It seems odd that Cryptic is completely missing out on a golden opportunity to set itself apart for the usual MMO formula of "Bring me XX of TRIBBLE" quests/missions. Since the days of TOS on, part of Trek's appeal has been it's Progressive storylines. Instead of the usual pew pew pew, why not develop a mission that has some sort of contemporary storyline that hints at today's problems (god knows we have plenty to choose from)?
Tell us, in no uncertain terms that this would work in a long running MMO? What ratio of moral dilema solving to "pew pew" would you suggest fullfils what you suggest is the ethos of Star Trek, while keeping the game active?
What if a person chooses to make a decision that is opposite to what the devs/ progressive storywriters believe is what the storyline should be? Should they fail? Maybe marked as a outcast?
Exactly how much content can really be based on exploration/dilema solving without it becoming overdone and repetitive? While I do agree with some that combat in STO can be repetitive, its cheaper to make in the conceptual and development stages.
More dilema worm might be fun, if it is well done, well thought out, and able to work with more than one veiwpoint. I dont see too many succesful MMO organizations with that as a core competancy, MMOs are aimed for people looking for action, as an escape from ones real world life ( hopefully w/o action).
Oh, and if he truly "didn't give a s**t about the south," then the lines about God from "Who Mourns for Adonais?" or "Bread And Circuses" wouldn't have made it into the show... yet, there they are. Shoot, "Who Mourns for Adonais?" would have been named "Who Mourns for God?", had Gene not caved to the studio/network (Adonais is an affectionate term used in the Jewish & Christian faith to refer to God).
I can't claim to know Roddenberry's intent... but I can shed some light on your confusion. The episode clearly establishes the main character to be Apollo. The Hebrew word you're thinking of is adonai.(not the same as Adonais) So where does Adonais come from? There was also a Greek god named Adonis. Well... that figure was actually one that seemed to exist in multiple mythologies.
The funny part is that both words come from the same ancient root. A word that roughly translates to "lord", in the context of a leader you owe fealty to.
I can't claim to know Roddenberry's intent... but I can shed some light on your confusion. The episode clearly establishes the main character to be Apollo. The Hebrew word you're thinking of is adonai.(not the same as Adonais) So where does Adonais come from? There was also a Greek god named Adonis. Well... that figure was actually one that seemed to exist in multiple mythologies.
The funny part is that both words come from the same ancient root. A word that roughly translates to "lord", in the context of a leader you owe fealty to.
Not confused. Yes, that is the word I was thinking of... most people don't know how to pronounce the episode, and the reference is lost on today's culture. The "s" is supposed to be silent, I think.
My comments were based off of the discussion of the episode from Mission Log podcast. Whether they meant "adonai" or "Adonis", the final point you made is more or less my point: Roddenberry chose "Adonais" as a reference to God/gods, and the original title (according to the research done by the podcast) was intended to be "Who Mourns For God?".
It grows tiring watching people sugar coat TOS under 10 layers of rose-colored glass.
Yet it was the TOS characters that were the only ones who grew up / grew older / truly evolved from the point they started at .
In essence, we've lived a lifetime with them ... , from their time as Hot Shots without an exactly defined Prime Directive , to Kirk's version of a midlife crisis to a "no country for old Starfleet officers" .
... no other Trek crew took us on such a journey , only to be rejuvenated again in the JJ verse ...
Yet it was the TOS characters that were the only ones who grew up / grew older / truly evolved from the point they started at .
In essence, we've lived a lifetime with them ... , from their time as Hot Shots without an exactly defined Prime Directive , to Kirk's version of a midlife crisis to a "no country for old Starfleet officers" .
... no other Trek crew took us on such a journey , only to be rejuvenated again in the JJ verse ...
The TOS crew really didn't start to evolve until the movies, due to TOS being truly episodic in nature. TNG had good evolution of their characters especially for La Forge, Data, and Picard. The rest took a while, but by the sixth season, they were finally moving on as characters. TNG movies just focused on Picard and Data. DS9 had the best character development overall, while VOY just had Seven and the Doctor. Torres showed some. In ENT, that show had the second most developed characters in a series, I would love to see what these characters would have look like beyond season 4.
Roddenberry was the Honey Badger of producing. He didn't give a sh*t what the South would think. He knew that those types of people are not the path to the future.
