test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

STO: Age of Discovery - Excited YEAH/NAY

145791030

Comments

  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    New stuff is always fun.

    Bug fixes would be nice...

    THIS^
    To hell with new content, how about they fix what is not working instead. That would certainly be more welcome at this point.

    Agreed. They gorge out new content faster than some people can keep up with, and is always accompanied by a legion of new bugs and imbalances, of which only one third gets fixed (if we're lucky).
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    Or perhaps you missed the anti-war message of "A Taste of Armageddon"
    That wasn't anti-war, it was anti-*clean* war, i.e. a fake war that killed people but left the culture and infrastructure intact allowing it to go on forever. Kirk and crew were more than welling not just to rage *real* war to stop it, but to destroy their entire planet while doing so.

    The meaning was simple- if you go to war, destroy your enemy completely and rapidly- don't just target part of them. In plain historical terms, WWII, not Vietnam although one would have to remember that all the lessons of the latter wouldn't be clear for half a decade yet.
    That's the sort of thing that makes for an ineffective social commentary. Assuming your read is correct that is. I saw it more as an examination of what it means to be "civilized". Shat actually had a pretty good monolog about that. the aliens of the week believed their way of life to be "civilized" because they had eliminated violence from war.... the problem was that their wars still killed millions of people.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • drakethewhitedrakethewhite Member Posts: 1,240 Arc User
    starswordc wrote: »
    (In comparison, off forum I'm friends with a self-described Marxist who considers DSC regressive in comparison to earlier Star Trek shows, with some reason.)

    That article actually does pretty good job of detailing most of my own issues with Discovery.

    The article was very TNG focused and basically ignored all the other shows (especially DS9 and Enterprise). Each show has been in different in very significant ways from the others with only a thin overlay to give the illusion they exist in the same time line. Even a passing examination would reveal that couldn't possibility be the case as the inconsistencies are just too great in number and seriousness.

    I'm not paying to watch TRIBBLE, so I can't comment on its story beyond what I've seen in Youtube videos and various articles I've read. It looks very bad to my eye, but not for the reasons given in that article. Still, with what little I do know it's not the bottom of the heap for me. That honor belongs to TNG. If I ever do watch it for free, I may change my mind.
  • furiontassadarfuriontassadar Member Posts: 475 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Frightening part is, fans of Discovery can't actually show what they like about it, because they're too busy arguing with people who don't like the show, said people who don't like the show tend to be able to show examples of what they don't like, and further,t he defenders always lapse into attacking OTHER star trek properties to defend Discovery.

    which kinda makes things LESS stable in the argument, because it really does come off as "They like Discovery because they hate prior Trek."

    which isn't, probably, their intent, but it is the end effect, it polarizes into a shouting match instead of a discussion.

    I was actually thinking about making a thread in Ten Foward (since it deals more with Discovery as show then STO) specifically asking what fans of Discovery actually like about it. I've seen plenty of people give reasons why they dislike Discovery (even if some of them are a little silly) but as you said, most of TRIBBLE's fans tend to spend more time dismissing the arguments of the detractors, then actually going into detail about what it is that actually gives them reason to defend it.
    "There will never be enough blood to wash away my need for vengeance! A single world...I could destroy a million worlds and it would not be enough! Your existence is an insult to the memory of my people! I will continue my fight, even if I must fight alone!"
  • szimszim Member Posts: 2,490 Arc User
    I don't have any problems with Discovery's apparant "liberal message". My problem is the lack of character development. I mean after one season we still know absolutely nothing about most of the bridge crew. And the one person we do get to know more closely, Burnham, is the least likeable lead character in Star Trek history. Star Trek is undergoing the same transition as many big franchises these days. It is moving away from more complex storytelling and "boring" character development towards more action and violence.

    The trailer for season 2 looks a bit more promising though. It seems that war will no longer be a major concern and mystery and exploration might play a larger role. Maybe 'helmslady with head implants' and 'black ops lady' even get a few lines. That would truely be something...
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,457 Arc User
    The main reason you think TOS wasn't making some fairly radical political statements in the 1960ies is because you don't really know (or if you are around my age or older)

    I lived during that time, saw the show as it first aired, and I remember them quite well and the state of the nation quite well thank you. What political statements it made were minor, and being made by other shows at the time as well.

