Chill out, CBS aren't taking your pretend spaceships away. The existence of new things does not remove or invalidate what has come before.
But it does remove the possibility of getting more of the sort of thing that 'came before'. The Star Wars EU was hit with the same kind of 'this will never be continued, ever' as the prime universe most likely has. (If the new series doesn't go back to the prime universe, then Kelvin it is, and I can only pray CBS doesn't repeat Abrams' mistakes.)
I know right! The EU is gone forever! And they totally got completely RID of Grand Admiral Thrawn even!
Oh wait ... they didn't.
Read the part you bolded. The existing stuff may still be here, but there will never be any more of it. It's actually been argued that Star Wars took the harder hit because Legends was actually still ongoing and had stories outright canceled, whereas the prime universe was and still is just sitting on its laurels waiting for a miracle to happen.
I suggest you watch the trailer to Rebels season 3.
Then come back and tell me how they've gotten rid of the EU completely.
Actually they have. Now the writers for the cartoons and movies are simply cherry picking what they like and tossing the rest like for example Bane. The bane in the cartoon is not the same as from the origin story written about him. And who knows, Revan may still show up in the cartoons, but that makes Revan Canon, but not everything about him so.
It's not surprising that the new SW writers are borrowing from the EU stuff. Glad they are bringing in Thrawn.
Nothing is stopping you from cherry picking what you like. It's what writers do. And all that stuff, can and likely will be picked up again at a later time.
ALL that Disney did was wipe the slate clean and start anew. And as this grows and evolves a lot of it will be brought back in. Some of it (Thrawn) is already happening. More of it will get picked up.
You guys don't really read comic books much do you?
You get all bent over parallel universes when the DC Universe is nothing but a collection of various universes.
You get all bent when something is retconned and rebooted, when Miles Morales and Peter Parker have actually met on panel.
You get all freaked out when sizes of starships are misrepresented when Marvel fans have been collecting no prizes since the 1960s.
Chris Pine is Barry Allen. Grand Admiral Thrawn is Alexander Luthor. And the Kelvin Timeline Constitution Class Enterprise is Arno Stark's armor.
It's all going to be ok. Because if it isn't Kang and the Time Trapper will team up, steal some stuff from Krona and the Grandmaster and fix it all the way you liked it anyways. By the year 2099. In a New Universe. With the Legion.
And I still see the hate train moving along. God all you "purists" who want to hold onto the past make me sick. Again think this is what Gene Roddenberry wanted?
Except that most of the objections aren't "purist" objections.
I don't mind that they added JJ verse and the ships, even if the new movies writting has holes you can drive Mack trucks through, or whole sale changes to charaters that make no sense even in an alternate timeline. It is how they've gone about it that irks me.
Your formating has me completely and totally confused.
Blame the forum. It has a text limit.
I initially broke calidhris' post down to little chunks that I replied to, colonelmarik then quoted the whole thing with their replies in bold, I replied to those in blue, the colonelmarik replied in italics and I replied in bold because the forum wouldn't let me change colours for some reason. Then it broke my quotes open.
The hate train will ride for a long time from this travesty. What you expect? For years we wanted the Connie and kept getting the "NO". Now the JJ fans get their Connie.
This is a real PR nightmare to deal with, now with a lot of angry gamers/fans.
And the only thing that shows is the fact people don't get the message, never will and are simply spoiled children claiming to be fans.
I weep for Star Trek.
Yeah, it's hard to take people seriously when they hate all the new stuff....
They can be spoiled or not, it depends. At times a company comes out with something. And many hates it caused what they did to it. As it basically ruins what it stood for. And the company tries to ram it down the customers throats. This is the issue what happened to Star Trek.
Same thing happened to Godzilla. They did the one where they had him attack NY. It was so horrible, and got such bad reaction. That Toho had to step back in and bring out 2000, in hopes to save the brand.
And yet.... Toho used "Zilla" in their own movies, and the movie with "Zilla" got a cartoon series as a sequel.
Funny thing is that in both of them Zilla dies. but. meh.
And I still see the hate train moving along. God all you "purists" who want to hold onto the past make me sick. Again think this is what Gene Roddenberry wanted?
Except that most of the objections aren't "purist" objections.