Um, not really - iif you WATCH the original pilot with Jeffery Hunter as Pike, you'll see a WASP crew - much in spirit with the feature film this was inspired from - Forbidden Planet.
The addition of a 'more diverse crew' was the result of a memo from NBC brass citing that their demographics showed more minorities in the audience, and the advertisers were wanting to get their commercials out to them too (FYI - "I Spy" was on NBC a year prior to Star Trek - with Bill Cosby in a lead role; and the show also had a lot of minority character actors in various roles). Herbert F. Solo was actually the one who first broached the idea of having a more ethnically diverse cast as they BOTH were working on the second pilot requested by NBC. GR agreed and didn't have an issue; but honestly the idea WASN'T his first.
That said, GR has never been above taking credit for ANYTHING someone else may have done or first proposed for Star Trek during the later years as he pimped everything about the series to us rabid fans, who ate it up.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
That said, GR has never been above taking credit for ANYTHING someone else may have done or first proposed for Star Trek during the later years as he pimped everything about the series to us rabid fans, who ate it up.
Very true on that... kind of like him agreeing and parroting the fact that the kiss between Shatner and Nichols was designed from the first because he wanted to show off inter-racial relations.
Which partly is true.. .and partly because he was or at least had been TRIBBLE Nichols who wanted more screen time and to be more front and center.
So yes while he certainly promoted "progressive" story lines... it wasn't always as aulteristic as others make it sounded and he certainly wasn't beyond stretching the truth or simply omitting things to make himself look better in the eyes of his fans.
YOU HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF STAR TREK! Let me educate you.
Star Trek was NEVER on CBS PERIOD.
Star Trek TOS / Star Trek the animated series/ Star Trek Next Generation only aired on NBC before syndication.
Later on UPN (United Paramount Network) Deep Space 9 / Voyager / Enterprise aired before syndication.
No first run Star Trek Series EVER aired on any other network outside of NBC or UPN until they were syndicated.
The Next Generation was syndicated from the get-go. It wasn't a network driven/exclusive project.
Seriously, three years ago, STO was about putting a good--not uber--team together, learning tactics, and accomplishing a mission. Today, it's become all about 30k DPS, mathematics, and statistical analysis for those that enjoy number crunching...those that I call "Janeways."
We're not all Janeways, developer team. Some are Archers...they like to learn through trial and error, exploration, reasoning, and their "gut." Some are Kirks...really using their gut, courage/bravado, and swagger. Some are Picards...steady players that remain balanced, with imagination and more of a literary approach. Still others are Siskos...firm, pragmatic.
But this game should be able to serve all, not just the Janeways.
How many countless hours of work has the current dev team rendered virtually useless with their content? Very few run ground STFs anymore, unless they've got a player base/group of friends that enjoy them. There are players who achieve Tier 5 Omega...and have NEVER run an STF.
Remember Nukara? How many players actually visit there anymore, unless it's to pick up their Tier 5 bonus?
The bottom line is that the game is turning into nothing more than an exercise in statistical analysis for those that feel the need to exploit every stat, analyze every function...and many of them...not all, but many...exlude any others who don't see things or play their way. This elitist mentality erodes the community of players that this game used to be.
If the new EP and the devs are truly listening, they need to make the game and its end-game content accessible, and achieveable, by more than a small percentage of the player base. A handful of those with all Legendary gear shouldn't determine the fate of all.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
Baldemort, K'Bald E Mort, D'Baldemort Twelve toons, one mission...enjoy STO House of DILLIGAF (KDF)
It seems odd that Cryptic is completely missing out on a golden opportunity to set itself apart for the usual MMO formula of "Bring me XX of TRIBBLE" quests/missions. Since the days of TOS on, part of Trek's appeal has been it's Progressive storylines. Instead of the usual pew pew pew, why not develop a mission that has some sort of contemporary storyline that hints at today's problems (god knows we have plenty to choose from)?
the error in your thinking is that times change, what is contemporary today might not be contemporary tomorrow and might be looked on as outdated.
making a load of contemporary missions could end up with the whole game looking old and tired before its time.
the usual pew pew pew is far less likely to date and therefore remain mainstream for much longer.
besides which cryptic may not want too appear to politically or socially motivated for fear of offending someone who has an opposing view of things, far better to stick with the old pew pew pew formula and be less likely to rub anyone up the wrong way.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
Are you kidding me? I'd Loved to go to this place.
