So one year and the Klingons are morphing into something else?
It couldn't get any worse ... right?
honestly, I don't think Mr. Hetrick means that he's going to completely change the makeup for no reason. I have no idea what he DOES mean, but it's not that. His idea of "new look" could be something as simple as new uniforms. Or it might be TNG Klingons, no way to know just from that one line.
I assume it's some TOSlings (Voq setva precedent and DSC might ignore the Augment nonsense) and TOS inspired uniforms.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
> @peterconnorfirst said: > marty123#3757 wrote: » > > Is it really such a big deal that klingons in discovery look different, in case you hadn't noticed not all humans look the same > > > > > Truer words were never spoken.
I disagree, simply because DSC Klingons are more akin to Lizardpeople posing as humans and everyone just naturally assumes scales, slit-pupils and tails are a ethnic variation of the same species. DSCs Klingons have been changed on purpose and that is confirmed - there is no need to 'defend' it, they wanted different Klingons and made it so. But claiming this all makes sense (or pretending there are literally no differences) is ridiculous
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Think the best term to describe my attitude would be “not that much of a thing”. But I’m sure somewhere on Qo'noS some mega nerdy Trek canon fanatics will probably discuss the ever changing appearance of humans as well so don’t let me stop you.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
I'm not a Discovery fan, actually I have seen the entire first season and can't really find relations to Star Trek. However with the Dominion Expansion Cryptic has given us 6 wonderful episodes and a very crappy last one "Home". So I have high hopes at at least the story in game will be better then the TV Show.
I don't know who did the last episode "Home" but saving a race by killing like half or more of them seems yeah not very Star Trek like and kill red in space kill red on ground kill red in space and then on ground again seemed to be a very lazy way of rounding up the Gamma Arc.
So my hopes are that guys who made the first 6 Gamma Episodes create something for Discovery and I can put my dislike for the show on side and actually enjoy it in game.
C-Store Inc. is still looking for active members on the fed side. If you don't have a fleet feel free to contact me in game @stegi.
Think the best term to describe my attitude would be “not that much of a thing”. But I’m sure somewhere on Qo'noS some mega nerdy Trek canon fanatics will probably discuss the ever changing appearance of humans as well so don’t let me stop you.
[img][/img]
[img][/img]
Humans may change in appearance, but in general, you can always point at a human and go "Thats a human!", we don't sprout entirely new facial features and structures outside of cosmetic surgery, nor do we suddenly start popping up in entirely new skintones. the new TRIBBLE klingons, if I wasn't told they were klingons, their ridges are much more uniformly flat, their lack of hair across almost the entire species, the much more pronounced and oddly structured nose, their almost hole-like ears, whatever's going on with their bloody lips, and the fact that their much more pronounced colors {People would notice if a dark purple/slate black human walked down the street}, about the ONLY part of the redesign I can accept and forgive is their armor redesign which I kinda dig, which is one of the only things in TRIBBLE I actually enjoyed.
Even humans who ARE radically altered via extensive cosmetic work are still recognizable as human
Theirs only so much you can change the facial features of human anatomy, our bodies can only be molded so much within a set parameter of bone structure and growth, until gene splicing becomes a thing and even THEN that brings up the debate if splicing with another creature is still "human".
I actually cnt wait for the new expansion, i love the ENT/TMP blend and continuation of the designs of Starfleet ships, so this is a more than welcome content for me ^^
yeah, just look at standard wermacht uniforms circa 1930s-1940s - they were basically housefrocks with thicker materials, but at least they were perfectly uniform (and ugly as hell - the SS and gestapo got the good uniforms)
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.
yeah, just look at standard wermacht uniforms circa 1930s-1940s - they were basically housefrocks with thicker materials, but at least they were perfectly uniform (and ugly as hell - the SS and gestapo got the good uniforms)
Luftwaffe and Panzer divisions as well had good looking uniforms. Not SS tier of beauty, but not ugly.
I'm honestly really excited for this. I don't understand why TRIBBLE gets so much hate from the fan-base. There are definitely points where it can be better (and preferably not locked behind CBS) but a lot of the complaints seem to come from the fact that it looks different. Did people seriously expect them not to do a visual reboot? Our perception of technology and future changes every day, and so should Star Trek. The franchise cannot grow if you expect them to follow the same plastic, kiddie play-set style that TOS had, you might as well put the final nail in the coffin. The franchise was in desperate need for a visual overhaul, and they did it pretty well. And yes, the actual show could definitely be better (better plot lines, character progression, etc) but it's not the end of the world like people are making it seem. It's probably had one of the best season-one's in the franchise. Idk, give the show a bit to prove itself, judging a ST show in it's entirely on its first season (or first couple episodes like a lot of people here) would mean no Star Trek show is safe.
