Star Trek Canon - Is STO official?

ketwolski · January 2017

I made a thread talking about what I considered to be canon information regarding the Tzenkethi, and that sparked up a bit of a debate.

Original topic: http://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline#/discussion/1226949/what-is-a-tzenkethi

What is really considered canon for Star Trek? Some trekkies consider the TV/films the only canon to be accepted; while others include in different sources as canon.

I did some digging around and wasnt able to find anything officially stated by Paramount and CBS regarding this...just a lot interviews and fans discussing the topic.

If found this post on reddit from awhile back and sumps up my feelings on the issue:

"There are two types of canon here; hard canon and soft canon. Hard canon is stuff that is definitely fact within the Star Trek fictional universe. Soft canon is stuff that is considered factual unless the hard canon contradicts it, and may never be mentioned onscreen. If hard canon and soft canon
contradict, hard canon wins (so if a novel says that Picard was born one year, and The Next Generation says he was born another year, TNG wins)."

So I ask you guys/gals: is STO considered canon in your minds? Does CBS have enough control of the storylines Cryptic is publishing to consider it hard and/or soft canon?

nikeix · January 2017

To me STO is official for itself and a possible inspiration for other branches of the brand. And that's all it needs to be

.

Now if Eaglemoss were to make figures of some of the STO-original ships, I'd be ALL OVER THAT.

baddmoonrizin · January 2017

Hard canon is everything that we've seen on screen (TV/movies) and anything else that CBS/Paramount says is canon.

Soft canon would be pretty much everything else that has been officially licensed, to include STO. I would also consider anything written or said behind the scenes related to production that explains or expounds on anything seen in the TV shows and movies as soft canon as well, if those things are not directly referenced on screen, since they could be reversed or contradicted later on.

That being said, STO is canon unto itself alone. Just as any other licensed novel, story, etc. is canon unto itself. It must acknowledge TV/movie events as fact, but it is not beholden to characters, events, etc. depicted in another licensed product unless it so chooses to acknowledge them, or is directed to do so by CBS/Paramount.

ketwolski · January 2017

spielman1 wrote: »

I see this old Argument starts again what is and isn't cannon as far as Novels go. here is a list of Cannon novels agreed apon by CBS and paramount.
TOS novels (Star Trek: The Original Series)
TNG novels (Star Trek: The Next Generation)
DS9 novels (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)
VOY novels (Star Trek: Voyager)
ENT novels (Star Trek: Enterprise)
These novels are considered cannon period, no if buts and or what ifs. The next list are considered cannon out side of novels and TV movies and or series.
Star Trek: New Frontier (NF)
Star Trek: Stargazer (STA)
Star Trek: IKS Gorkon (GKN)
Star Trek: Starfleet Corps of Engineers (SCE; CoE)
Star Trek: The Lost Era (TLE)
Star Trek: Titan (TTN)
Star Trek: Vanguard (VAN)
Star Trek Online (STO)
This list is considered cannon by CBS and Paramount as Cannon, but it is not considered as Movie or Series Cannon but as Licensed series cannon. Meaning CBS and Paramount agree that it is cannon but not under there direct control and or influence of as such. Anything outside of this is considered non cannon and there for not considered as apart of the Star Trek officially or under Licensed.

I haven't seen anything that states what is and isn't canon (is it canon or cannon?) from Paramount/CBS....the Startrek.com website only lists out the films/tv shows but nothing on there that says 'this our official canon list'.

So is it fair to say that there is no canon? Only different interpretations on events? I mean the TV shows themselves didnt do a hot job of keeping continuity within their own scripts.

Personally I like the theory of soft/hard canon...it helps keep things that arent hard canon in the realm of being a part of star trek.

ketwolski · January 2017

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

see how sad that is, that people have to invent words like that to make themselves feel better?

Easy does it.

And sure, why not? There could be a parallel universe where everyone on earth evolved into giant turtles (or this case, beamed into an alternate universe if I understand the bit of text below the picture....its hard to read for me.)