I don't mind that they added JJ verse and the ships, even if the new movies writting has holes you can drive Mack trucks through, or whole sale changes to charaters that make no sense even in an alternate timeline. It is how they've gone about it that irks me.
It's an Alternate timeline, thus setting up different circumstances for characters to exist upon.. Same as Mirror Universe, possibly even the alt future "all good things" set up, and a few other alternate reality snippets that has happened here and there throughout Trek in its entirety.. Heck STO can be seen as its own little altverse.
Kelvin Timeline is still a proverbial temporal thread, if a little frayed here and there, you have to cut them some slack for wanting to do things differently somewhat.
I mean if you wanted things to be the same, figure out the entire continuity of every single episode starting with Enterprise -season one- right up until Star Trek Nemesis.
That's a TRIBBLE ton of movies, novels, comics, etc, essentially world building from a LOT of different angles..
The Kelvin Timeline's had what? 3 movies so far with a smattering of assorted other media?
Now, i know 'trek' fans feathers are ruffled because of them, but considering the last time anything remotely trek was on TV that fans liked.. Enterprise's ratings fell flat and it went far short of the usual 7 season run previous series have had.
and since the Abrams movies came about we've seen a revitalisation in interest with the series, and we're getting a new series next year -in the prime timeline- Set in the time period where the maroon uniforms with the white trim were ALL of the rage, 'parrently.
Folks will get what they want, let folks who actually -like the look of the kelvin starships- have what they want for now.
One thing I have learned from Star Trek, and have made it a corner stone in my life actually, is to accept people for who they are. I see no reason to extend that to accept things for what they are
Chill out, CBS aren't taking your pretend spaceships away. The existence of new things does not remove or invalidate what has come before.
But it does remove the possibility of getting more of the sort of thing that 'came before'. The Star Wars EU was hit with the same kind of 'this will never be continued, ever' as the prime universe most likely has. (If the new series doesn't go back to the prime universe, then Kelvin it is, and I can only pray CBS doesn't repeat Abrams' mistakes.)
I know right! The EU is gone forever! And they totally got completely RID of Grand Admiral Thrawn even!
Oh wait ... they didn't.
Read the part you bolded. The existing stuff may still be here, but there will never be any more of it. It's actually been argued that Star Wars took the harder hit because Legends was actually still ongoing and had stories outright canceled, whereas the prime universe was and still is just sitting on its laurels waiting for a miracle to happen.
I suggest you watch the trailer to Rebels season 3.
Then come back and tell me how they've gotten rid of the EU completely.
And I suggest you stop missing the point entirely. Yes, Thrawn is coming back in Rebels (which, given the success rate of that team, actually manages not to fill me with dread). Yes, they've brought back various other EU elements like the Immobilizer-418.
This does not mean they have not decided to stop making any more 'Legends' stories. This does not mean they have not canceled stories that were already being written, sequels to ongoing arcs that will now never be wrapped up! This does not mean they have not actively consigned Legends to complete stasis! (EA's TOR-era cash cow notwithstanding. Obviously they have free reign so long as they bring in millions.)
The only difference between the fate of Legends and the likely fate of the prime universe is that Legends was still evolving - which makes the whole thing even more painful. (And I say that as someone who barely paid attention to the stuff.)
So wait, your point is that the EU is dead, except for all the parts that aren't dead. And that the legends stuff is dead, except the TOR stuff that is continuing. So all this stuff, except the exceptions, is completely and totally gone. For good.
Ok. Got it!
Legends is the EU. As another poster said after me, the fact that they're cherrypicking tidbits here and there does not canonize everything related to them - the fact that Thrawn is in Rebels does not mean that anything we knew about Thrawn 'really happened', the hypothetical scenario of Revan appearing would not mean that anything we've seen about Revan happened in the Disney canon.
There is a difference between 'dead' in the way you seem to be using it (outright deletion of all existing content - which is both infeasible and ridiculous) and 'dead' in the way I'm using it (no more new stuff until hell freezes over).