Again this nonsense. NOBODY EVER SAID THEY HAD TO BUILD THE SETS FROM CARDBOARD OR STRING. Although I bet DSCs sets are also made of plywood - because that's how you build sets, they don't construct solid steel walls. Can you tell the material of a modern TV/Movie set? You can't. And if they kept more of the original aesthetics with slight upgrades it'd have worked. What people are really saying is that Trek stood out with unique visuals and needed to be changed to be indistinguishable from all the other shows running.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Just like every Trek show so far there has been stuff I liked and stuff I didn't... ST:D is no different. Pretty much like all the STO expansions so far. I'll play the new expansion, probably buy a new ship and move on once it's over. (or not if they actually manage to continue content for AoD)
Again this nonsense. NOBODY EVER SAID THEY HAD TO BUILD THE SETS FROM CARDBOARD OR STRING. Although I bet DSCs sets are also made of plywood - because that's how you build sets, they don't construct solid steel walls. Can you tell the material of a modern TV/Movie set? You can't. And if they kept more of the original aesthetics with slight upgrades it'd have worked. What people are really saying is that Trek stood out with unique visuals and needed to be changed to be indistinguishable from all the other shows running.
The franchise cannot grow if you expect them to follow the same plastic, kiddie play-set style that TOS had, you might as well put the final nail in the coffin.
What a peculiar strawman. I've read about lethargic Klingons, with exo-armor that hinders them to the degree that even Burnham accidentally bumping into one can cause their deaths; I've read about Burnham not being everyone's favorite Trek character. I heard Tilly mentioned, weak, rushed, implausible Season ending, etc. But I don't think I recall ppl hating on the ship's tech (which looks absolutely fine to me).
> @meimeitoo said: > gabeoz1 wrote: » > > The franchise cannot grow if you expect them to follow the same plastic, kiddie play-set style that TOS had, you might as well put the final nail in the coffin. > > > > > > What a peculiar strawman. I've read about lethargic Klingons, with exo-armor that hinders them to the degree that even Burnham accidentally bumping into one can cause their deaths; I've read about Burnham not being everyone's favorite Trek character. I heard Tilly mentioned, weak, rushed, implausible Season ending, etc. But I don't think I recall ppl hating on the ship's tech (which looks absolutely fine to me).
I have problems with the tech, but they I guess are more nitpicks. Like the Enterprise in DSC being about 33% bigger than the actual one in TOS. Trek yards did an episode on this.
Because if they hadn't made Enterprise bigger, Discovery would of Dwarfed Enterprise.
Beyond that just a bit too modern for the day, but I figure Gene would of done the same.
Just at the Binary stars battle would of rather seen a lot more of the older style round nacelles rather than the newer looking ones.
Again nitpicks I know but it does take me out of this is 10 years previous to TOS but the ships look lightyears more advanced(almost to TMP levels) than TOS.
Again nitpicks. They could of done a bit better with style instead of JJ verse mark 2. Which is what it felt a lot like to me. But what do I expect? A lot of the discovery team comes from the JJ movies.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
> @meimeitoo said:
> gabeoz1 wrote: »
>
> The franchise cannot grow if you expect them to follow the same plastic, kiddie play-set style that TOS had, you might as well put the final nail in the coffin.
>
>
>
>
>
> What a peculiar strawman. I've read about lethargic Klingons, with exo-armor that hinders them to the degree that even Burnham accidentally bumping into one can cause their deaths; I've read about Burnham not being everyone's favorite Trek character. I heard Tilly mentioned, weak, rushed, implausible Season ending, etc. But I don't think I recall ppl hating on the ship's tech (which looks absolutely fine to me).
I have problems with the tech, but they I guess are more nitpicks. Like the Enterprise in DSC being about 33% bigger than the actual one in TOS. Trek yards did an episode on this.
Because if they hadn't made Enterprise bigger, Discovery would of Dwarfed Enterprise.
Beyond that just a bit too modern for the day, but I figure Gene would of done the same.
Just at the Binary stars battle would of rather seen a lot more of the older style round nacelles rather than the newer looking ones.
Again nitpicks I know but it does take me out of this is 10 years previous to TOS but the ships look lightyears more advanced(almost to TMP levels) than TOS.
Again nitpicks. They could of done a bit better with style instead of JJ verse mark 2. Which is what it felt a lot like to me. But what do I expect? A lot of the discovery team comes from the JJ movies.