Why cant that be considered soft-canon if it was never explicitly denied in some hard-canon fashion?

You showing off all of these different examples of 'crazy' ideas taking place in the star trek multiverse as proof that only one kind of 'canon' exists.

But in reality, there is NO defined canon from paramount or CBS...so yea we as fans have to interpret this in our own fashion.

baddmoonrizin · January 2017

Or, the TMNT are Trekkies, and just dressed up to go to a Star Trek Convention.

ketwolski · January 2017

ketwolski#6374 wrote: »

So is it fair to say that there is no canon? Only different interpretations on events? I mean the TV shows themselves didnt do a hot job of keeping continuity within their own scripts.

Now we are starting to understand each other a bit better I think.

I said the above quote in an earlier post...and my question right now is: is it more accurate to say that there is no canon in 'Star Trek' because Para/CBS hasn't declared anything, and there's so many different takes on this topic?

ketwolski · January 2017

baddmoonrizin wrote: »

Or, the TMNT are Trekkies, and just dressed up to go to a Star Trek Convention.

Haha I could easily get behind this concept fursure!

Live long, and cowabunga dude!!!!

ketwolski · January 2017

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

if people have to wonder or ask if something is part of the official story...its not.

Example: TNG ep Qpuid shows Data getting penetrated by a simple arrow; Star Trek: First Contact shows him practically bullet proof.

Thats a contradiction within what you define as 'common sense canon'. But they are making their own canon questionable within these 2 scripts...forcing me as a viewer to sit here and say 'hm...in canon how impenetrable is Data?

strathkin · January 2017

spielman1 wrote: »

I see this old Argument starts again what is and isn't cannon as far as Novels go. here is a list of Cannon novels agreed apon by CBS and paramount.
TOS novels (Star Trek: The Original Series)
TNG novels (Star Trek: The Next Generation)
DS9 novels (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)
VOY novels (Star Trek: Voyager)
ENT novels (Star Trek: Enterprise)
These novels are considered cannon period, no if buts and or what ifs. The next list are considered cannon out side of novels and TV movies and or series.
Star Trek: New Frontier (NF)
Star Trek: Stargazer (STA)
Star Trek: IKS Gorkon (GKN)
Star Trek: Starfleet Corps of Engineers (SCE; CoE)
Star Trek: The Lost Era (TLE)
Star Trek: Titan (TTN)
Star Trek: Vanguard (VAN)
Star Trek Online (STO)
This list is considered cannon by CBS and Paramount as Cannon, but it is not considered as Movie or Series Cannon but as Licensed series cannon. Meaning CBS and Paramount agree that it is cannon but not under there direct control and or influence of as such. Anything outside of this is considered non cannon and there for not considered as apart of the Star Trek officially or under Licensed.

Yea! Someone fighting for the Cannon of Novel's -- some of which are very good & expand the Universe greatly especially the one about the Continuum.

It's the reason why I suggested a while back it be nice to see a few elements from Novel's incorporated into the STO story a bit more...

But as far as the ongoing debate regarding the Tzenkethi you can find a little mention of them from DS9 although the race was never actually seen on set. As a result it seems Star Trek Online has taken the approach similar to the Xindi somewhat so whatever they create with the approval of CBS does not limit designers or makeup artists in the TV/Movies from adapting.

http://www.startrek.com/article/alien-races-without-faces

baddmoonrizin · January 2017

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

one more thing.

a lot of people arent going to understand what im about to say.

its going to go straight over their heads.

but a select few will get my point, so i'll say it.

for just a moment, forget the terminology and just focus on the concept of canon.

i am a big star trek fan and i have been reading message boards for a few decades.

never, not even once, in all of that time, have i ever seen anyone ask if any of the movies or TV shows were part of the official story.

why do you think that is?

it is because everybody knows the movies and tv shows are part of the official story.

its common sense.

it is so obvious that there is no question.

now, back to the terminology.

canon is what everyone knows is part of the official story.

canon is what is so obviously part of the official story that people dont even have to ask.

if people have to wonder or ask if something is part of the official story...its not.

it really couldnt be any simpler than that.

unfortunately, some people get so neurotic and fanatic about this fiction that they have to delude themselves with terms like "soft canon".