To me, there is nothing more Trek than a pointed-eared mobster (or TRIBBLE or Roman or...)
Yeah that would be awesome
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
the error in your thinking is that times change, what is contemporary today might not be contemporary tomorrow and might be looked on as outdated.
making a load of contemporary missions could end up with the whole game looking old and tired before its time.
the usual pew pew pew is far less likely to date and therefore remain mainstream for much longer.
besides which cryptic may not want too appear to politically or socially motivated for fear of offending someone who has an opposing view of things, far better to stick with the old pew pew pew formula and be less likely to rub anyone up the wrong way.
One thing I feel the urge to point out is that the better "social commentary" things in sci-fi are the ones that don't make it too specific. Logan's Run for example.... There's definitely social commentary in there somewhere... Exactly where is hard to define though. which is why it works.
The TOS crew really didn't start to evolve until the movies, due to TOS being truly episodic in nature.
I'm not sure that that is a fair claim ... -- and what I mean by that is that TOS (and a million other beloved shows from the 40's to the 90's and beyond) were episodic by nature .
Also , I think that for episodic TV (which was the definition of TV for about 40 years) , there was a different expectation by the viewers .
We didn't necessarily expect the characters to evolve from episode to episode , rather we expected them to have (deep / not so deep) experiences (that they shared with us) , and by that sharing we felt that we got to know them better .
We felt for them , and they took us on their adventures .
The "evolved" part is at times "cheating" as well , as sometimes all it takes is to refer to a past event in the character's history ... , and there are two ways of doing that as well :
Either referring to something that took place in the show in the past , or referring to something that took place in the past in the characters life (off screen) .
The latter was actually employed in TOS prior to the movies ... , but it was employed in the movies as well (the back story of David for example) .
I will say a happy 'no thank you' to the idea of a contemporary storyline that hints at today's problems. The last thing we need is enraged demagogues rampaging through the forum about how biased STO has become since they took a stand on a modern issue. I get plenty of that in my real life and in General Chat.
What you aren't excited about storylines involving the Federation and it's allies fighting the True Way with a snappier acronym?
J'mpok claiming that Arkanis has always been part of the Klingon Empire and the rest of the Alpha Quadrant being largely unwilling to do anything about it?
Don't you want to go on a mission to prove that Aennik Okeg is not a secret Gorn Pah-Wraith worshipper not born in the Federation to the New Essentialist faction of the Federation Council?
Don't you want FEs about how all of our new-fangled FTL are bad for the environment of our galaxy? (TNG did that one, but like Ronald Moore said it really pulled the rug out from under Star Trek)
Just so it's totally clear, I'm with Jermbot on this.
It's one thing for television characters having to deal with veiled and not so thinly veiled allegories for our world's problems, they aren't us. It's another thing entirely for me and my character with his own sweet back story that doesn't involve him being a 22 year old Fleet Admiral to have to deal with various writers attempts at ham-handed messaging. (I actually think the writers on this game ate pretty good, but what they choose for problems isn't necessarily what my characters would as I envision them.)
It seems odd that Cryptic is completely missing out on a golden opportunity to set itself apart for the usual MMO formula of "Bring me XX of TRIBBLE" quests/missions. Since the days of TOS on, part of Trek's appeal has been it's Progressive storylines. Instead of the usual pew pew pew, why not develop a mission that has some sort of contemporary storyline that hints at today's problems (god knows we have plenty to choose from)?
It's not odd at all. We are no longer the type of society that can both handle "progressive" storylines or anything involving moral dilemmas and social commentary. Companies like Cryptic are not going to take a chance toying with this type of content as long as there are nimrods out there who are waiting to be offended over any little thing--no matter how well intentioned--or can only understand reality in overly simplistic black/white terms.
On top of that, we're living in an increasingly amoral society that is offended by the idea of morality and ethics. It's gotten so bad that even thinking of putting out a story with some moral dimension to it is likely to offend, because: 1) how dare anyone "preach" to anyone about X, Y, X; no one knows better than anyone else because morality is relative/subjective/personal 2) morality is for the birds; nihilism is where it's at.