    It was first and foremost timeless stories written by many of sci-fi writers of the period. That changed forever with TNG, but by then it was nothing special. What's hard to find now is something that isn't Political commentary. I don't know about you, but even if I agreed with it, I'd find that boring.

    Various stuff, such as talking against the Vietnam war was a no no to censors, and Gene was able to put his messages into his show, by merely having it in space and with weird creatures....the censors were too stupid to catch on.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • lapprenticellapprenticel Member Posts: 254 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    (Trolling comments moderated out. - BMR)
    Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
  • smokebaileysmokebailey Member Posts: 4,457 Arc User
    jonsills wrote: »
    Or perhaps you missed the anti-war message of "A Taste of Armageddon"
    That wasn't anti-war, it was anti-*clean* war, i.e. a fake war that killed people but left the culture and infrastructure intact allowing it to go on forever. Kirk and crew were more than welling not just to rage *real* war to stop it, but to destroy their entire planet while doing so.

    The meaning was simple- if you go to war, destroy your enemy completely and rapidly- don't just target part of them. In plain historical terms, WWII, not Vietnam although one would have to remember that all the lessons of the latter wouldn't be clear for half a decade yet.
    That's the sort of thing that makes for an ineffective social commentary. Assuming your read is correct that is. I saw it more as an examination of what it means to be "civilized". Shat actually had a pretty good monolog about that. the aliens of the week believed their way of life to be "civilized" because they had eliminated violence from war.... the problem was that their wars still killed millions of people.

    And, if you really watch carefully, Anon Seven and Mae Three were borderline boasting "We have been at war for 500 years"....almost proud. Make a war so clean, efficient and prevent collateral damage, and those in power, and possibly some of the masses, will keep on doing it. Looked also like a hidden 'population control' agenda as well on that planet.
    dvZq2Aj.jpg
  • irm1963irm1963 Member Posts: 678 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »

    Frightening part is, fans of Discovery can't actually show what they like about it, because they're too busy arguing with people who don't like the show, said people who don't like the show tend to be able to show examples of what they don't like, and further,t he defenders always lapse into attacking OTHER star trek properties to defend Discovery.

    Because it's pointless, because we just get shouted down with a 2-page rant about how we're wrong and hate Star Trek and are "liberuuuls" along with a pile of dumb internet conspiracy theory nonsense and conservative persecution complex hate. Doesn't exactly make it worth the bother.

  • furiontassadarfuriontassadar Member Posts: 475 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    irm1963 wrote: »
    Because it's pointless, because we just get shouted down with a 2-page rant about how we're wrong and hate Star Trek and are "liberuuuls" along with a pile of dumb internet conspiracy theory nonsense and conservative persecution complex hate. Doesn't exactly make it worth the bother.

    I consider myself a liberal.

    I don't care that the main character is female, black, or has what is traditionally a guy's name.

    I don't care that there is apparently an openly TRIBBLE relationship on the show.

    I DO care that the focus on the main character seems to come at the expense of developing TRIBBLE's side characters, where Star Trek usually has side characters that can be just as interesting, if not moreso, than whomever is in the leading role.

    I DO care that the dark and gritty tone of the show contrasts sharply with the more idealistic outlook of the previous Star Trek shows, DS9 included.

    I DO care that the Klingons were transformed from being a nuanced and complicated warrior culture, into what seem to be generic, rubber forehead villains, for seemingly no explanation other that to they needed a bad guy and they wanted to be "different".

    You may not feel it is worth the bother, but surely someone who actually likes Discovery can explain to me why TRIBBLE is worth the bother of defending at all?
    "There will never be enough blood to wash away my need for vengeance! A single world...I could destroy a million worlds and it would not be enough! Your existence is an insult to the memory of my people! I will continue my fight, even if I must fight alone!"
  • reafisreafis Member Posts: 147 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Frightening part is, fans of Discovery can't actually show what they like about it, because they're too busy arguing with people who don't like the show, said people who don't like the show tend to be able to show examples of what they don't like, and further,t he defenders always lapse into attacking OTHER star trek properties to defend Discovery.

    which kinda makes things LESS stable in the argument, because it really does come off as "They like Discovery because they hate prior Trek."

    which isn't, probably, their intent, but it is the end effect, it polarizes into a shouting match instead of a discussion.

