test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Discovery Season 3 Discussion *spoilers obviously*

1568101115

Comments

  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,001 Arc User
    edited November 2020
    jonsills wrote: »
    The mirror in your bathroom is the same technology as the mirrors used in 1835. Does that indicate that Earth's technology has been stagnant for 185 years?

    If I was living in the 19th century and watching a show about the future and they show me that they won't develop mirrors further then yes, I would assume technology is stagnant. pig-36.gif

    You know squalin' well what my point was and you are just trying to be a contrarian.​​
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,459 Arc User
    edited November 2020
    ENT had some of the same stagnant thinking problem, though in their case it was imposed from above and the producers fought for a believable progression. CBS Paramount executives wanted them to use the Akira class and all the rest of the stuff directly from First Contact with the only change being the date and exposition about it being "before the Federation" while the production team wanted to use an era-appropriate ship armed with plasma cannons and tactical nuclear missiles throughout the series since Balance of Terror established that they used the missiles in the Romulan war and the Romulans seemed surprised at the phaser bombardment the Enterprise was subjecting them to.

    They managed to talk the executives into allowing them to adjust the Akira into something that looked very similar but older tech, and they got to use the plasma weapons and missiles early on but had to "upgrade" very quickly. But at least it worked out better than just using the stuff straight from the then latest movie the way the executives wanted.

    Star Trek started off very innovative and forward looking in TOS, and the following movies and series got gradually more formulaic and less visionary over the years, something seen over and over in the entertainment industry as new subgenres come in wild and new and over time get categorized and circumscribed into neat little predictable pigeonholes. It is easier to see in the music industry since TV/movies are a bit more granular, but long running series (whether TV or movies) like Star Trek, Star Wars, and even Lost in Space show it in action well enough.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,001 Arc User
    > @somtaawkhar said:
    > One would realistically expect general tech advancement to stop around the TNG/DS9/VOY timeframe. (...)

    One would? How? Why?

    There is plenty of things they can do to show new technology, especially with modern cgi. For instance, nano technology, 'nanite helmets', free walking holograms, advanced robotics, maybe even biotech. The problem, and my point, is that they already did that for inexplicable reasons. They lifted the nanite-helmets straight from Iron Man, as well as the holographic UIs. We got robot and cyborg people, advanced holograms all in season one which causes this whole conflict.

    If half the stuff they used during S1 and S2 was reserved to be S3 future tech it'd have looked much more interesting. Especially since the Enterprise we'll see in SNW had to 'remove all holo tech' for flimsy reasons - then why show it at all?

    I don't think the similarity of S1 and S2 tech to the 31st century can be explained in a satisfactory manner, nor would I logically expect it to become stagnant. The future has floaty ship parts, there are plenty of ways to make it seem really strange and fantastic.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,459 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    > @somtaawkhar said:
    > One would realistically expect general tech advancement to stop around the TNG/DS9/VOY timeframe. (...)

    One would? How? Why?

    There is plenty of things they can do to show new technology, especially with modern cgi. For instance, nano technology, 'nanite helmets', free walking holograms, advanced robotics, maybe even biotech. The problem, and my point, is that they already did that for inexplicable reasons. They lifted the nanite-helmets straight from Iron Man, as well as the holographic UIs. We got robot and cyborg people, advanced holograms all in season one which causes this whole conflict.

    If half the stuff they used during S1 and S2 was reserved to be S3 future tech it'd have looked much more interesting. Especially since the Enterprise we'll see in SNW had to 'remove all holo tech' for flimsy reasons - then why show it at all?

    I don't think the similarity of S1 and S2 tech to the 31st century can be explained in a satisfactory manner, nor would I logically expect it to become stagnant. The future has floaty ship parts, there are plenty of ways to make it seem really strange and fantastic.

    Moonves's bunch did the cyborg and holocom stuff in DSC S1 because they were planning to completely bulldozer TOS under. Also, that flickering unstable analog holocom is one of the big visual signature features of Star Wars and Moonves wanted to coattail that as well as use the Star Trek name to drum up subscribers for CBSAA.