Look at modern day sci-fi and you'll see where we're at as a society. So many of these shows now are anti-morality and pro-nihilist, arguing that there's no such thing as right or wrong because the characters are only doing what they have to do to survive in a world full of death, mayhem and destruction. On shows like Revolution and Defiance, sociopaths guilty of flat out murder, treachery and torture are often made out to be protagonists who are really doing nothing wrong and should always be given a free pass for their actions because they "can't help it" or "it wasn't their fault."
So I dunno. Me, personally, I would love to see more stories with moral dilemmas and social commentary. However, I can see why Cryptic would be reluctant to toy with this idea. There would be people taking offense to storylines like these and raging about them--trust me.
My Foundry Mission--Name: Falling Star | Mission ID: HQIH36HAW | Faction: FED
Captain Geko went into a little detail about the messaging in the Sela interrogation blog. I like this approach. It is hard to work that kind of issue directly into gameplay, so putting it into supporting narrative makes sense.
I think there's one or two more episode-related blogs coming up before release, so it should be interesting.
One thing I feel the urge to point out is that the better "social commentary" things in sci-fi are the ones that don't make it too specific. Logan's Run for example.... There's definitely social commentary in there somewhere... Exactly where is hard to define though. which is why it works.
Logan's Run was very specific in its commentary--so specific, that it practically beat it over the audience's head with a 2x4. It was a direct reference to the Baby Boomers contempt of anyone they perceived as "old." Why does everyone have to die by 30 in Logan's Run? Because the Boomers in the 1960s always said, "Don't trust anyone over 30", plus their unofficial anthem, "My Generation" by The Who, had a famous line that went, "Hope I die before I get old." Don't trust anyone over 30 + hope I die before I get old=Logan's Run.
So there was nothing vague or undefinable about LR at all, not even. Not saying that you don't have a point about what you were saying about social commentary itself; just clarifying that Logan's Run was specifically about something.
My Foundry Mission--Name: Falling Star | Mission ID: HQIH36HAW | Faction: FED
Logan's Run was very specific in its commentary--so specific, that it practically beat it over the audience's head with a 2x4. It was a direct reference to the Baby Boomers contempt of anyone they perceived as "old." Why does everyone have to die by 30 in Logan's Run? Because the Boomers in the 1960s always said, "Don't trust anyone over 30", plus their unofficial anthem, "My Generation" by The Who, had a famous line that went, "Hope I die before I get old." Don't trust anyone over 30 + hope I die before I get old=Logan's Run.
So there was nothing vague or undefinable about LR at all, not even. Not saying that you don't have a point about what you were saying about social commentary itself; just clarifying that Logan's Run was specifically about something.
The actual novel is set in a Mars colony, and the people are terminated at the age of 21, not 30, via lethal injection in sleep rooms. The novel is really about the narcissism of youth. The people in the book are living a meaningless existence of eating, drinking, and sex until they are put down. It's because those older realize there is more to life then just a good time that they interfere with the party and must be stopped. It is not really about old versus young but rather what happens when hedonism rules society.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
The actual novel is set in a Mars colony, and the people are terminated at the age of 21, not 30, via lethal injection in sleep rooms. The novel is really about the narcissism of youth. The people in the book are living a meaningless existence of eating, drinking, and sex until they are put down. It's because those older realize there is more to life then just a good time that they interfere with the party and must be stopped. It is not really about old versus young but rather what happens when hedonism rules society.
I don't think it's accurate to claim that it wasn't a statement about the Baby Boomers and their disdain for the old. The movie may have changed some details around, but it did that in order to convey to the audience in a very unsubtle, hammer-to-the-head-Hollywood way what the novel was about. (Which was why it changed the age from 21 to 30). Logan's Run was about the Boomers and their war against the WWII generation. Not only was it written/published at the height of what was called the "Youthquake" (1967), the intro to the book actually references the Summer of Love (with all the sit-ins, be-ins, love-ins, etc.):
The seeds of the Little War were planted in a restless summer during the mid-1960s, with sit-ins and student demonstrations as youth tested its strength.By the early 1970s over 75 per cent of the people
The youth being hedonistic in the novel is a direct reference to the Boomers, who decided during the Summer of Love aka Youthquake that life should be all about sex, drugs and rock and roll and not following the path of their parents, which was about settling down at the age of 18 with the white picket fence and 2.4 children and becoming a corporate drone. As someone who was born at the tail end of this era and saw the fallout, you're going to have to trust me on this one that this was what Logan's Run was commenting about.
