As interesting as the concept sounds, I would prefer something more directly related to TOS in some way.
Or another interesting Idea that I thought of is the release of the Enterprise F in a standalone Featured Episode that some how involves all the past incarnations of the Enterprise. That way it celebrates the continuation of the franchise rather than just TOS itself. Now if we could get all the "known" Captain's involved as well (Archer, Kirk, Pike, Picard, Data, Harriman, April, Spock, Garrett) that would be brilliant! But as they say "If wishes were horses, we would all be eating stake!"
when i was reading that, i thought a bit of the TNG episodes "Parallels" and "all good things"
the whole sovereign sized JJprise has been shot down. there was even a quote i read from a visual effects guy saying they scaled it up for shuttle bay scenes so it looked better. also, details like the docking ports and windows do not support the ship being that size at all, the pod they shot kirk out of fit like a glove out of the docking port, and we can see that the pod is not much bigger then kirk after he climbs out of it. that docking port alone points to the JJprise not being sovereign sized. most figure it was about 320m.
the kelvin destruction did seem to push the constitution class program back to the drawing board, in the new movie it was launched in 2258, the prime universe constitution was launched in 2245, plenty of time for there to be a captain Robert April captaining it in the prime universe before pike.
"No, it's quite clear in Star Trek 2009 that Captain Pike is the original captain of the Enterprise."
Sorry but being a fan of star trek, i have to say this. That film that monstrosity it was pure sacrilege of everything star trek. The one thing in the star trek universe barley touched on barely shown, was the Romulan star Empire, and its home world. Even nemesis did not touch on the Romulan culture. Every series made the Romulans appear mysterious . Then some *** writes a script destroying Romulous! I do not take anything in that movie seriously. Its ok for a watch here and there, but as far as i am concerned it was the worse mistake in star trek history.
Somebody earlier mentioned the idea of a time travel mission where you go back and visit the enterprise when it is under construction. It is probably too late to see this happen but I thought the idea would be great.
I could totally see a one off where you are sent back in time for some reason or another (Q, Future Time Agency, Chance, whatever)
The mission itself would take place on a TOS interior using modified pieces of the TOS ship interior and Drozona station components to make them look under construction. IE, exposed panels, missing consoles, walls without panelling. Would be pretty cool if they had EVA tech hooked up so you could go into sections of the ship that had no outer hull and look out into space.
No idea what the mission would be about. Probably persuing some other baddies from the future or something.
In the Star Trek Fact Files April is listed as the first captain of the Enterprise. Would love to see him or Pike in an FE. Maybe the best way to go about it is that April was the Captain overseeing the construction of the enterprise. And have a time travel FE baised around Earth and the San Fransisco Shipyards where the Enterprise is being built. With the FE ending in the comissioning of the 1701
You know, after thinking and reading this thread, a perfect use for Robert April or Christopher Pike (if they could use his likeness), would be the 'training hologram' for the Kobayashi Maru simulator. He could be the 'contact' and give general history and such on the no-win-scenario. That could also be the tie-in for the 45th Anniversary.
It would be interesting if Robert April is shown for the first time since the Animated Series, I've always regarded him as the first captain of the Constituion class Enterprise and wondered if he might get more of a lime light.
As for the 2009 Trek movie, it was terrible. Nice CGI but it pretty much spat on over forty years of Star Trek history as well as went the Star Wars route by having very little back history on why the Federation's Starfleet ships were designed to be like fancy hot rods, which I'm sure Tom Paris would have loved.
I don't regard that movie as true Trek at all, it's little more than Trek for the impatent generation.
The time line in that universe was clearly changed in Archer's time due to the difference in technology and progression, but that was never explained what the changes were.
Maybe the Xindi attack caused differences, or maybe Archer's mission had a different outcome. Either way the prime time line and the 2009 Trek movie time line branched off from one another well before the Narada appeared.
Maybe the Federation in the 2009 movie time line wasn't founded until much later instead of 2161 like in the prime time line. That couild explain a lot of the differences.