Again this nonsense. NOBODY EVER SAID THEY HAD TO BUILD THE SETS FROM CARDBOARD OR STRING. Although I bet DSCs sets are also made of plywood - because that's how you build sets, they don't construct solid steel walls. Can you tell the material of a modern TV/Movie set? You can't. And if they kept more of the original aesthetics with slight upgrades it'd have worked. What people are really saying is that Trek stood out with unique visuals and needed to be changed to be indistinguishable from all the other shows running.
TOS was Forbidden Planet + a heavy dose of 60's. Connecting style and décor to an immediate cultural context, while couching that in popular sci-fi, helped the show stand out and function as allegory. Lose that (in favor or keeping to a canon that falsely attributes stylistic changes, made in response to real-time cultural evolution, to a working history of the FED that shifts according to an internal and disconnected timeline) and the allegory is dampened. More distance is created between your perception of setting and the characters and events which inhabit it, making it more difficult for actions find a connection to daily experience. Can it work? Maybe. Will it work as well, all else being equal? No.
Thus, regurgitating TOS aesthetics out of their original context would be a disservice to what Star Trek is beyond the simple description of its fictitious canon. Every iteration should reinterpret Star Trek for a modern stylistic view of the future in order to continue functioning like a Star Trek series (using design cues, rather than wholesale copying, to connect narratives; as Discovery does [even in Season 1].)
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
Again this nonsense. NOBODY EVER SAID THEY HAD TO BUILD THE SETS FROM CARDBOARD OR STRING. Although I bet DSCs sets are also made of plywood - because that's how you build sets, they don't construct solid steel walls. Can you tell the material of a modern TV/Movie set? You can't. And if they kept more of the original aesthetics with slight upgrades it'd have worked. What people are really saying is that Trek stood out with unique visuals and needed to be changed to be indistinguishable from all the other shows running.
TOS was Forbidden Planet + a heavy dose of 60's. Connecting style and décor to an immediate cultural context, while couching that in popular sci-fi, helped the show stand out and function as allegory. Lose that (in favor or keeping to a canon that falsely attributes stylistic changes, made in response to real-time cultural evolution, to a working history of the FED that shifts according to an internal and disconnected timeline) and the allegory is dampened. More distance is created between your perception of setting and the characters and events which inhabit it, making it more difficult for actions find a connection to daily experience. Can it work? Maybe. Will it work as well, all else being equal? No.
Thus, regurgitating TOS aesthetics out of their original context would be a disservice to what Star Trek is beyond the simple description of its fictitious canon. Every iteration should reinterpret Star Trek for a modern stylistic view of the future in order to continue functioning like a Star Trek series (using design cues, rather than wholesale copying, to connect narratives; as Discovery does [even in Season 1].)
Yeah, TOS looked futuristic... in the 60s. Nowadays it looks anachronistic.
Again this nonsense. NOBODY EVER SAID THEY HAD TO BUILD THE SETS FROM CARDBOARD OR STRING. Although I bet DSCs sets are also made of plywood - because that's how you build sets, they don't construct solid steel walls. Can you tell the material of a modern TV/Movie set? You can't. And if they kept more of the original aesthetics with slight upgrades it'd have worked. What people are really saying is that Trek stood out with unique visuals and needed to be changed to be indistinguishable from all the other shows running.
TOS was Forbidden Planet + a heavy dose of 60's. Connecting style and décor to an immediate cultural context, while couching that in popular sci-fi, helped the show stand out and function as allegory. Lose that (in favor or keeping to a canon that falsely attributes stylistic changes, made in response to real-time cultural evolution, to a working history of the FED that shifts according to an internal and disconnected timeline) and the allegory is dampened. More distance is created between your perception of setting and the characters and events which inhabit it, making it more difficult for actions find a connection to daily experience. Can it work? Maybe. Will it work as well, all else being equal? No.
Thus, regurgitating TOS aesthetics out of their original context would be a disservice to what Star Trek is beyond the simple description of its fictitious canon. Every iteration should reinterpret Star Trek for a modern stylistic view of the future in order to continue functioning like a Star Trek series (using design cues, rather than wholesale copying, to connect narratives; as Discovery does [even in Season 1].)
Yeah, TOS looked futuristic... in the 60s. Nowadays it looks anachronistic.
Zactly! TOS looked modern by the standards of the day. So does Discovery now. The ship's interior/bridge is probably one of the very few things they got entirely right, IMHO.
Not really, no. Might look into it when it gets released. I'll much rather look forward to the "Age of that new show with not Captain anymore Picard in it". Might tank also; but right now it has the benefit of not having shown anything disastrous like these Reman looking Aliens they call Klingons.