    I doubt that Moonves even knew that TOS had hologram technology that was a lot better than the unstable low res garbage they showed in DSC. In TOS there was simply no reason to actually show the holotech they had in the first three seasons, they just talked about it a few times (and it was supposedly not on the bridge for safety reasons except for the 3D depth-and-parallax showing screens).

    However, season four was going to have a subplot with McCoy's daughter joining the crew fresh out of the academy and his wife sending him all sorts of holo-letters and holocoms (when they were in range of a relay) about it. They were planning to shoot it a bit like the TNG holodeck, a little room which would lap dissolve into a real-looking scene from somewhere else and while everything would look perfectly solid none of it had any real substance and trying to sit on anything shown would result in a pratfall since it is all illusion.

    They were staying away from cyborgs of any sort in TOS since Roddenberry was totally against them being in the show except as antagonists.

    One piece of TOS tech that I wish the DSC people would have done was the force-field helmets of the TOS vac suits. In the '60s they did not have a special-effect to show it so they put the fine mesh on the helmets (which unfortunately just looked like they were running around with windowscreen instead of a forcefield). McCoy was actually supposed to inject people in the suits by inserting the hypospray though the "force field" to touch it to skin like it was normally used but no matter how they mounted the mesh putting the prop through distorted it in a way that made it obvious that the mesh was just a physical one.
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    starkaos wrote: »
    I don't buy the budget limitation excuse
    What you buy or not is irrelevant. What the people who made the show says is what matters.

    The budget limitation is an excuse since I stated how TOS could easily do holographic technology. It is ridiculous to think that it takes a larger budget to create a ring on the floor and a fake door for holographic technology. A glowing ring on the floor is all DS9 did for their holo-communicator.
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    Here is a better look of the Voyager-J

    voyagerjzoom-900x242.jpeg
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,276 Arc User
    yeesh...you can really tell they did nothing with that ship beyond modeling basic shapes and slapping on a 5 minute diffuse/normal map​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #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!"
    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.
  • qultuqqultuq Member Posts: 988 Arc User
    edited November 2020
    > @starkaos said:
    > Here is a better look of the Voyager-J
    >
    > (Image)

    Not really. It is a Simplified 2-d graphic art poster—not the 3-d digital model of the ship. However internet promos paid for by CBS has called it “a better look”

    Hence shadowfang’s incredulous statement...

    Here is the whole poster:

    https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/comicbook.com/startrek/amp/news/star-trek-discovery-voyager-j-artwork-photos/
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,459 Arc User
    starkaos wrote: »
    starkaos wrote: »
    I don't buy the budget limitation excuse
    What you buy or not is irrelevant. What the people who made the show says is what matters.

    The budget limitation is an excuse since I stated how TOS could easily do holographic technology. It is ridiculous to think that it takes a larger budget to create a ring on the floor and a fake door for holographic technology. A glowing ring on the floor is all DS9 did for their holo-communicator.

    In TOS they did not use holocoms on the bridge because there is absolutely no reason to with all the screens around. Also, in TOS one of the main themes was that ships were out of contact a lot of the time because the relay network was so thin out on the frontier at that point, so they often did not even have realtime audio communication available much less an incredibly wasteful bandwidth hog like a holographic comm signal.

    As for the real world expense, if the studio ever did want to use that glowing ring on the floor thing they would have had to tear up a section of the floor to mount a glass plate or ring there. There was no inexpensive way to do it optically like you can do with CGI, and no one in their right mind would burn the amount of SFX budget and compositor time it would take to do that ring for any kind of useful length conversation using post production optical effects. And they didn't even have lasers at the time that could draw the circle that way either, and lasers would be the only projected light source bright enough to be seen on the very brightly lit bridge.

    On top of that, since the "hologram" would just be a person on the bridge standing on a lit glass circle viewers would probably think there was a transporter on the bridge at first and just get annoyed by what they think is inconsistent special effects unless they also burn dialog time mentioning it is a hologram every time they use it (because they cannot know when people started watching the show).