The Enterprise was launched in 2245. Pike would have been somewhere between 19 and 26. (Going by Jeffrey Hunter's age, Pike would have been a teenager in 2245. Going by the character's age as elaborated in soft canon, he'd be, at most, 26.)
Kirk-Prime, however, broke all records for being the youngest Captain in Starfleet by getting his first commission at age 34.
In other words, it would be impossible based on canon references for Christopher Pike to have commanded the Enterprise when it was launched.
The Enterprise was launched in 2245. Pike would have been somewhere between 19 and 26. (Going by Jeffrey Hunter's age, Pike would have been a teenager in 2245. Going by the character's age as elaborated in soft canon, he'd be, at most, 26.)
Kirk-Prime, however, broke all records for being the youngest Captain in Starfleet by getting his first commission at age 34.
In other words, it would be impossible based on canon references for Christopher Pike to have commanded the Enterprise when it was launched.
Unless you go by the 2009 movie form of Starfleet where a newly graduated Ensign - the other Kirk - was given command of the Enterprise at around the age of, what, 24/25? Depending when he was born in the other time line, or the Hot Rod Star Ship timeline as it should be considered as.
I prefer the idea of a captain earning a command through a great deal of experience and effort, not just being given a ship because he got lucky.
So yeah, Levi's number put a nail in the coffin of the whole Robert April issue - He is the 1st Captain of the 1701.. (though in one of the TOS comics, there was an earlier guy who took her out on shakedown and got himself killed. Enterprise Shakedown cruises are ALWAYS BAD - never serve on the Enterprise during a shakedown :P)
2 other random things to clear up: "Constitution Class" wasn't spoken in dialog until TNG, though it was on unreadable tech schematics on screen in the series. Other places it was called Starship Class or a Class 1 Starship
Nonetheless, Constitution Class is the accepted name. It was also the class name of the JJ-Prise - though again not seen on screen, it was on the dedication plaque and on the official movie website in the ships biography page.
Someone else said that the timeline changed as far back as Archer's time, not true. The USS Kelvin is actually a Prime Universe ship, and you can tell because its design is VERY similar to the TOS Enterprise as far as shapes and textures go. Up until the point that the Narada emerged from the rift, that WAS the Prime universe, and we can assume the USS Kelvin went on to serve longer in "our" universe as a precursor to the Constitution Class project which launched in 2245 (12 years after the scene we see in ST-09)
Also keep in mind that STO isn't strictly in the Prime universe either - all we know (from the STO novel) is that STO's timeline is different from the one occuring now in the Pocketbooks novels, and that both are different takes on the "future" of the Prime timeline - its very likely that IF CBS or Paramount ever revisit Prime and tell stories in this time period, whatever they write will at least retcon SOME of what happens in both STO-Time and the 'Pocketverse"
My thoughts on why April was not the captain of the Enterprise in the 2009 movie was that he was assigned to another ship when an emergency arrised and Pike was available to command. Yes there was A LOT that the movie got fubar but, I seen it for what it was, an enjoyable movie.
I am in the group of those that think that perhaps the timeline actually changed during Archers time. After all, how can you go through a temporal war and not have lasting effects?
As for the idea the OP had, I would be full in favor of it. :cool:
Jeffery Hunter who played Pike in the pilot didn't want to continue with the show.
William Shatner said the part of Kirk was offered to Jack Lord, before him. Jack lord wanted way to much, then they offered it to Shatner.
A dev told us in Qo'Nos dance Q&A. That they tried to get some TAS stuff in. The CBS rep he dealt with didn't like it to much. So it sounded like CBS doesn't want to put TAS stuff in STO, or whatever they tried.
Jeffery Hunter who played Pike in the pilot didn't want to continue with the show.
William Shatner said the part of Kirk was offered to Jack Lord, before him. Jack lord wanted way to much, then they offered it to Shatner.
A dev told us in Qo'Nos dance Q&A. That they tried to get some TAS stuff in. The CBS rep he dealt with didn't like it to much. So it sounded like CBS doesn't want to put TAS stuff in STO, or whatever they tried.