    I was actually thinking about making a thread in Ten Foward (since it deals more with Discovery as show then STO) specifically asking what fans of Discovery actually like about it. I've seen plenty of people give reasons why they dislike Discovery (even if some of them are a little silly) but as you said, most of TRIBBLE's fans tend to spend more time dismissing the arguments of the detractors, then actually going into detail about what it is that actually gives them reason to defend it.

    Ok as a Discovery fan I will share what I like and what I dislike about it. I don't have any problem with anyone who doesn't like it as that's their choice

    Likes

    I like a lot of the characters to be honest. Burnham whilst flawed I find a great character who is sort of Vulcan/human but probably one of the most real characters star trek has ever had (How many Star Trek captains have ever made huge mistakes and had to live with it) She knows the mutiny was wrong and she carries the deaths of the battle at the binary stars with her.

    I find her character journey fascinating as we know she is destined to apparently command discovery but IF its going to happen its going to take a while. I don't think anyone would have liked her if they just straight up made her captain after season 1.

    I love saru as a truly fascinating new species. His journey from a brow beaten bridge officer to First office/acting captain was awesome and truly think he would make a great captain.

    Stamets is a different kind of Starfleet engineer\scientist and his sarcasm and hostility is a awesome and I think he is a great character.

    Tilly is also a great character and I know there is more than a hint of Wesley in her, but somehow she seems to rise above that and has a great deal of potential as a character.

    I know we have not seem much of the supporting bridge crew but I do like their portrayal and am hoping they build on them on season 2.

    I like the technology/special effects too. I know the phasers seem to be radically different but they make sense to me because the beam style from the later series is going to be pretty rubbish against a lot of fast targets like warheads and fighters. The uniforms look great to me (Like the functionality of the Starfleet insignia being a kind of dog tag).

    I like SOME of the ships like the crossfield and the fletcher, even the new enterprise.

    I did like the war arc a lot as it really depicted it a lot better than other series did. I know DS9 did a war arc but DS9's war arc kinda fizzled out. From the capture of DS9 it was great as it felt like a war that the federation and the Klingons might not win, but suddenly Sisko is back on DS9 and he's not really used except for major offenses. Given the closeness of DS9 to the alpha quadrant HQ of the dominion there just never felt like enough risk. In discovery we really see Starfleet suffering badly from the capturing of starbases, to the siege of dilithium mines and ambush of Starfleet ships we see them suffer as we never have before.

    We have seen Starfleet officers captured before but I think their treatment is in character with Klingons at war.

    I like SOME of the Klingon behaviour. We have seen Klingons at war before but it was alluded by Worf in The Way of the Warrior that "In war there is nothing more honourable than victory" so we know that Klingons at war are a scary prospect.

    The "Remain Klingon" is a very real thing that has been mentioned before. In the excellent The Undiscovered Country, the Klingons openly talk about the end of the culture and the federation being a "homo sapiens only club" and even the term human rights is refered to as racist. A lot of cultures even today are fearful of this sort of assimilation.

    I like L'rell a little she is a bit different to other Klingons (maybe a bit similar to Lursa and B'Etor)but she is a really scary Klingon .
    I like the crew of the discovery as a whole because although they go along with Lorca despite his questionable decisions they really bond well and stay true to the Starfleet ideals. I see a lot of stuff about how Starfleet in discovery is militant and is supposed to be war mongering. Yes in desperation as a Klingon fleet is poised to kill earth they attempt genocide on qo'noS, but this is Starfleet command, who are following a ridiculous plan from a mirror dictator but the plan is supported by a supposed renowned Vulcan ambassador. The actual crew didn't know of the plan and when they did, burnham led them in a proposed mutiny and they stood with her. Infact Admiral Cornwell actually went to a supposed peace talk despite the insane risk that it wasa trap. Starfleet command has done this before with the liberated borg hugh when they attempted to use him as a weapon to kill the borg.