I get what you're saying. And you're right that most people are not going to question the canonicity of the TV shows and movies. Even there though, there are contradictions, and fans will debate those things forever.

The idea of "soft canon" comes from the fact that those stories are officially licensed by the IP owner. They were approved to continue the story where the "hard canon" left off. But it can be easily ignored if the IP owner decides to continue the story themself and take it in another direction. In that event, those particular stories would become "apocrypha" of a sort. And perhaps that's all "soft canon" really is anyway, "apocrypha", but most people don't know that word, and so it's easier to say "hard canon" vs "soft canon".

nikeix · January 2017

And the prerogative the IP holder has actually exercised is to eliminate the "Screen-is-God" rule. They took it down and replaced it with exactly nothing. Because they enjoy chats like this one.

Sure, casuals can and should assume the 17 episodes they half remember are canon. Because half remembered episodes are easy to string together. More tenacious viewer recognize that as you say, Star Trek contradicts itself regularly and never tried to present a consistent universe in the first place

.

snoggymack22 · January 2017

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

and just focus on the concept of canon.

It all started when the Justice Society got together for dinner, and suddenly things that happened to Flash affected Doctor Fate.

Then Stan Lee came along and decided that it all happened in some sort of connected, linear timeline, so if Thor was trapped by Loki in Asgard, he couldn't show up to help the Avengers stave off Namor.

After that, we were all doomed. Oh wait, that's just continuity. You meant canon, which is just a huge long debate over what fans think is officially official and what writers hate because it boxes them in and infringes on their special powers of creativity!

Carry on.

baddmoonrizin · January 2017

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

ketwolski#6374 wrote: »

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

if people have to wonder or ask if something is part of the official story...its not.

Example: TNG ep Qpuid shows Data getting penetrated by a simple arrow; Star Trek: First Contact shows him practically bullet proof.

Thats a contradiction within what you define as 'common sense canon'. But they are making their own canon questionable within these 2 scripts...forcing me as a viewer to sit here and say 'hm...in canon how impenetrable is Data?

great question!

fortunately for you, i also have a great answer.

both the episode and movie in question are canon.

canon can and does contradict itself many times.

and that is the prerogative of the IP holder.

they get to make that 'choice', not the fans.

so your question is: how impenetrable is data?

in canon, as in life, there is more than one "correct" answer.

You know, actually, 1) there was no indication that those bullets bounced off Data in ST:FC, so his skin could've still been penetrated, we just never see it and 2) even so, one can stab through kevlar, yet a bullet can be stopped, so Data's skin might act similarly, possibly "bulletproof" but susceptible to a cut or stabbing, like with an arrow.

angrytarg · January 2017

Oh, goody...

dracounguis · January 2017

I see it this way...
Is STO "Official"? No, but...
Is there any other substantial fount of new info better than STO? Not that I've seen. So barring a new series cranking out canon, I would take STO as the best canon we have continuing the Prime timeline. Do I like everything they've done? Hell no, but it's what we got.

ssbn655 · January 2017

ketwolski#6374 wrote: »

I made a thread talking about what I considered to be canon information regarding the Tzenkethi, and that sparked up a bit of a debate.

Original topic: http://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline#/discussion/1226949/what-is-a-tzenkethi

What is really considered canon for Star Trek? Some trekkies consider the TV/films the only canon to be accepted; while others include in different sources as canon.

I did some digging around and wasnt able to find anything officially stated by Paramount and CBS regarding this...just a lot interviews and fans discussing the topic.