Which is funny because i swear i thought i saw some federation transports in a mission recently that had came directly from More Tribbles, More troubles which was a TAS episodes
In one of the Star Trek: The Magazine, they have a bio on kirk and he's listed as the third captain of Enterprise after Pike who is mentioned as after Robert April.
I have the magazine, but i don't know where my stack is stored at currently.
Jeffery Hunter who played Pike in the pilot didn't want to continue with the show.
William Shatner said the part of Kirk was offered to Jack Lord, before him. Jack lord wanted way to much, then they offered it to Shatner.
A dev told us in Qo'Nos dance Q&A. That they tried to get some TAS stuff in. The CBS rep he dealt with didn't like it to much. So it sounded like CBS doesn't want to put TAS stuff in STO, or whatever they tried.
Thing is... I'm not convinced the license holder sees April as TAS, largely because notes about him predate TAS and the bulk of his appearances came in an era when TAS was outlawed. Beyond that, you have Roddenberry holding to the Robert April stuff (and having a photo taken of himself as Robert April) during the phase when he de-canonized that stuff.
Regarding licensing restrictions, Decipher was able to use any original series asset featured in "Trials and Tribble-ations" under the rationale that, based on that one episode, anything from that episode counted as part of the DS9 license. So if there is ambiguity regarding April's usage in TAS, the solution would likely be to simply get Pocket Books permission to use their version of April (the only thing they've shot down that I know of is the Vesta and they may not own that) or permission from Paramount, who owns all the rights to the 90s comics where April appeared. That is, assuming April isn't already included in the license that CBS supplied Cryptic with.
Paramount likely has no interest in a Prime Universe Robert April anyway and I suspect it would be a case of, "Oh. You want this...? Here you go."
In one of the Star Trek: The Magazine, they have a bio on kirk and he's listed as the third captain of Enterprise after Pike who is mentioned as after Robert April.
I have the magazine, but i don't know where my stack is stored at currently.
StarTrek.com has a bio for April. It's a CBS run site. I think the photo they use is a still from The Animated Series, because the idea of April looking like Roddenberry was always unofficial and TAS and the Paramount comics (which were distributed and edited by Marvel but appear to be Paramount property) both made him look more square-jawed.
Thing is... I'm not convinced the license holder sees April as TAS, largely because notes about him predate TAS and the bulk of his appearances came in an era when TAS was outlawed. Beyond that, you have Roddenberry holding to the Robert April stuff (and having a photo taken of himself as Robert April) during the phase when he de-canonized that stuff.
Regarding licensing restrictions, Decipher was able to use any original series asset featured in "Trials and Tribble-ations" under the rationale that, based on that one episode, anything from that episode counted as part of the DS9 license. So if there is ambiguity regarding April's usage in TAS, the solution would likely be to simply get Pocket Books permission to use their version of April (the only thing they've shot down that I know of is the Vesta and they may not own that) or permission from Paramount, who owns all the rights to the 90s comics where April appeared. That is, assuming April isn't already included in the license that CBS supplied Cryptic with.
Paramount likely has no interest in a Prime Universe Robert April anyway and I suspect it would be a case of, "Oh. You want this...? Here you go."
Why would they go through all this trouble to get him mentioned in the game? It's serves no purpose and wouldn't make the game any better. He would have been dead for about a hundred years, most wouldn't even know who he is or care.
One book I read had April as the first captain. Kirk's dad served as April's Chief of Security. In the book, it was actually the elder Kirk that suggested the name Enterprise.
Why would they go through all this trouble to get him mentioned in the game? It's serves no purpose and wouldn't make the game any better. He would have been dead for about a hundred years, most wouldn't even know who he is or care.
actually we never found out what happened to April...
actually we never found out what happened to April...
I don't think many would really care. Since he was mentioned on TAS and in some Star Trek books.
Any way that's moving in the wrong direction since STO is in the 25th century. It would be easier to make new characters than try to acquire rights to a obscure 23rd century one.
I think it's interesting - and rather disappointing - when player's disregard any ideas related to Star Trek's past as a means of celebrating an anniversary for the entire franchise. Of which the game they play is now a part. As if to continue honoring the past somehow negates the prospects of looking toward the future of the game. I doubt I will ever understand that mindset.