    Dislikes

    I don't really care a lot of the new Klingon look. I can see why they did it but the heavy face masks take 90% of the expressions, emotions and feeling out of it. That works for Saru as the actor has made a career out of performing in heavy costumes/masks but it doesn't work for the Klingons.

    I don't really care for the Klingon ships bar the sarcophagus, they are really different to any we have seen before (even in JJ Trek they were at least vaguely familiar)I am hoping this is rectified in season 2.

    I don't really like the new phaser rifle as its just ridiculously overpowered and not in keeping with previous models.

    Some of the new Starfleet ships in the battle of the binary stars are awful in terms of design particularly at the battle of the binary stars.
    I am not a fan of the "nuke on qo'nos "thing as its a difficult thing to resolve and it feels a bit silly. I wish they had come up with something better but I do hope it is resolved in season 2.

    Lastly I am not a fan of the spore drive as compared to other methods of travel in Star Trek it seems to be the most far fetched and only existed as a plot device.





  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 11,125 Arc User
    Are you kidding? Have you not seen what many Trekkies all over the net (from Youtube, to IMBD, to TrekBBS, etc.) have been saying about TRIBBLE? They hate this show....period.

    Just as legions of Trek fans hated TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise.... Honest questions - do you know anything of Trek history? Were you even born when TNG first premiered?

    Try watching or reading some of the myriad of documentaries / behind-the-scenes content about Star Trek. The reaction to Discovery is nothing new at all. Those of us old enough to have been around since TOS first aired on television have seen this all before.

    There only appears to be more whining about Discovery because we (sadly) live in the age of the entitlement generation whose pasttime is whining on the internet.

    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • richyrich1991richyrich1991 Member Posts: 139 Arc User
    Yay because the ships (FED ones at least) are beautiful, I love the uniforms (which I already have tbf), and new content is new content :)

    One thing I'm really hoping for though for my Mirror themed toon is the DSC Terran regalia, that is probably my favourite Trek uniform out of all of them :D
    "As of this moment, we are all dead. We go into battle to reclaim our lives.
    This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Victory is Life!"
    njflWNG.jpg
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 11,125 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Frightening part is, fans of Discovery can't actually show what they like about it, because they're too busy arguing with people who don't like the show, said people who don't like the show tend to be able to show examples of what they don't like, and further,t he defenders always lapse into attacking OTHER star trek properties to defend Discovery.

    Pot, meet kettle. This coming from the person who goes on multi-page diatribes about a show they hated from the very beginning so much, they kept watching every single subsequent episode and will attack anyone who posts even the slightest positive expression about Discovery.

    Many people have expressed what they both like and dislike about the show, only to be shouted at and told they are wrong by some of the more vocal haters of the show who for some unknown reason believe their opinion is the correct one.
    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • avoozuulavoozuul Member Posts: 3,036 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    I haven't seen many fans of ST:D actually mention what they don't like about the show honestly.
    Post edited by avoozuul on
  • redvengeredvenge Member Posts: 1,425 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    Many people have expressed what they both like and dislike about the show, only to be shouted at and told they are wrong by some of the more vocal haters of the show who for some unknown reason believe their opinion is the correct one.
    Positive or negative, what I usually see is someone saying "I like it" or "I don't like it". Those who dislike it more will say "it's not Trek" or something along those lines.

    Personally, when I make specific points about what I do not like about TRIBBLE I get, how did you put it? "Only to be shouted at and told they are wrong by some of the more vocal supporters of the show who, for some unknown reason, believe their opinion is the correct one"? The ones who say I am a "fanboi, afraid of change" while completely ignoring my criticisms? "Pot, meet kettle"?
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 12,395 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    Me? I'm still waiting for them to fix the Gamma Armor. And I really don't need 12 extra types of Klingons in the game (or even half the amount). And Geko's intended focus on Tilly... well, let's just say I would have made a different choice :wink: All will be forgiven, though, when they give me a Detmer boff.
    ChCDpuh.jpg
  • valoreahvaloreah Member Posts: 11,125 Arc User
    @redvenge Of course both sides can be blamed. Personally, I didn't care for a lot of things in Discovery either. I don't hate it, nor is it my favorite Star Trek. It's interesting enough for me to continue to watch though and I certainly won't say it isn't Star Trek because it doesn't look like TOS.
    Dear Devs: I enjoyed the Legacy of Romulus expansion much more than the Delta Rising expansion. .
    thecosmic1 wrote:
    Anyone calling Valoreah a "Cryptic fanboy" must be new to the forum.

