is so disinteresting to me that an expansion based on it has no personal merit and will not invoke interest.
I'll take ingame goodies if they are provided to all my existing characters, but I am not going to make a Discovery Recruit character.
Personally, I think this is just another variation on the Temporal Agent theme established with the TOS character type.
Uncertain if we need two time displaced origin stories.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
You ever been to a bar where people tell sea-stories, Som?
or war-stories. either one. Bullsh*tting while drinking practically IS a boasting contest. as much as people claim alcohol is a truth serum, the fact is, it's more or less a bullsh*t serum instead.
Except that the rules of morality don't get tossed in the trash. So if you're drunk in a bar and start boasting of things that your buddies think are morally reprehensible … great way to get the pointy end of a D'k tagh.
sit down and watch sports fans sometime. Most of whom would never concieve of harming another person in real life, they'll use words like "Annihilate" and "Kill" and "Massacre".
some of them get downright salty. doesn't mean they're going to do it, or that the people they're saying it to expect them to really take the umpire/referee/official out and shoot them in the head.
But the'll use language that makes it sound like that's exactly what they aim to do, if you don't understand the context of their sub culture.
maybe it's NOT coming from a nice, white-collar, socially conscious and conscientious culture, but I've heard guys talking like that on real-life subjects my whole life, and know when they're bullshitting and exaggerating for effect, because when they get serious, they get very polite and inoffensive in their speech. (this is kind of a warning sign someone's actually going to go for a knife, gun, or what-have-you. The hyperbole stops and they get REAL quiet.)
You are still arguing that there's a contradiction in canon because maybe a story told by a very literal people wasn't necessarily literal in this case, without specific evidence or a broader statement than the barest glimmer of that technicality. IE. it's a fluff argument to save face. Take the point that Discovery doesn't contradict trek lore in this respect, as it has been established in on-screen dialog, and move on.
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Comments
I guess you didn't read my post after the one you quoted. Ok. Yes, my subjective opinions on CBS's secret market research objectively proves I'm detached from reality.
Do we really need to start qualifying every sentence we make with "in my opinion" and "I see it this way, but fully understand, respect, and appreciate why others would not" and TRIBBLE like that? Really? I guess when it comes to TRIBBLE we do. What a waste of time.
Apparently only TRIBBLE lovers get to be sarcastic and hyperbolic, amirite? I think the difference is that I don't mind that stuff, but it seems the TRIBBLE fan backlash here is from people who abhor it (and yet, then commence doing it). Reminds me of a certain political persuasion I won't mention to keep the thread from being locked.
I've watched season one of The Orville, but nothing past that.
par·o·dy
ˈperədē/
noun
noun: parody; plural noun: parodies
1.
an imitation of the style of a particular writer, artist, or genre with deliberate exaggeration for comic effect.
Yeah, man. Not a parody at all...
The first 12 episodes of Season 1 were paid for by Netflix. Only 3 episodes were paid for by CBS.
Then, you have the "future online strategy". It goes something like this: Neflix and Hulu are currently the largest streaming providers in the business (though they are starting to get fierce competition from Amazon). You make content for your network, but also lease it to Neflix, Hulu, etc for 10 cents a view.
So, to inflate the value of your product, you create your own online service. You keep the viewer numbers close to your chest. When you negotiate to lease your product you claim "well, our viewers pay 8 dollars a month for this content". Now, no one is going to give you 8 dollars per view, but maybe you can negotiate it up to 20 cents or 25 cents a view. Then, you bundle your content. You insist the streaming service take several of your programs. This gives the illusion that you have a large and diverse selection of shows, when only a few of them get significant views.
Finally, you pay social media mills to mention your product on social media sites. This drives up the "demand" as seen by Parrot Analytics. You know, the site that was the basis for this hitpiece: https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2018/03/13/parrot-analytics-star-trek-discovery-tops-irish-in-demand-ratings/
The only people who know just how well TRIBBLE is doing, is CBS. Most people wonder "if TRIBBLE is doing so well, why not release the view counts? they are not even telling their stockholders these numbers". The answer is "future online strategy". The less information is out there (or the more information they can manipulate) the more money they can get from streaming services.
I think there's also a question of what the internet is most easily channeled to do now versus, say, the time of Enterprise and Voyager. Social media and the ubiquity of "nerd culture" in mainstream TV and movies has elevated fan complaints to the state of apparent power, even though the population demographics and how people generally appreciate the material hasn't changed. Thus the apparent stakes are greater, the methods for attack well honed, and media platforms generally resistant to filter garbage toxicity and harassment campaigns.
Result: anything whose function isn't the affirmation of fanboys (see. Discovery, Last Jedi, Thundercats) gets some amount of apparently meaningful backlash (if you simply look at the surface expression). Does it represent cogent criticisms? They might be in there, but mostly (IMO) its a power game for those who feel a sense of ownership over a media franchise. And that dialog has grown so distorted (through escalation) that even basic commentary on themes, world building, visual story telling, and narrative (see. the basic clarifications offered in this and other Discovery threads since the AoD announcement) is generally beyond the capacity of these fan circles to accurately identify (ex. the use of lore in Discovery.)
For it to be different, I think we'll need to wait for structural changes (via natural evolution) to both social media and franchise entertainment. Broken discourse isn't conducive to the maintenance of fan bases over the long term, people on the outside opt to not identify with the snarling trolls snapping at any apparent subversion of their selected source material, and this provides both an impetus for conscious decisions to decontextualize that "discussion" as discussion and the erosion of apathetic ones which take the snarling at face value (and adjust the franchise to suit those who can't accurately identify what does or doesn't in mass media.)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Being appropriate for more than one reasons is far short of a contradiction.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
My character Tsin'xing
Primarily because the series is so disinteresting to me that an expansion based on it has no personal merit and will not invoke interest.
I'll take ingame goodies if they are provided to all my existing characters, but I am not going to make a Discovery Recruit character.
Personally, I think this is just another variation on the Temporal Agent theme established with the TOS character type.
Uncertain if we need two time displaced origin stories.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
You are still arguing that there's a contradiction in canon because maybe a story told by a very literal people wasn't necessarily literal in this case, without specific evidence or a broader statement than the barest glimmer of that technicality. IE. it's a fluff argument to save face. Take the point that Discovery doesn't contradict trek lore in this respect, as it has been established in on-screen dialog, and move on.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!