I do like Leviathan's idea. A lot. And I'm glad other's do as well. Thankfully, Dstahl has already stated something is in the works. What that will be is anyone's guess. I can only hope the event is successful with honoring the past as the game looks toward its future.
As a side note, the cartoon as canon or not argument would be moot if the Great Bird wasn't as professionally petty as he was inspired. He just didn't want to legally acknowledge his co-creators of TNG as, well, co-creators. Folks who had helped previously with the writing and production of the previous cartoon. You see? It was a legal maneuver to keep TNG to himself during that first year of production. By disassociating with a past legal connection to those same people. Like I said, petty. Now GR is dead (RIP) and CBS owns Star Trek. The cartoon was re-issued to DVD as part of the Star Trek world. CBS saw the advantage to moving on (and making more money. which is good business).
I agree with this completely. I get that many of the players are from the TOS generation but this game does take place WAY later than the TOS era. Also I want a NX01 Tier 5 and a Tier 5 TOS Connie.
"According to Voyages of Imagination, the Animated Series was officially removed from canon at Gene Roddenberry's request in 1988." From memory alpha. While memory alpha recognizes TAS as a valid resource Gene didn't, and I don't.
Zehra, I feel I must chime in here. Going wih your above quote, I would like for you to explain the following.
As of 2011, all Star Trek films produced are considered canon.[1] However, much like for TV series, this policy fails to note which version of the films is canon. This leaves unknown the canonicity of scenes missing from the theatrical version of a film but included in home releases or director's cuts. Such is the case, for example, of a scene revealing that the character of Peter Preston was the nephew of Scotty in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.[13]
Adding confusion to the issue is the fact that Roddenberry is quoted as saying he did not like the films, and "didn't much consider them canon".[4] There exists no definitive list of which films in particular Roddenberry disliked, or what elements in them he did not consider canon. For example, the reference book Star Trek Chronology states that Roddenberry considered elements of Star Trek V and Star Trek VI to be apocryphal, but it does not specify which particular elements in the films Roddenberry objected to.[14]
The canonicity of extra features found on home DVD releases, such as deleted scenes, has never been explicitly addressed.
Even the filmed series had issues with Canon..
Trills (TNG episode "The Host" versus DS9 series)
Star Trek 6 (Klingons have no tear ducts yet in TNG Worf tells of Kahless weeping. Also Martok in DS9 talks about weeping.
My point is that we as STO players and Star Trek fans in general can debate canon until the warp drive works and gets us to Vulcan. If the writers and producers of the show dont follow "canon" how could we? I would throw in other instances where "canon" is not followed in other media but that would cause me to violate the HARD canon Forum Rules.
I don't think many would really care. Since he was mentioned on TAS and in some Star Trek books.
Any way that's moving in the wrong direction since STO is in the 25th century. It would be easier to make new characters than try to acquire rights to a obscure 23rd century one.
TOS era is moving in the wrong direction for a TOS anniversary event...?
Comments
Quoting star trek 2009 as the end all and be all of star trek is like watching a Godzilla movie and thinking it is a narrative on dinosaurs.
when i was reading that, i thought a bit of the TNG episodes "Parallels" and "all good things"
the kelvin destruction did seem to push the constitution class program back to the drawing board, in the new movie it was launched in 2258, the prime universe constitution was launched in 2245, plenty of time for there to be a captain Robert April captaining it in the prime universe before pike.
Sorry but being a fan of star trek, i have to say this. That film that monstrosity it was pure sacrilege of everything star trek. The one thing in the star trek universe barley touched on barely shown, was the Romulan star Empire, and its home world. Even nemesis did not touch on the Romulan culture. Every series made the Romulans appear mysterious . Then some *** writes a script destroying Romulous! I do not take anything in that movie seriously. Its ok for a watch here and there, but as far as i am concerned it was the worse mistake in star trek history.
No thank you OP.