    Most of the time back then a TV episode only used optical effects for the credits and titles, and sometimes a car scene were you can see stock footage in rear window. Star Trek would sometimes hire ever single optical house in Hollywood at once just to get the stuff done you see in the episodes as it is. They averaged something like two hundred times as much special effects as the average TV show back then.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,001 Arc User
    > @somtaawkhar said:
    > Strange and fantastic are code words for stupid and impractical. Good technology is neither. One would expect future tech to follow along established lines of design and style because those things have a reason for existing the way they do in the first place. Because its convenient, and useful, for it to be that way. One does not redesign the wheel simply to make it strange and fantastic. It works fine the way it is already.

    Until they replaced wheels with antigrav tech ;)

    I did read your posting, but you assume it answered my question. It didn't. I have no reason to believe technology woukd stagnate between the 23rd to 31st century, it doesn't make sense. Especially since I as a watcher of a sci-fi show expect the future to be wacky. DSC made a mistake 'modernizing' the era before they went to the future in S3. For instance, traditional helmets were used throughout the franchise, then we get 'nanite-helmets' that predate it all just because Marvel did it? If they had saved that till now it'd convey 'future' much better. They obviously did that with floaty ship parts.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • foxrockssocksfoxrockssocks Member Posts: 2,482 Arc User
    Honestly its hard to imagine the future. Back to the Future gave us flying cars and hoverboards and we just aren't there. Star Trek, even in TOS/movies gave us a myriad of incredibly futuristic things that ST:D wants to improve on somehow with 900 more years. But how? That isn't an easy question to answer in a franchise that has already done a lot of that.

    As much as I think separate nacelles seem dumb and I definitely hate the look, I give them credit for trying (although the low detail ships I've seen are not getting any credit for effort because the effort was low.) I do hope they explain them for the audience and the crew. I think part of selling the idea that it is future tech is explaining how it is better and how it works (fictionally obviously.) Still I think ST:D has a pretty hard job imagining future in terms of Star Trek.

    Now what ST:D could have done instead, given the Burn concept, is to seemingly regress in tech. If in reaction to the Burn people overreacted and threw out anti-matter reactors entirely then had an energy shortage on ships, it could have resulted in an issue powering them which required cheaper and simpler tech to be installed on ships alongside some things that were vastly improved. Think fusion reactors as the primary power plants along with passive solar generation, or using a plain old wrench and grease to adjust a warp plasma conduit alongside an advanced tricorder to monitor it.

    That sort of look at the world can get you thinking about what is really useful, and what is just a luxury.

  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    qultuq wrote: »
    > @starkaos said:
    > Here is a better look of the Voyager-J
    >
    > (Image)

    Not really. It is a Simplified 2-d graphic art poster—not the 3-d digital model of the ship. However internet promos paid for by CBS has called it “a better look”

    Hence shadowfang’s incredulous statement...

    Here is the whole poster:

    https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/comicbook.com/startrek/amp/news/star-trek-discovery-voyager-j-artwork-photos/

    Well I did say it was a better look of Voyager-J not that it was a better image. Voyager-J shown in Discovery showed only the front of the ship not the back to show that the ship had detached nacelles.
  • nrobbiecnrobbiec Member Posts: 959 Arc User
    Some dialogue seemed to suggest Discovery being renamed to Discovery-A was a result of keeping their time hopping secret.

    I knew I wouldn't get my XRT-55D.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,459 Arc User
    nrobbiec wrote: »
    Some dialogue seemed to suggest Discovery being renamed to Discovery-A was a result of keeping their time hopping secret.

    I knew I wouldn't get my XRT-55D.

    I doubt if Kurtzman's bunch even know what an XRT-55D is.
  • nrobbiecnrobbiec Member Posts: 959 Arc User
    > @phoenixc#0738 said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > I doubt if Kurtzman's bunch even know what an XRT-55D is.