Even if the novel wasn't about the whole Baby Boomer thing, the point still stands that Logan's Run--whether the adaptation or the novel itself-- wasn't about something vague and undefinable, as the other poster was stating.
My Foundry Mission--Name: Falling Star | Mission ID: HQIH36HAW | Faction: FED
I don't think it's accurate to claim that it wasn't a statement about the Baby Boomers and their disdain for the old. The movie may have changed some details around, but it did that in order to convey to the audience in a very unsubtle, hammer-to-the-head-Hollywood way what the novel was about. (Which was why it changed the age from 21 to 30).
By changing the age from 21 to 30 the movie is making it about ageism - as 30 is a recognized age for become an adult. By anyone's definition 21 is still young. The author's original work is not about the young being against the old. It is about the young being against the young. References to the Summer of Love are not a Boomer statement, or having anything to do with Boomers versus WWII generation. They are there for their hedonistic connotations of the period: when the youth lived hedonistically in the moment without any thought for the future.
The novel and the movies are really two very different things. The various movies are about ageism: youth versus adults. The novel is about what happens to a society that lives only for the moment and pure pleasure.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Comments
Tell us, in no uncertain terms that this would work in a long running MMO? What ratio of moral dilema solving to "pew pew" would you suggest fullfils what you suggest is the ethos of Star Trek, while keeping the game active?
What if a person chooses to make a decision that is opposite to what the devs/ progressive storywriters believe is what the storyline should be? Should they fail? Maybe marked as a outcast?
Exactly how much content can really be based on exploration/dilema solving without it becoming overdone and repetitive? While I do agree with some that combat in STO can be repetitive, its cheaper to make in the conceptual and development stages.
More dilema worm might be fun, if it is well done, well thought out, and able to work with more than one veiwpoint. I dont see too many succesful MMO organizations with that as a core competancy, MMOs are aimed for people looking for action, as an escape from ones real world life ( hopefully w/o action).
The funny part is that both words come from the same ancient root. A word that roughly translates to "lord", in the context of a leader you owe fealty to.
My character Tsin'xing
Not confused. Yes, that is the word I was thinking of... most people don't know how to pronounce the episode, and the reference is lost on today's culture. The "s" is supposed to be silent, I think.
My comments were based off of the discussion of the episode from Mission Log podcast. Whether they meant "adonai" or "Adonis", the final point you made is more or less my point: Roddenberry chose "Adonais" as a reference to God/gods, and the original title (according to the research done by the podcast) was intended to be "Who Mourns For God?".
Yet it was the TOS characters that were the only ones who grew up / grew older / truly evolved from the point they started at .
In essence, we've lived a lifetime with them ... , from their time as Hot Shots without an exactly defined Prime Directive , to Kirk's version of a midlife crisis to a "no country for old Starfleet officers" .
... no other Trek crew took us on such a journey , only to be rejuvenated again in the JJ verse ...
The TOS crew really didn't start to evolve until the movies, due to TOS being truly episodic in nature. TNG had good evolution of their characters especially for La Forge, Data, and Picard. The rest took a while, but by the sixth season, they were finally moving on as characters. TNG movies just focused on Picard and Data. DS9 had the best character development overall, while VOY just had Seven and the Doctor. Torres showed some. In ENT, that show had the second most developed characters in a series, I would love to see what these characters would have look like beyond season 4.
Um, not really - iif you WATCH the original pilot with Jeffery Hunter as Pike, you'll see a WASP crew - much in spirit with the feature film this was inspired from - Forbidden Planet.
The addition of a 'more diverse crew' was the result of a memo from NBC brass citing that their demographics showed more minorities in the audience, and the advertisers were wanting to get their commercials out to them too (FYI - "I Spy" was on NBC a year prior to Star Trek - with Bill Cosby in a lead role; and the show also had a lot of minority character actors in various roles). Herbert F. Solo was actually the one who first broached the idea of having a more ethnically diverse cast as they BOTH were working on the second pilot requested by NBC. GR agreed and didn't have an issue; but honestly the idea WASN'T his first.