As for TOR, it is the only exception. As I said, they can obviously do whatever the hell they like so long as they give Disney a hefty cut of the profits, until the game shuts down. After that, there will no longer be any new Legends content.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
I have a vengeance and was lucky to get two constitutions from the lock box. I never really received hate. I did receive a compliment from someone during pve saying my Connie is sexy. I can see why people may dislike the kelvin ships being from the new movies, but there are fans such as myself who enjoy it. I grew up watching Star Trek and have seen every season of tng, ds9, voyager and enterprise and I find the new Star Trek pretty entertaining, my best buddy began to watch the tv shows because of the new movies. He's seen all of tng, ds9 and voyager. I think the new movies can bring in new fans who can appreciate the same trek we all love
I don't dislike the JJ movies as movies, only the underlying concept of a remake in itself. If you're going to create an all new movie with an all new cast and an all new plot not continuing any existing storylines, in an all new style intended for an all new audience, IMHO you should have the decency to give it an all new name to go with it. Giving it a famous name just to cash in on the famous name seems a little dishonest to me.
If they'd actually called the movies "The Kelvin Timeline," this whole controversy wouldn't exist.
But Star Trek it is and now it's in STO. Ironically, the Kelvin Timeline stuff actually fits into STO much better than it fit into canon Trek. Flying ships from an alternate universe is, after all, par for the course here.
It wasn't a remake, just like Jurassic World wasn't a remake of Jurassic Park. It's a fresh start that breathes new life into the franchise, while at the same time maintaining everything that has come before. Reboot? Yes, but that's not a bad thing.
The simple facts are the people that make the money decisions saw the response to Enterprise and Nemesis and, instead of listening to the legitimate complaints about certain aspects of the story telling in those, decided fans were just bored with Trek and wanted something new. Executives don't understand the franchise, they understand dollar signs. Could they have made the same money by continuing to make Prime Universe movies? Yes, but there's no way anyone could have convinced them of that. So if it wasn't JJ trek it would have been something very similar, or just no new Trek at all.
Remake, reboot, what's the difference? The point stands if you're not going to use the existing story continuity you shouldn't use the name of the existing story continuity either.
The simple fact is they called the new movies Star Trek just to cash in on the name recognition. Just like a bazillion other movies before and after it.
A re-make is a re-creation of an established film or episode or game or whatever story. Not to be confused with a remastered version of existing material, which is basically just editing-work.
Simple example: if somebody would make the exact same story from TNG's Best of both Worlds, just with new actors or even the same actors where possible, AGAIN. A Remake may have one or two new bits, extra bits or altered bits here and there, but it is essentially the exact same thing, just looking and sounding different.
A re-boot on the other hand is what ST 2009 did. They were basically re-rolling TOS, and made it an alternate timeline so the established canon is both preserved *and* reset for this specific movie-franchise. To prove that both timelines would still exist, Leonard Nimoy was cast for the movie. The end. A re-boot is basically a reset-button. With the ST-reboot, they at least cared about preserving the canon.. which many reboots don't even mention.
Another example (from gaming):
Resident Evil (the first one).
We had the original in 1996 as an early title for PSX and Sega Saturn.
2002 or 2003 Capcom remade it for the Nintendo Gamecube. It was the exact same game aside from some altered puzzles and some added content here and there, and hugely upgraded graphics and effects (which was also shown by the mansion and laboratories tilesets being updated to look more realistic, which is especially clear when comparing the remade fishtank with the original one). Which is why it was not a port.
Port would have been the same game as the original from 1996 which it was not. There was a port to the Nintendo DS and I think to the PSP as well though.
The only "re-boot" Resident Evil ever got was basically the movie-franchise.
What about a remix? And a retcon? And a mashup? And a cover? And a homage? Where does Earth X fit into the 616? How does Earth 3 get justified now that Power Ring's power ring is being used by a new GL, using it for good? Is Aquaman related to Arion of Atlantis? Is Artie Jr. dead? What happened to Sub-Diego? Which Zod did Superman kill and which Zod was banished to the phantom zone? Which Braniac is which? And which one is Braniac 5 descended from? Hawkman's origin story, what what? If Nicky Minaj were to remix Anaconda, adding in Sir Mix Alot's commentary about Blake Lively's Oakland booty tweets, would Taylor Swift do a cover song of it as a Spotify Exclusive?