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • the1tiggletthe1tigglet Member Posts: 1,421 Arc User
    looking forward to it. new era ,new players ...

    Not a new era a new show entirely, it's not trek at all, it's just some trash scifi show.
  • the1tiggletthe1tigglet Member Posts: 1,421 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    New stuff is always fun.

    Bug fixes would be nice...

    THIS^
    To hell with new content, how about they fix what is not working instead. That would certainly be more welcome at this point.

    Exactly, why enter a scifi show that has nothing to do with trek outside of the names, 0 substance, they couldn't even get the phasers right, instead fix the bugs that have been there since beta, work on what Star Trek really should be which is exploration. There are plenty of examples from other space games out there on how to do it properly.
  • the1tiggletthe1tigglet Member Posts: 1,421 Arc User
    jam3s1701 wrote: »

    If potential players do not like that emphasis then they are not really into Star Trek as a whole, they are into TRIBBLE.
    STO is a post-Voyager game and has been since it was released. You just admitted I'm correct by stating that STO has already covered the 23rd Century, so doing so again with what amounts to an expansion for the sole purpose of promoting TRIBBLE is redundant and thus a waste of time. Many of us dislike TRIBBLE for a wide variety of reasons and are not ever going to pay for it no matter how much CBS attempts to force it on us. As I've stated consistently, you Drekkers should be have content from TRIBBLE for your personal use, what should not be in game is anything that is required for character advancement that is connected to TRIBBLE.
    The new content is being advertised as an expansion, not just new content that can be ignored. We've yet to see how invasive this new content will be, but understand that "new" players are not likely to be PAYING players since younger players tend to not have as much money as older players.
    TRIBBLE is now 25 years old. Most fans of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine are probably from back then, so I don't know why you'd say that people attracted by it would be "young".

    And I always thought that DS9 had a rough start, but eventually became the most popular Star Trek series, since it's so much more relevant in its topics to today, and also has some of the more complex story arcs, closer to what modern TV and Streaming television has to offer. It put a more "realistic" spin on the universe, without losing Star Trek's sense of hope in the future. It balanced the Dark with the Light well.

    But I am not sure why we are still talking about TRIBBLE. Victory of Life is "done", the next big thing is Star Trek Discovery. DSC will probably bring in some younger people, but probably also plenty "old" fans whose Star Trek love just got reinvigorated after such a long absence. I have 4 or 5 colleagues around my age that have watched it, and they are mostly middle class basically, so if people like them get into STO as well, they'd have neat disposable income.


    TRIBBLE is not 25 years old nor is it ST:DS9.
    You will not force me, or anyone else to use "DSC" to describe TRIBBLE.

    You do know that TRIBBLE stands for something rather derogatory yeah, so using it to describe Star Trek: Discovery (DSC) is not clever or funny, it is immature at best and insulting at worst.

    Including Star Trek in TRIBBLE is like claiming that Farscape is about Star Wars, It's just not Star Wars is it. Same goes for TRIBBLE, TRIBBLE is just some trash scifi show that happens to have star trek names in it somewhere, it has exactly 0 substance that would make it star trek.
  • redvengeredvenge Member Posts: 1,425 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    @redvenge Of course both sides can be blamed. Personally, I didn't care for a lot of things in Discovery either. I don't hate it, nor is it my favorite Star Trek. It's interesting enough for me to continue to watch though and I certainly won't say it isn't Star Trek because it doesn't look like TOS.
    Interestingly enough, there are those who will say Star Trek: Enterprise is "good" Trek because it "looks like it could be pre-TOS". I won't say ENT is not Trek, but I will say ENT is terrible.
  • the1tiggletthe1tigglet Member Posts: 1,421 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    Hate speech removed.