That said, GR has never been above taking credit for ANYTHING someone else may have done or first proposed for Star Trek during the later years as he pimped everything about the series to us rabid fans, who ate it up.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Very true on that... kind of like him agreeing and parroting the fact that the kiss between Shatner and Nichols was designed from the first because he wanted to show off inter-racial relations.
Which partly is true.. .and partly because he was or at least had been TRIBBLE Nichols who wanted more screen time and to be more front and center.
So yes while he certainly promoted "progressive" story lines... it wasn't always as aulteristic as others make it sounded and he certainly wasn't beyond stretching the truth or simply omitting things to make himself look better in the eyes of his fans.
The Next Generation was syndicated from the get-go. It wasn't a network driven/exclusive project.
And for that matter, so was Deep Space Nine.
Seriously, three years ago, STO was about putting a good--not uber--team together, learning tactics, and accomplishing a mission. Today, it's become all about 30k DPS, mathematics, and statistical analysis for those that enjoy number crunching...those that I call "Janeways."
We're not all Janeways, developer team. Some are Archers...they like to learn through trial and error, exploration, reasoning, and their "gut." Some are Kirks...really using their gut, courage/bravado, and swagger. Some are Picards...steady players that remain balanced, with imagination and more of a literary approach. Still others are Siskos...firm, pragmatic.
But this game should be able to serve all, not just the Janeways.
How many countless hours of work has the current dev team rendered virtually useless with their content? Very few run ground STFs anymore, unless they've got a player base/group of friends that enjoy them. There are players who achieve Tier 5 Omega...and have NEVER run an STF.
Remember Nukara? How many players actually visit there anymore, unless it's to pick up their Tier 5 bonus?
The bottom line is that the game is turning into nothing more than an exercise in statistical analysis for those that feel the need to exploit every stat, analyze every function...and many of them...not all, but many...exlude any others who don't see things or play their way. This elitist mentality erodes the community of players that this game used to be.
If the new EP and the devs are truly listening, they need to make the game and its end-game content accessible, and achieveable, by more than a small percentage of the player base. A handful of those with all Legendary gear shouldn't determine the fate of all.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
Twelve toons, one mission...enjoy STO
House of DILLIGAF (KDF)
Are you kidding me? I'd Loved to go to this place.
To me, there is nothing more Trek than a pointed-eared mobster (or TRIBBLE or Roman or...)
the error in your thinking is that times change, what is contemporary today might not be contemporary tomorrow and might be looked on as outdated.
making a load of contemporary missions could end up with the whole game looking old and tired before its time.
the usual pew pew pew is far less likely to date and therefore remain mainstream for much longer.
besides which cryptic may not want too appear to politically or socially motivated for fear of offending someone who has an opposing view of things, far better to stick with the old pew pew pew formula and be less likely to rub anyone up the wrong way.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
Yeah that would be awesome
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I love this ep because it is so very Trek. In fact, in The Muse, Star Trek actually holds a mirror up to itself.
IMHO - this ep has serious depth.
My character Tsin'xing
I'm not sure that that is a fair claim ... -- and what I mean by that is that TOS (and a million other beloved shows from the 40's to the 90's and beyond) were episodic by nature .
Also , I think that for episodic TV (which was the definition of TV for about 40 years) , there was a different expectation by the viewers .
We didn't necessarily expect the characters to evolve from episode to episode , rather we expected them to have (deep / not so deep) experiences (that they shared with us) , and by that sharing we felt that we got to know them better .
We felt for them , and they took us on their adventures .
The "evolved" part is at times "cheating" as well , as sometimes all it takes is to refer to a past event in the character's history ... , and there are two ways of doing that as well :
Either referring to something that took place in the show in the past , or referring to something that took place in the past in the characters life (off screen) .
The latter was actually employed in TOS prior to the movies ... , but it was employed in the movies as well (the back story of David for example) .
What you aren't excited about storylines involving the Federation and it's allies fighting the True Way with a snappier acronym?
J'mpok claiming that Arkanis has always been part of the Klingon Empire and the rest of the Alpha Quadrant being largely unwilling to do anything about it?
Don't you want to go on a mission to prove that Aennik Okeg is not a secret Gorn Pah-Wraith worshipper not born in the Federation to the New Essentialist faction of the Federation Council?