What about a remix? And a retcon? And a mashup? And a cover? And a homage? Where does Earth X fit into the 616? How does Earth 3 get justified now that Power Ring's power ring is being used by a new GL, using it for good? Is Aquaman related to Arion of Atlantis? Is Artie Jr. dead? What happened to Sub-Diego? Which Zod did Superman kill and which Zod was banished to the phantom zone? Which Braniac is which? And which one is Braniac 5 descended from? Hawkman's origin story, what what? If Nicky Minaj were to remix Anaconda, adding in Sir Mix Alot's commentary about Blake Lively's Oakland booty tweets, would Taylor Swift do a cover song of it as a Spotify Exclusive?
A re-make is a re-creation of an established film or episode or game or whatever story. Not to be confused with a remastered version of existing material, which is basically just editing-work.
Simple example: if somebody would make the exact same story from TNG's Best of both Worlds, just with new actors or even the same actors where possible, AGAIN. A Remake may have one or two new bits, extra bits or altered bits here and there, but it is essentially the exact same thing, just looking and sounding different.
A re-boot on the other hand is what ST 2009 did. They were basically re-rolling TOS, and made it an alternate timeline so the established canon is both preserved *and* reset for this specific movie-franchise. To prove that both timelines would still exist, Leonard Nimoy was cast for the movie. The end. A re-boot is basically a reset-button. With the ST-reboot, they at least cared about preserving the canon.. which many reboots don't even mention.
Another example (from gaming):
Resident Evil (the first one).
We had the original in 1996 as an early title for PSX and Sega Saturn.
2002 or 2003 Capcom remade it for the Nintendo Gamecube. It was the exact same game aside from some altered puzzles and some added content here and there, and hugely upgraded graphics and effects (which was also shown by the mansion and laboratories tilesets being updated to look more realistic, which is especially clear when comparing the remade fishtank with the original one). Which is why it was not a port.
Port would have been the same game as the original from 1996 which it was not. There was a port to the Nintendo DS and I think to the PSP as well though.
The only "re-boot" Resident Evil ever got was basically the movie-franchise.
Better example:
Remake - Superman Returns. Basically a continuaiton of the Christopher Reeves Superman movies. Superman's 'backstory/origin' was not part of the story and the entire plot revolved around his absense from Earth following the discovery of the remains of Krypton. No real changes in the character, the primary villan, or superman's cosutme.
Reboot: Man of Steel. Clean slate; New (and frankly stupid) origin/background, different costume, portrayed differently on the whole.
A re-make is a re-creation of an established film or episode or game or whatever story. Not to be confused with a remastered version of existing material, which is basically just editing-work.
Simple example: if somebody would make the exact same story from TNG's Best of both Worlds, just with new actors or even the same actors where possible, AGAIN. A Remake may have one or two new bits, extra bits or altered bits here and there, but it is essentially the exact same thing, just looking and sounding different.
A re-boot on the other hand is what ST 2009 did. They were basically re-rolling TOS, and made it an alternate timeline so the established canon is both preserved *and* reset for this specific movie-franchise. To prove that both timelines would still exist, Leonard Nimoy was cast for the movie. The end. A re-boot is basically a reset-button. With the ST-reboot, they at least cared about preserving the canon.. which many reboots don't even mention.
Another example (from gaming):
Resident Evil (the first one).
We had the original in 1996 as an early title for PSX and Sega Saturn.
2002 or 2003 Capcom remade it for the Nintendo Gamecube. It was the exact same game aside from some altered puzzles and some added content here and there, and hugely upgraded graphics and effects (which was also shown by the mansion and laboratories tilesets being updated to look more realistic, which is especially clear when comparing the remade fishtank with the original one). Which is why it was not a port.
Port would have been the same game as the original from 1996 which it was not. There was a port to the Nintendo DS and I think to the PSP as well though.
The only "re-boot" Resident Evil ever got was basically the movie-franchise.
Better example:
Remake - Superman Returns. Basically a continuaiton of the Christopher Reeves Superman movies. Superman's 'backstory/origin' was not part of the story and the entire plot revolved around his absense from Earth following the discovery of the remains of Krypton. No real changes in the character, the primary villan, or superman's cosutme.
Reboot: Man of Steel. Clean slate; New (and frankly stupid) origin/background, different costume, portrayed differently on the whole.
A continuation is NOT a re-make.
Definition of Remake: "make (something) again or differently." Seems to fit the critera to me.