    They knew about benemite crystals and quantum slipstream drives. I'm pretty sure they know how to do their research, especially with Kirsten Beyer on the writing staff.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,459 Arc User
    nrobbiec wrote: »
    > @phoenixc#0738 said:
    > (Quote)
    >
    > I doubt if Kurtzman's bunch even know what an XRT-55D is.

    They knew about benemite crystals and quantum slipstream drives. I'm pretty sure they know how to do their research, especially with Kirsten Beyer on the writing staff.

    The thing is, how much do they actually listen to her? Or understand the context of what she says?. That can make quite a bit of difference.

    And as for quantum slipstream drives, that is one of the big reference points of VOY and a two second search would get them to the fact that it uses those crystals for anyone who does not know about them already, though that would be sort of like not knowing the wormhole in DS9 had timeless aliens in it.

    Conversely, the XRT-55D is rather obscure, it was shown a few times as a wireframe (and only actually talked about once) but you have to actively stop and examine it to read much of the display and a lot of viewers don't bother to really analyze ENT like that. And according to the behind the scenes interviews very few of the top DSC creative staff actually watched any of the Star Trek series, in fact some mentioned that they never saw anything but the movies so they would not have seen it even as a barely glanced at display.

    I would really like to see the ship in the game too, but with DSC altering the look of the future the same way they did with pre-TOS I doubt it will happen since there will probably be a stream of fugly DSC ships to do instead.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,001 Arc User
    DSC's future shios will be the ENT-J debacle all over: The ship(s) is(are) a poorly made rushjob for background fluff. Nobody really cares, however in STO the ships are the core aspect of the game. And they want it to be screen accurate. And so the poorly made rushjob becomes a 200$ prime item in the game.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • nrobbiecnrobbiec Member Posts: 959 Arc User
    > @angrytarg said:
    > DSC's future shios will be the ENT-J debacle all over: The ship(s) is(are) a poorly made rushjob for background fluff. Nobody really cares, however in STO the ships are the core aspect of the game. And they want it to be screen accurate. And so the poorly made rushjob becomes a 200$ prime item in the game.

    Dont you be dissing that beautiful J boyo
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,276 Arc User
    the STO J ISN'T accurate to what's seen on screen though - cryptic's version actually has detail​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #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!"
    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.
  • szimszim Member Posts: 2,503 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    I didn't find the main plot of this episode very interesting. It took a direction that I was happier that they'd been slightly moving away from - namely over-focus on Burham. And I have to admit, I found the way everyone accepted what Burham was saying based on her 'confession' and, basically, saying "forget my request" a little hard to beleive.

    Personal preference, but I've enjoyed the episodes that have given other characters a chance to shine more - and this episode kinda tried to do that (the XO Tilly sub-plot) but the main story overwhelmed it.

    So much this. Burham gets so tiresome. The way she wispers and whines her way through 90% of her dialogue, I whished she would leave Discovery for good and give others a chance to shine. Nobody is nearly as annoying as her.

    And what about making the least qualified, least experienced and most anxious person on the entire ship the new first officer? It's just getting silly now...
  • truewarpertruewarper Member Posts: 928 Arc User
    szim wrote: »
    reyan01 wrote: »
    I didn't find the main plot of this episode very interesting. It took a direction that I was happier that they'd been slightly moving away from - namely over-focus on Burham. And I have to admit, I found the way everyone accepted what Burham was saying based on her 'confession' and, basically, saying "forget my request" a little hard to beleive.

    Personal preference, but I've enjoyed the episodes that have given other characters a chance to shine more - and this episode kinda tried to do that (the XO Tilly sub-plot) but the main story overwhelmed it.

    So much this. Burham gets so tiresome. The way she wispers and whines her way through 90% of her dialogue, I whished she would leave Discovery for good and give others a chance to shine. Nobody is nearly as annoying as her.

    And what about making the least qualified, least experienced and most anxious person on the entire ship the new first officer? It's just getting silly now...

    The MB persona, what was the intent in its representation? From the time of her appearance, to how she deals with things...I realized at some point, she was broken. And I should layout that reason.