Comments
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Truer words were never spoken.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
> marty123#3757 wrote: »
>
> Is it really such a big deal that klingons in discovery look different, in case you hadn't noticed not all humans look the same
>
>
>
>
> Truer words were never spoken.
I disagree, simply because DSC Klingons are more akin to Lizardpeople posing as humans and everyone just naturally assumes scales, slit-pupils and tails are a ethnic variation of the same species. DSCs Klingons have been changed on purpose and that is confirmed - there is no need to 'defend' it, they wanted different Klingons and made it so. But claiming this all makes sense (or pretending there are literally no differences) is ridiculous
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Damn, and I had my new L'Rell character already completely figured out...
... and of course, I'd love to have a T5/6 Kamarag, like there is a T5/6 Ambassador.
I don't know who did the last episode "Home" but saving a race by killing like half or more of them seems yeah not very Star Trek like and kill red in space kill red on ground kill red in space and then on ground again seemed to be a very lazy way of rounding up the Gamma Arc.
So my hopes are that guys who made the first 6 Gamma Episodes create something for Discovery and I can put my dislike for the show on side and actually enjoy it in game.
Humans may change in appearance, but in general, you can always point at a human and go "Thats a human!", we don't sprout entirely new facial features and structures outside of cosmetic surgery, nor do we suddenly start popping up in entirely new skintones. the new TRIBBLE klingons, if I wasn't told they were klingons, their ridges are much more uniformly flat, their lack of hair across almost the entire species, the much more pronounced and oddly structured nose, their almost hole-like ears, whatever's going on with their bloody lips, and the fact that their much more pronounced colors {People would notice if a dark purple/slate black human walked down the street}, about the ONLY part of the redesign I can accept and forgive is their armor redesign which I kinda dig, which is one of the only things in TRIBBLE I actually enjoyed.
Even humans who ARE radically altered via extensive cosmetic work are still recognizable as human
Theirs only so much you can change the facial features of human anatomy, our bodies can only be molded so much within a set parameter of bone structure and growth, until gene splicing becomes a thing and even THEN that brings up the debate if splicing with another creature is still "human".
I Vote Yay!!
Same boring game play.
Same worn out story.
New lockbox and C-store ships.
Nothing to be excited over.
It's like wearing a suit jacket with two ties.
It makes no sense, to me.
#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!"
Luftwaffe and Panzer divisions as well had good looking uniforms. Not SS tier of beauty, but not ugly.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Nailed it.
What a peculiar strawman.
> gabeoz1 wrote: »
>
> The franchise cannot grow if you expect them to follow the same plastic, kiddie play-set style that TOS had, you might as well put the final nail in the coffin.
>
>
>
>
>
> What a peculiar strawman.
I have problems with the tech, but they I guess are more nitpicks. Like the Enterprise in DSC being about 33% bigger than the actual one in TOS. Trek yards did an episode on this.
Because if they hadn't made Enterprise bigger, Discovery would of Dwarfed Enterprise.
Beyond that just a bit too modern for the day, but I figure Gene would of done the same.
Just at the Binary stars battle would of rather seen a lot more of the older style round nacelles rather than the newer looking ones.
Again nitpicks I know but it does take me out of this is 10 years previous to TOS but the ships look lightyears more advanced(almost to TMP levels) than TOS.
Again nitpicks. They could of done a bit better with style instead of JJ verse mark 2. Which is what it felt a lot like to me. But what do I expect? A lot of the discovery team comes from the JJ movies.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
TOS was Forbidden Planet + a heavy dose of 60's. Connecting style and décor to an immediate cultural context, while couching that in popular sci-fi, helped the show stand out and function as allegory. Lose that (in favor or keeping to a canon that falsely attributes stylistic changes, made in response to real-time cultural evolution, to a working history of the FED that shifts according to an internal and disconnected timeline) and the allegory is dampened. More distance is created between your perception of setting and the characters and events which inhabit it, making it more difficult for actions find a connection to daily experience. Can it work? Maybe. Will it work as well, all else being equal? No.
Thus, regurgitating TOS aesthetics out of their original context would be a disservice to what Star Trek is beyond the simple description of its fictitious canon. Every iteration should reinterpret Star Trek for a modern stylistic view of the future in order to continue functioning like a Star Trek series (using design cues, rather than wholesale copying, to connect narratives; as Discovery does [even in Season 1].)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
My character Tsin'xing
Zactly! TOS looked modern by the standards of the day. So does Discovery now. The ship's interior/bridge is probably one of the very few things they got entirely right, IMHO.
Yet Axanar looked futuristic nowadays; but still it was clearly TOS era Star Trek.
My character Tsin'xing