I don't particularly like the JJ Trek movies, but I don't hate those ships in the game at all. Think about it this way...if you think those ships are "un-canon" then you have to realize also that most of the ships in the game are not in any movies or series at all...and so most of the ships in game are "un-canon." All of the ships in game are very Trek-like...which makes it all good!
What would you call it then? I mean, it was presented as being a progression of the Christopher Reeves Superman movies, but had a different set of actors and a story that made pretty much no reference to the earlier movies.
It is a continuation, you already said it basically is one. That rules out the re-make. The costume and villain being the same doesn't have an Impact on that. TWoK is not a re-make of Space Seed for that matter either. It is a continuation of that story, not the exact same story.
'homage sequel' seems fitting in that case IMO... as a sequel is a continuation anyways.
I'm just going to add my voice to the conversation stating that I like the Kelvin designs. Alot. Other than the larger than normal nacelles, the Kelvin Constitution is pretty respectful to the proportions of the original Connie. And it just looks nice and modern. Yes modern. Designs progress just like everything else.
People want to complain about the Kelvin ships, but were they OK with some of the earlier ships in STO? The awful (imo) Star Cruisers? Or any of the alternative Sovereign skins? I grew up with TNG and I never even liked the Galaxy design. But here we are getting worked up about the JJ designs. It's baffling.
And it just looks nice and modern. Yes modern. Designs progress just like everything else.
I've seen people complain that the 'new old' Enterprise is more modern than the Enterprise E. They say that's not right and blabla.
I've told them that's because the Enterprise E was actually not very sci-fi for modern standards anymore anyways and in order to present the new movies to a modern audience, they *had* to make it look reminiscent of the original but yet as modern as possible. Imagine if they just had used a CGI-recreation of the original sheetwood+metal-studio-model alongside the original interior...
What would you call it then? I mean, it was presented as being a progression of the Christopher Reeves Superman movies, but had a different set of actors and a story that made pretty much no reference to the earlier movies.
Edit: various websites describe it as a "homage sequel" - so guess it fits into a catergory all of it's own.
Do "real" Superman fans of "true" Superman stories acknowledge a homage sequel as part of Superman canon though?
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
well, that makes sense...the prime constitution was supposed to have the ability to separate its saucer in emergencies too, as was the sovereign - but since it was only mentioned in technical manuals and not ever seen onscreen, it never ended up a canon thing
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
What would you call it then? I mean, it was presented as being a progression of the Christopher Reeves Superman movies, but had a different set of actors and a story that made pretty much no reference to the earlier movies.
Edit: various websites describe it as a "homage sequel" - so guess it fits into a catergory all of it's own.
Do "real" Superman fans of "true" Superman stories acknowledge a homage sequel as part of Superman canon though?
You will watch Superman/Batman:_Apocalypse and you will like it. Seriously though.... Summer Glau was an awesome Supergirl.
well, that makes sense...the prime constitution was supposed to have the ability to separate its saucer in emergencies too, as was the sovereign - but since it was only mentioned in technical manuals and not ever seen onscreen, it never ended up a canon thing
It ended up being a "canon thing" because Kirk told Scotty in "The Apple" ...
"...Discard the warp drive nacelles if you have to, and crack out of there with the main section, but get that ship out of there!..."
(the "Main Section" presumably being the Primary Hull)
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
The Kelvin Timeline Heavy Command Cruiser [T6] is a Constitution Class vessel. And with NCC-1701 on its hull, you could, with a little bit of good will, say it's an endgame Connie. However, a 'Connie' is generally believed to be the original starship flown by Kirk; and, as such, the Kelvin ship is not the long sought-after T6 Connie.
Apart from CBS prohibiting endgame Connies, a true T6 Connie would be weird, as it could not possible be on par with the T6 ships we have now. It would, canon-wise, make no sense. An alternate timeline Connie, however, from an era in which the focus was more on heavy weaponry, *does* make sense, and becomes a plausible endgame Connie. I believe Cryptic did good, and kept CBS happy at the same time too.
Apart from CBS prohibiting endgame Connies, a true T6 Connie would be weird, as it could not possible be on par with the T6 ships we have now.
I am destroying the Crystalline Entity every day with my T6 Daedalus. It's not only on par with the T6 ships we have now, it's set up is actually very optimal for the build I chose.