    ConcreteVagueCobra-size_restricted.gif

    Knock it off. — StarSword-C
    Post edited by starswordc on
  • the1tiggletthe1tigglet Member Posts: 1,421 Arc User
    reafis wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Frightening part is, fans of Discovery can't actually show what they like about it, because they're too busy arguing with people who don't like the show, said people who don't like the show tend to be able to show examples of what they don't like, and further,t he defenders always lapse into attacking OTHER star trek properties to defend Discovery.

    which kinda makes things LESS stable in the argument, because it really does come off as "They like Discovery because they hate prior Trek."

    which isn't, probably, their intent, but it is the end effect, it polarizes into a shouting match instead of a discussion.

    I was actually thinking about making a thread in Ten Foward (since it deals more with Discovery as show then STO) specifically asking what fans of Discovery actually like about it. I've seen plenty of people give reasons why they dislike Discovery (even if some of them are a little silly) but as you said, most of TRIBBLE's fans tend to spend more time dismissing the arguments of the detractors, then actually going into detail about what it is that actually gives them reason to defend it.

    Ok as a Discovery fan I will share what I like and what I dislike about it. I don't have any problem with anyone who doesn't like it as that's their choice

    Likes

    I like a lot of the characters to be honest. Burnham whilst flawed I find a great character who is sort of Vulcan/human but probably one of the most real characters star trek has ever had (How many Star Trek captains have ever made huge mistakes and had to live with it) She knows the mutiny was wrong and she carries the deaths of the battle at the binary stars with her.

    I find her character journey fascinating as we know she is destined to apparently command discovery but IF its going to happen its going to take a while. I don't think anyone would have liked her if they just straight up made her captain after season 1.

    I love saru as a truly fascinating new species. His journey from a brow beaten bridge officer to First office/acting captain was awesome and truly think he would make a great captain.

    Stamets is a different kind of Starfleet engineer\scientist and his sarcasm and hostility is a awesome and I think he is a great character.

    Tilly is also a great character and I know there is more than a hint of Wesley in her, but somehow she seems to rise above that and has a great deal of potential as a character.

    I know we have not seem much of the supporting bridge crew but I do like their portrayal and am hoping they build on them on season 2.

    I like the technology/special effects too. I know the phasers seem to be radically different but they make sense to me because the beam style from the later series is going to be pretty rubbish against a lot of fast targets like warheads and fighters. The uniforms look great to me (Like the functionality of the Starfleet insignia being a kind of dog tag).

    I like SOME of the ships like the crossfield and the fletcher, even the new enterprise.

    I did like the war arc a lot as it really depicted it a lot better than other series did. I know DS9 did a war arc but DS9's war arc kinda fizzled out. From the capture of DS9 it was great as it felt like a war that the federation and the Klingons might not win, but suddenly Sisko is back on DS9 and he's not really used except for major offenses. Given the closeness of DS9 to the alpha quadrant HQ of the dominion there just never felt like enough risk. In discovery we really see Starfleet suffering badly from the capturing of starbases, to the siege of dilithium mines and ambush of Starfleet ships we see them suffer as we never have before.

    We have seen Starfleet officers captured before but I think their treatment is in character with Klingons at war.

    I like SOME of the Klingon behaviour. We have seen Klingons at war before but it was alluded by Worf in The Way of the Warrior that "In war there is nothing more honourable than victory" so we know that Klingons at war are a scary prospect.

    The "Remain Klingon" is a very real thing that has been mentioned before. In the excellent The Undiscovered Country, the Klingons openly talk about the end of the culture and the federation being a "homo sapiens only club" and even the term human rights is refered to as racist. A lot of cultures even today are fearful of this sort of assimilation.