If found this post on reddit from awhile back and sumps up my feelings on the issue:

"There are two types of canon here; hard canon and soft canon. Hard canon is stuff that is definitely fact within the Star Trek fictional universe. Soft canon is stuff that is considered factual unless the hard canon contradicts it, and may never be mentioned onscreen. If hard canon and soft canon
contradict, hard canon wins (so if a novel says that Picard was born one year, and The Next Generation says he was born another year, TNG wins)."

So I ask you guys/gals: is STO considered canon in your minds? Does CBS have enough control of the storylines Cryptic is publishing to consider it hard and/or soft canon?

^ This TRIBBLE again?

artan42 · January 2017

ketwolski#6374 wrote: »

stoleviathan999#6673 wrote: »

if people have to wonder or ask if something is part of the official story...its not.

Example: TNG ep Qpuid shows Data getting penetrated by a simple arrow; Star Trek: First Contact shows him practically bullet proof.

Thats a contradiction within what you define as 'common sense canon'. But they are making their own canon questionable within these 2 scripts...forcing me as a viewer to sit here and say 'hm...in canon how impenetrable is Data?

FC is after Qupid, he could have upgraded his body slightly by then.

angrytarg wrote: »

Oh, goody...

Nooo. You're doing it wrong. The best way of dealing with debates long settled is to dive headlong into them and beat the point into the ground. You'll never win any internet points through sarcasm.

Observe...

CBS has stated that their canon policy is the films and TV shows only (TAS and the KT films included obviously). There is no 'hard' or 'soft' canon, only canon and other licensed, official, non-canon works. That's it. That stands unless they revise this policy when DSC comes out as they've been hints that it might be a multimedia approach. It's also CBS' decision not Paramount's hence why JJ got no say in wiping existing canon and didn't make his game canon.

Also, unless it was actually put in a film or on TV it's not canon, that includes scripts, deleted scenes, writers intent, other BtS material, or fiery letters burnt across the sky by the glowing eternal ghost of Gene Roddenberry.

starkaos · January 2017

Star Trek believes in the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics according to the Parallels episode from TNG. So the STO Universe exists in parallel to the Prime Universe and Kelvin Universe. STO is only canon to itself until it is briefly acknowledged by a canon source and is only one of the infinite number of parallel universes that exists in parallel to the only Star Trek universe that truly matters, the Prime Universe.

STO could appear as a parallel universe in a new Star Trek movie, Star Trek: Discovery as some parallel universe and time travel story, or in some future Star Trek movie or TV series set after Nemesis which would make it as canon as any of the parallel universes that is shown in Star Trek. Of course in this extremely hypothetical situation that most likely would never happen, it would only be remembered as the parallel universe shown in Episode X of Season Y of whatever Star Trek series that was originally the setting of an early 21st Century game played by less than a million people.

The Many Worlds Interpretation also means it is possible for Star Wars and D&D to exist in parallel with the Prime Universe. It would be interesting if Cryptic did a Star Trek Online/Neverwinter crossover since there doesn't seem to be a Star Trek/fantasy crossover.

observatorr · January 2017

Everyone has their own "personal canon" meaning the stories that they consider to be "real" in their own personal experience of Star Trek. And this is always different from CBS's canon which includes only the TV shows and movies. You consider STO to be part of your personal canon but not the novels. For me it's the opposite. I consider the novels to be part of my personal canon, but not STO. Many of the novels seem a lot more plausible than STO and they don't have silly alien names like "Violacean" and "Zambean". Furthermore, STO will someday be shut down when it's no longer profitable but the novels will last forever.

artan42 · January 2017

starkaos wrote: »

STO is only canon to itself until it is briefly acknowledged by a canon source and is only one of the infinite number of parallel universes that exists in parallel to the only Star Trek universe that truly matters, the Prime Universe.

Even if it is briefly mentioned, only that mention would be canon and not the entire game.
And, no the Prime Universe is not the only one that 'matters' The Kelvin Timeline and Mirror Universes are still ongoing and open-ended unlike the AGT Timeline and so on that are wrapped up by the end of the episode.

Star Trek Canon - Is STO official?

Comments