It also kicks some serious tail in Borg queues, can beat the snot out of Mirror Universe Leeta, can turn back those Iconian cowards, and so on and so forth. This golfball that was retired from service before Kirk ever got his captaincy can wreck shop in endgame STO.
It's time to put the "Connie is too old" arguments away. Because an OLDER ship is now a very powerful T6 ship.
NOTE: Before anyone tries to reply with "But [insert excuse as to how the storyline allows the T6 Daedalus]" just stop. Because whatever reasoning you give for having a T6 Daedalus as plausible, EQUALLY applies to any other ship, including the Constitution class.
Comments
Nothing is stopping you from cherry picking what you like. It's what writers do. And all that stuff, can and likely will be picked up again at a later time.
ALL that Disney did was wipe the slate clean and start anew. And as this grows and evolves a lot of it will be brought back in. Some of it (Thrawn) is already happening. More of it will get picked up.
You guys don't really read comic books much do you?
You get all bent over parallel universes when the DC Universe is nothing but a collection of various universes.
You get all bent when something is retconned and rebooted, when Miles Morales and Peter Parker have actually met on panel.
You get all freaked out when sizes of starships are misrepresented when Marvel fans have been collecting no prizes since the 1960s.
Chris Pine is Barry Allen. Grand Admiral Thrawn is Alexander Luthor. And the Kelvin Timeline Constitution Class Enterprise is Arno Stark's armor.
It's all going to be ok. Because if it isn't Kang and the Time Trapper will team up, steal some stuff from Krona and the Grandmaster and fix it all the way you liked it anyways. By the year 2099. In a New Universe. With the Legion.
Except that most of the objections aren't "purist" objections.
I don't mind that they added JJ verse and the ships, even if the new movies writting has holes you can drive Mack trucks through, or whole sale changes to charaters that make no sense even in an alternate timeline. It is how they've gone about it that irks me.
Funny thing is that in both of them Zilla dies. but. meh.
My character Tsin'xing
It's an Alternate timeline, thus setting up different circumstances for characters to exist upon.. Same as Mirror Universe, possibly even the alt future "all good things" set up, and a few other alternate reality snippets that has happened here and there throughout Trek in its entirety.. Heck STO can be seen as its own little altverse.
Kelvin Timeline is still a proverbial temporal thread, if a little frayed here and there, you have to cut them some slack for wanting to do things differently somewhat.
I mean if you wanted things to be the same, figure out the entire continuity of every single episode starting with Enterprise -season one- right up until Star Trek Nemesis.
That's a TRIBBLE ton of movies, novels, comics, etc, essentially world building from a LOT of different angles..
The Kelvin Timeline's had what? 3 movies so far with a smattering of assorted other media?
Now, i know 'trek' fans feathers are ruffled because of them, but considering the last time anything remotely trek was on TV that fans liked.. Enterprise's ratings fell flat and it went far short of the usual 7 season run previous series have had.
and since the Abrams movies came about we've seen a revitalisation in interest with the series, and we're getting a new series next year -in the prime timeline- Set in the time period where the maroon uniforms with the white trim were ALL of the rage, 'parrently.
Folks will get what they want, let folks who actually -like the look of the kelvin starships- have what they want for now.
I like all the timeline ships
Them Kelvin Phasers though
Legends is the EU. As another poster said after me, the fact that they're cherrypicking tidbits here and there does not canonize everything related to them - the fact that Thrawn is in Rebels does not mean that anything we knew about Thrawn 'really happened', the hypothetical scenario of Revan appearing would not mean that anything we've seen about Revan happened in the Disney canon.
There is a difference between 'dead' in the way you seem to be using it (outright deletion of all existing content - which is both infeasible and ridiculous) and 'dead' in the way I'm using it (no more new stuff until hell freezes over).
As for TOR, it is the only exception. As I said, they can obviously do whatever the hell they like so long as they give Disney a hefty cut of the profits, until the game shuts down. After that, there will no longer be any new Legends content.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
The simple fact is they called the new movies Star Trek just to cash in on the name recognition. Just like a bazillion other movies before and after it.
A re-make is a re-creation of an established film or episode or game or whatever story. Not to be confused with a remastered version of existing material, which is basically just editing-work.