I could totally see a one off where you are sent back in time for some reason or another (Q, Future Time Agency, Chance, whatever)
The mission itself would take place on a TOS interior using modified pieces of the TOS ship interior and Drozona station components to make them look under construction. IE, exposed panels, missing consoles, walls without panelling. Would be pretty cool if they had EVA tech hooked up so you could go into sections of the ship that had no outer hull and look out into space.
No idea what the mission would be about. Probably persuing some other baddies from the future or something.
Won't happen though, but a cool idea.
Just a thought.
As for the 2009 Trek movie, it was terrible. Nice CGI but it pretty much spat on over forty years of Star Trek history as well as went the Star Wars route by having very little back history on why the Federation's Starfleet ships were designed to be like fancy hot rods, which I'm sure Tom Paris would have loved.
I don't regard that movie as true Trek at all, it's little more than Trek for the impatent generation.
The time line in that universe was clearly changed in Archer's time due to the difference in technology and progression, but that was never explained what the changes were.
Maybe the Xindi attack caused differences, or maybe Archer's mission had a different outcome. Either way the prime time line and the 2009 Trek movie time line branched off from one another well before the Narada appeared.
Maybe the Federation in the 2009 movie time line wasn't founded until much later instead of 2161 like in the prime time line. That couild explain a lot of the differences.
Kirk-Prime, however, broke all records for being the youngest Captain in Starfleet by getting his first commission at age 34.
In other words, it would be impossible based on canon references for Christopher Pike to have commanded the Enterprise when it was launched.
Unless you go by the 2009 movie form of Starfleet where a newly graduated Ensign - the other Kirk - was given command of the Enterprise at around the age of, what, 24/25? Depending when he was born in the other time line, or the Hot Rod Star Ship timeline as it should be considered as.
I prefer the idea of a captain earning a command through a great deal of experience and effort, not just being given a ship because he got lucky.
2 other random things to clear up: "Constitution Class" wasn't spoken in dialog until TNG, though it was on unreadable tech schematics on screen in the series. Other places it was called Starship Class or a Class 1 Starship
Nonetheless, Constitution Class is the accepted name. It was also the class name of the JJ-Prise - though again not seen on screen, it was on the dedication plaque and on the official movie website in the ships biography page.
Someone else said that the timeline changed as far back as Archer's time, not true. The USS Kelvin is actually a Prime Universe ship, and you can tell because its design is VERY similar to the TOS Enterprise as far as shapes and textures go. Up until the point that the Narada emerged from the rift, that WAS the Prime universe, and we can assume the USS Kelvin went on to serve longer in "our" universe as a precursor to the Constitution Class project which launched in 2245 (12 years after the scene we see in ST-09)
Also keep in mind that STO isn't strictly in the Prime universe either - all we know (from the STO novel) is that STO's timeline is different from the one occuring now in the Pocketbooks novels, and that both are different takes on the "future" of the Prime timeline - its very likely that IF CBS or Paramount ever revisit Prime and tell stories in this time period, whatever they write will at least retcon SOME of what happens in both STO-Time and the 'Pocketverse"
I am in the group of those that think that perhaps the timeline actually changed during Archers time. After all, how can you go through a temporal war and not have lasting effects?
As for the idea the OP had, I would be full in favor of it. :cool:
William Shatner said the part of Kirk was offered to Jack Lord, before him. Jack lord wanted way to much, then they offered it to Shatner.
A dev told us in Qo'Nos dance Q&A. That they tried to get some TAS stuff in. The CBS rep he dealt with didn't like it to much. So it sounded like CBS doesn't want to put TAS stuff in STO, or whatever they tried.
Which is funny because i swear i thought i saw some federation transports in a mission recently that had came directly from More Tribbles, More troubles which was a TAS episodes
I have the magazine, but i don't know where my stack is stored at currently.
Thing is... I'm not convinced the license holder sees April as TAS, largely because notes about him predate TAS and the bulk of his appearances came in an era when TAS was outlawed. Beyond that, you have Roddenberry holding to the Robert April stuff (and having a photo taken of himself as Robert April) during the phase when he de-canonized that stuff.