    I like L'rell a little she is a bit different to other Klingons (maybe a bit similar to Lursa and B'Etor)but she is a really scary Klingon .
    I like the crew of the discovery as a whole because although they go along with Lorca despite his questionable decisions they really bond well and stay true to the Starfleet ideals. I see a lot of stuff about how Starfleet in discovery is militant and is supposed to be war mongering. Yes in desperation as a Klingon fleet is poised to kill earth they attempt genocide on qo'noS, but this is Starfleet command, who are following a ridiculous plan from a mirror dictator but the plan is supported by a supposed renowned Vulcan ambassador. The actual crew didn't know of the plan and when they did, burnham led them in a proposed mutiny and they stood with her. Infact Admiral Cornwell actually went to a supposed peace talk despite the insane risk that it wasa trap. Starfleet command has done this before with the liberated borg hugh when they attempted to use him as a weapon to kill the borg.

    Dislikes

    I don't really care a lot of the new Klingon look. I can see why they did it but the heavy face masks take 90% of the expressions, emotions and feeling out of it. That works for Saru as the actor has made a career out of performing in heavy costumes/masks but it doesn't work for the Klingons.

    I don't really care for the Klingon ships bar the sarcophagus, they are really different to any we have seen before (even in JJ Trek they were at least vaguely familiar)I am hoping this is rectified in season 2.

    I don't really like the new phaser rifle as its just ridiculously overpowered and not in keeping with previous models.

    Some of the new Starfleet ships in the battle of the binary stars are awful in terms of design particularly at the battle of the binary stars.
    I am not a fan of the "nuke on qo'nos "thing as its a difficult thing to resolve and it feels a bit silly. I wish they had come up with something better but I do hope it is resolved in season 2.

    Lastly I am not a fan of the spore drive as compared to other methods of travel in Star Trek it seems to be the most far fetched and only existed as a plot device.





    Good write up, sums up a lot of my feelings as well. Personally, I like the darker edge that Discover has over a show like Next Generation. Times have changed as time has progressed and I don't care what anyone thinks.. Discovery feels like a natural evolution of what Star Trek should be.

    Is it "typical" Star Trek? No.. no it's not.. and that's what makes it great. Adapt or die.



    Nemesis had more edge than TRIBBLE, that doesn't mean TRIBBLE is great, that just means they are trying to use the only thing they understand at CBS to make something popular. Eventually, the "edge" will become boring which will then reveal TRIBBLE for what it really is, empty, trash tv with no substance. Sadly, I fear many will realize this too late.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,913 Arc User
    reafis wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Frightening part is, fans of Discovery can't actually show what they like about it, because they're too busy arguing with people who don't like the show, said people who don't like the show tend to be able to show examples of what they don't like, and further,t he defenders always lapse into attacking OTHER star trek properties to defend Discovery.

    which kinda makes things LESS stable in the argument, because it really does come off as "They like Discovery because they hate prior Trek."

    which isn't, probably, their intent, but it is the end effect, it polarizes into a shouting match instead of a discussion.

    I was actually thinking about making a thread in Ten Foward (since it deals more with Discovery as show then STO) specifically asking what fans of Discovery actually like about it. I've seen plenty of people give reasons why they dislike Discovery (even if some of them are a little silly) but as you said, most of TRIBBLE's fans tend to spend more time dismissing the arguments of the detractors, then actually going into detail about what it is that actually gives them reason to defend it.

    Ok as a Discovery fan I will share what I like and what I dislike about it. I don't have any problem with anyone who doesn't like it as that's their choice

    Likes

    I like a lot of the characters to be honest. Burnham whilst flawed I find a great character who is sort of Vulcan/human but probably one of the most real characters star trek has ever had (How many Star Trek captains have ever made huge mistakes and had to live with it) She knows the mutiny was wrong and she carries the deaths of the battle at the binary stars with her.

    I find her character journey fascinating as we know she is destined to apparently command discovery but IF its going to happen its going to take a while. I don't think anyone would have liked her if they just straight up made her captain after season 1.

    I love saru as a truly fascinating new species. His journey from a brow beaten bridge officer to First office/acting captain was awesome and truly think he would make a great captain.

    Stamets is a different kind of Starfleet engineer\scientist and his sarcasm and hostility is a awesome and I think he is a great character.

    Tilly is also a great character and I know there is more than a hint of Wesley in her, but somehow she seems to rise above that and has a great deal of potential as a character.