Don't you want FEs about how all of our new-fangled FTL are bad for the environment of our galaxy? (TNG did that one, but like Ronald Moore said it really pulled the rug out from under Star Trek)
Just so it's totally clear, I'm with Jermbot on this.
It's one thing for television characters having to deal with veiled and not so thinly veiled allegories for our world's problems, they aren't us. It's another thing entirely for me and my character with his own sweet back story that doesn't involve him being a 22 year old Fleet Admiral to have to deal with various writers attempts at ham-handed messaging. (I actually think the writers on this game ate pretty good, but what they choose for problems isn't necessarily what my characters would as I envision them.)
It's not odd at all. We are no longer the type of society that can both handle "progressive" storylines or anything involving moral dilemmas and social commentary. Companies like Cryptic are not going to take a chance toying with this type of content as long as there are nimrods out there who are waiting to be offended over any little thing--no matter how well intentioned--or can only understand reality in overly simplistic black/white terms.
On top of that, we're living in an increasingly amoral society that is offended by the idea of morality and ethics. It's gotten so bad that even thinking of putting out a story with some moral dimension to it is likely to offend, because: 1) how dare anyone "preach" to anyone about X, Y, X; no one knows better than anyone else because morality is relative/subjective/personal 2) morality is for the birds; nihilism is where it's at.
Look at modern day sci-fi and you'll see where we're at as a society. So many of these shows now are anti-morality and pro-nihilist, arguing that there's no such thing as right or wrong because the characters are only doing what they have to do to survive in a world full of death, mayhem and destruction. On shows like Revolution and Defiance, sociopaths guilty of flat out murder, treachery and torture are often made out to be protagonists who are really doing nothing wrong and should always be given a free pass for their actions because they "can't help it" or "it wasn't their fault."
So I dunno. Me, personally, I would love to see more stories with moral dilemmas and social commentary. However, I can see why Cryptic would be reluctant to toy with this idea. There would be people taking offense to storylines like these and raging about them--trust me.
https://twitter.com/CaptainGeko/status/578714204179283968
Captain Geko went into a little detail about the messaging in the Sela interrogation blog. I like this approach. It is hard to work that kind of issue directly into gameplay, so putting it into supporting narrative makes sense.
I think there's one or two more episode-related blogs coming up before release, so it should be interesting.
Logan's Run was very specific in its commentary--so specific, that it practically beat it over the audience's head with a 2x4. It was a direct reference to the Baby Boomers contempt of anyone they perceived as "old." Why does everyone have to die by 30 in Logan's Run? Because the Boomers in the 1960s always said, "Don't trust anyone over 30", plus their unofficial anthem, "My Generation" by The Who, had a famous line that went, "Hope I die before I get old." Don't trust anyone over 30 + hope I die before I get old=Logan's Run.
So there was nothing vague or undefinable about LR at all, not even. Not saying that you don't have a point about what you were saying about social commentary itself; just clarifying that Logan's Run was specifically about something.
I don't think it's accurate to claim that it wasn't a statement about the Baby Boomers and their disdain for the old. The movie may have changed some details around, but it did that in order to convey to the audience in a very unsubtle, hammer-to-the-head-Hollywood way what the novel was about. (Which was why it changed the age from 21 to 30). Logan's Run was about the Boomers and their war against the WWII generation. Not only was it written/published at the height of what was called the "Youthquake" (1967), the intro to the book actually references the Summer of Love (with all the sit-ins, be-ins, love-ins, etc.):
The youth being hedonistic in the novel is a direct reference to the Boomers, who decided during the Summer of Love aka Youthquake that life should be all about sex, drugs and rock and roll and not following the path of their parents, which was about settling down at the age of 18 with the white picket fence and 2.4 children and becoming a corporate drone. As someone who was born at the tail end of this era and saw the fallout, you're going to have to trust me on this one that this was what Logan's Run was commenting about.
Even if the novel wasn't about the whole Baby Boomer thing, the point still stands that Logan's Run--whether the adaptation or the novel itself-- wasn't about something vague and undefinable, as the other poster was stating.
The novel and the movies are really two very different things. The various movies are about ageism: youth versus adults. The novel is about what happens to a society that lives only for the moment and pure pleasure.