Simple example: if somebody would make the exact same story from TNG's Best of both Worlds, just with new actors or even the same actors where possible, AGAIN. A Remake may have one or two new bits, extra bits or altered bits here and there, but it is essentially the exact same thing, just looking and sounding different.
A re-boot on the other hand is what ST 2009 did. They were basically re-rolling TOS, and made it an alternate timeline so the established canon is both preserved *and* reset for this specific movie-franchise. To prove that both timelines would still exist, Leonard Nimoy was cast for the movie. The end. A re-boot is basically a reset-button. With the ST-reboot, they at least cared about preserving the canon.. which many reboots don't even mention.
Another example (from gaming):
Resident Evil (the first one).
We had the original in 1996 as an early title for PSX and Sega Saturn.
2002 or 2003 Capcom remade it for the Nintendo Gamecube. It was the exact same game aside from some altered puzzles and some added content here and there, and hugely upgraded graphics and effects (which was also shown by the mansion and laboratories tilesets being updated to look more realistic, which is especially clear when comparing the remade fishtank with the original one). Which is why it was not a port.
Port would have been the same game as the original from 1996 which it was not. There was a port to the Nintendo DS and I think to the PSP as well though.
The only "re-boot" Resident Evil ever got was basically the movie-franchise.
The truth is... Q did it.
A continuation is NOT a re-make.
It seems to, but it does not
Aside from Q being involved... where does *THIS* fit in for you?
Everyone hating on the JJ-designs... but here's what people *should* hate *instead*.
It is a continuation, you already said it basically is one. That rules out the re-make. The costume and villain being the same doesn't have an Impact on that. TWoK is not a re-make of Space Seed for that matter either. It is a continuation of that story, not the exact same story.
'homage sequel' seems fitting in that case IMO... as a sequel is a continuation anyways.
People want to complain about the Kelvin ships, but were they OK with some of the earlier ships in STO? The awful (imo) Star Cruisers? Or any of the alternative Sovereign skins? I grew up with TNG and I never even liked the Galaxy design. But here we are getting worked up about the JJ designs. It's baffling.
I've seen people complain that the 'new old' Enterprise is more modern than the Enterprise E. They say that's not right and blabla.
I've told them that's because the Enterprise E was actually not very sci-fi for modern standards anymore anyways and in order to present the new movies to a modern audience, they *had* to make it look reminiscent of the original but yet as modern as possible. Imagine if they just had used a CGI-recreation of the original sheetwood+metal-studio-model alongside the original interior...
Do "real" Superman fans of "true" Superman stories acknowledge a homage sequel as part of Superman canon though?
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
*Throws in the fact that the JJ Enterprise can now seperate its Saucer*
[Minor Spoiler alert]
Seperation at 0:40
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MLuOTKu4lnk
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
My character Tsin'xing
It ended up being a "canon thing" because Kirk told Scotty in "The Apple" ...
"...Discard the warp drive nacelles if you have to, and crack out of there with the main section, but get that ship out of there!..."
(the "Main Section" presumably being the Primary Hull)
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Apart from CBS prohibiting endgame Connies, a true T6 Connie would be weird, as it could not possible be on par with the T6 ships we have now. It would, canon-wise, make no sense. An alternate timeline Connie, however, from an era in which the focus was more on heavy weaponry, *does* make sense, and becomes a plausible endgame Connie. I believe Cryptic did good, and kept CBS happy at the same time too.
I am destroying the Crystalline Entity every day with my T6 Daedalus. It's not only on par with the T6 ships we have now, it's set up is actually very optimal for the build I chose.
It also kicks some serious tail in Borg queues, can beat the snot out of Mirror Universe Leeta, can turn back those Iconian cowards, and so on and so forth. This golfball that was retired from service before Kirk ever got his captaincy can wreck shop in endgame STO.
It's time to put the "Connie is too old" arguments away. Because an OLDER ship is now a very powerful T6 ship.
NOTE: Before anyone tries to reply with "But [insert excuse as to how the storyline allows the T6 Daedalus]" just stop. Because whatever reasoning you give for having a T6 Daedalus as plausible, EQUALLY applies to any other ship, including the Constitution class.
My character Tsin'xing