    I know we have not seem much of the supporting bridge crew but I do like their portrayal and am hoping they build on them on season 2.

    I like the technology/special effects too. I know the phasers seem to be radically different but they make sense to me because the beam style from the later series is going to be pretty rubbish against a lot of fast targets like warheads and fighters. The uniforms look great to me (Like the functionality of the Starfleet insignia being a kind of dog tag).

    I like SOME of the ships like the crossfield and the fletcher, even the new enterprise.

    I did like the war arc a lot as it really depicted it a lot better than other series did. I know DS9 did a war arc but DS9's war arc kinda fizzled out. From the capture of DS9 it was great as it felt like a war that the federation and the Klingons might not win, but suddenly Sisko is back on DS9 and he's not really used except for major offenses. Given the closeness of DS9 to the alpha quadrant HQ of the dominion there just never felt like enough risk. In discovery we really see Starfleet suffering badly from the capturing of starbases, to the siege of dilithium mines and ambush of Starfleet ships we see them suffer as we never have before.

    We have seen Starfleet officers captured before but I think their treatment is in character with Klingons at war.

    I like SOME of the Klingon behaviour. We have seen Klingons at war before but it was alluded by Worf in The Way of the Warrior that "In war there is nothing more honourable than victory" so we know that Klingons at war are a scary prospect.

    The "Remain Klingon" is a very real thing that has been mentioned before. In the excellent The Undiscovered Country, the Klingons openly talk about the end of the culture and the federation being a "homo sapiens only club" and even the term human rights is refered to as racist. A lot of cultures even today are fearful of this sort of assimilation.

    I like L'rell a little she is a bit different to other Klingons (maybe a bit similar to Lursa and B'Etor)but she is a really scary Klingon .
    I like the crew of the discovery as a whole because although they go along with Lorca despite his questionable decisions they really bond well and stay true to the Starfleet ideals. I see a lot of stuff about how Starfleet in discovery is militant and is supposed to be war mongering. Yes in desperation as a Klingon fleet is poised to kill earth they attempt genocide on qo'noS, but this is Starfleet command, who are following a ridiculous plan from a mirror dictator but the plan is supported by a supposed renowned Vulcan ambassador. The actual crew didn't know of the plan and when they did, burnham led them in a proposed mutiny and they stood with her. Infact Admiral Cornwell actually went to a supposed peace talk despite the insane risk that it wasa trap. Starfleet command has done this before with the liberated borg hugh when they attempted to use him as a weapon to kill the borg.

    Dislikes

    I don't really care a lot of the new Klingon look. I can see why they did it but the heavy face masks take 90% of the expressions, emotions and feeling out of it. That works for Saru as the actor has made a career out of performing in heavy costumes/masks but it doesn't work for the Klingons.

    I don't really care for the Klingon ships bar the sarcophagus, they are really different to any we have seen before (even in JJ Trek they were at least vaguely familiar)I am hoping this is rectified in season 2.

    I don't really like the new phaser rifle as its just ridiculously overpowered and not in keeping with previous models.

    Some of the new Starfleet ships in the battle of the binary stars are awful in terms of design particularly at the battle of the binary stars.
    I am not a fan of the "nuke on qo'nos "thing as its a difficult thing to resolve and it feels a bit silly. I wish they had come up with something better but I do hope it is resolved in season 2.

    Lastly I am not a fan of the spore drive as compared to other methods of travel in Star Trek it seems to be the most far fetched and only existed as a plot device.





    Nice write up, covers the way I largely feel about Discovery as well. I like that Discovery has a 'darker' edge then the typical Star Trek we're used to.

    All of the Star Trek shows are different from the last, they all reflect the passage of time and the way society has evolved (in some ways.) Discovery feels to me like an evolved and modern version of Star Trek. I also appreciate that unlike previous Star Trek there is no filler in discovery.. no stupid holodeck episodes, no 'data wants to be a real boy' garbage.. all the episodes are relevant, they all advance the story.

    Discovery feels like a natural evolution of the Star Trek Series. Adapt or Die.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
This discussion has been closed.