Regarding licensing restrictions, Decipher was able to use any original series asset featured in "Trials and Tribble-ations" under the rationale that, based on that one episode, anything from that episode counted as part of the DS9 license. So if there is ambiguity regarding April's usage in TAS, the solution would likely be to simply get Pocket Books permission to use their version of April (the only thing they've shot down that I know of is the Vesta and they may not own that) or permission from Paramount, who owns all the rights to the 90s comics where April appeared. That is, assuming April isn't already included in the license that CBS supplied Cryptic with.
Paramount likely has no interest in a Prime Universe Robert April anyway and I suspect it would be a case of, "Oh. You want this...? Here you go."
StarTrek.com has a bio for April. It's a CBS run site. I think the photo they use is a still from The Animated Series, because the idea of April looking like Roddenberry was always unofficial and TAS and the Paramount comics (which were distributed and edited by Marvel but appear to be Paramount property) both made him look more square-jawed.
CBS has the episode of TAS streaming on the web:
http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek_animated/video/
Why would they go through all this trouble to get him mentioned in the game? It's serves no purpose and wouldn't make the game any better. He would have been dead for about a hundred years, most wouldn't even know who he is or care.
actually we never found out what happened to April...
I don't think many would really care. Since he was mentioned on TAS and in some Star Trek books.
Any way that's moving in the wrong direction since STO is in the 25th century. It would be easier to make new characters than try to acquire rights to a obscure 23rd century one.
I do like Leviathan's idea. A lot. And I'm glad other's do as well. Thankfully, Dstahl has already stated something is in the works. What that will be is anyone's guess. I can only hope the event is successful with honoring the past as the game looks toward its future.
As a side note, the cartoon as canon or not argument would be moot if the Great Bird wasn't as professionally petty as he was inspired. He just didn't want to legally acknowledge his co-creators of TNG as, well, co-creators. Folks who had helped previously with the writing and production of the previous cartoon. You see? It was a legal maneuver to keep TNG to himself during that first year of production. By disassociating with a past legal connection to those same people. Like I said, petty. Now GR is dead (RIP) and CBS owns Star Trek. The cartoon was re-issued to DVD as part of the Star Trek world. CBS saw the advantage to moving on (and making more money. which is good business).
It's 2409 people, not 22XX
A descendant is not TOS garbage.
I agree with this completely. I get that many of the players are from the TOS generation but this game does take place WAY later than the TOS era. Also I want a NX01 Tier 5 and a Tier 5 TOS Connie.
Zehra, I feel I must chime in here. Going wih your above quote, I would like for you to explain the following.
Gene said that he felt parts of Star Trek 5 and 6 were not canon. Example from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon
Films
As of 2011, all Star Trek films produced are considered canon.[1] However, much like for TV series, this policy fails to note which version of the films is canon. This leaves unknown the canonicity of scenes missing from the theatrical version of a film but included in home releases or director's cuts. Such is the case, for example, of a scene revealing that the character of Peter Preston was the nephew of Scotty in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.[13]
Adding confusion to the issue is the fact that Roddenberry is quoted as saying he did not like the films, and "didn't much consider them canon".[4] There exists no definitive list of which films in particular Roddenberry disliked, or what elements in them he did not consider canon. For example, the reference book Star Trek Chronology states that Roddenberry considered elements of Star Trek V and Star Trek VI to be apocryphal, but it does not specify which particular elements in the films Roddenberry objected to.[14]
The canonicity of extra features found on home DVD releases, such as deleted scenes, has never been explicitly addressed.
Even the filmed series had issues with Canon..
Trills (TNG episode "The Host" versus DS9 series)
Star Trek 6 (Klingons have no tear ducts yet in TNG Worf tells of Kahless weeping. Also Martok in DS9 talks about weeping.
My point is that we as STO players and Star Trek fans in general can debate canon until the warp drive works and gets us to Vulcan. If the writers and producers of the show dont follow "canon" how could we? I would throw in other instances where "canon" is not followed in other media but that would cause me to violate the HARD canon Forum Rules.
Live long and prosper
TOS era is moving in the wrong direction for a TOS anniversary event...?