    Traumatized at the loss of her parents.

    She almost died from critical injuries, but was saved by an Essence sharing of a Sarak's Katra *and to this day, that was never extracted from her*

    Shares a life with a Vulcan family from her preteens to earlier adulthood. *Meanwhile her own bio mom watched from afar*

    She goes through the equivalent of human/Vulcan mental discipline teachings, which suppresses her own trauma, meanwhile she deals with 'Spock' mental issues while growing up.

    As she progresses to early adulthood showing potential at exceeding in her studies...she gets another 'trauma' effect, she was denied on advancing further into the Vulcan Academy Hall of Science--that privilege went to Spock *and he turned it down for Starfleet* And because... she is Human.

    Sarak later finds a Fed ship and put her there, to learn on how interact with others of her own kind...*since Vulcan was no longer a place for her*

    Spent the first 7 years of life, learning Federation directives and protocols, and get a commission of an officer rank at the end of it. *Never once she has been to Starfleet academy before that*

    She causes a war with the Klingons *due to her personal bias and trauma from her past* Cause a lot of deaths indirectly, including her mentor. And the rest you know if you watched the past seasons.

    And the big question that came to my mind...she got in, as privileged person at first, but later as the story progressed, was she an experiment by Sarak to see how a human born, taught in a Vulcan mindset can function in a proper setting?

    They never showed how she adjusted to the loss of her original family, she got traumatized again she was denied to excel further into the Hall of Science. And oh, had a fallen out with her foster brother for a time.

    What is shown here, anything of importance in her life...is simply taken away brutally...and I suspect she never heal properly back on Vulcan, never got the nourishing aspect to cope with loss. And now let lose in the universe, with a human/vulcan soul/essence mix and all the tendencies of being a smart TRIBBLE, with no mental guidance on how to apply it in a proper frame.

    She wants it done now, and doesn't care how it accomplished.

    And we or some of us...are suppose to except like it is normal?


    52611496918_3c42b8bab8.jpg
    Departing from Sol *Earth* by Carlos A Smith,on Flickr
    SPACE---The Last and Great Frontier. A 14th-year journey
    Vna res, una mens, unum cor et anima una. Cetera omnia, somnium est.
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,354 Arc User
    Michael Burnham is broken. The fact that she's a fundamentally decent person after all that is truly amazing, but there's a reason why Saru dismissed her as his first officer - she's too rash, in part because she's broken. She only just began to realize herself this last episode that she's been repeatedly traumatized, losing family after family (her parents killed - as far as she knew, anyway - her adoptive parents never knowing what to do with her, losing her Shenzhou family due to her rashness, her brother going missing, then losing her entire universe, believing she can make it because of her Discovery family, only to lose them with no assurance she'd ever see them again (there was no way to know if the ship would appear in the same millenium she was in)...). And this was apparently before Starfleet made Ship's Counselor a dedicated posting, so even if she decided to seek help, the best she's got is Hugh Culber. He's a nice guy, but I don't think psychology is his main focus.

    I know you're used to the heroes of Trek shows being guys who've got their tribble together, but she's not one of those guys. Michael Burnham is a stone mess. Only reason I can possibly ship her and Book is because he's pretty broken too, and maybe they can find a way to glue each other back together - I've seen it work IRL. Other than that, I'd suggest any man, woman, or other considering a close personal relationship with her might want to start running now.
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,001 Arc User
    I think Burnham's role were originally multiple characters which got folded into one during the development process of the show. She's Janeway-level all over the place.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ 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
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    the STO J ISN'T accurate to what's seen on screen though - cryptic's version actually has detail​​

    And it will be interesting how many 32nd Century ships are improved by Cryptic.
  • phoenixc#0738 phoenixc Member Posts: 5,459 Arc User
    The fact that so far the "future" ships seem to be little more than quick slap together models made up of simple geometric shape slices with very little actual detail work makes me wonder how long they actually plan to keep the series there.
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    The fact that so far the "future" ships seem to be little more than quick slap together models made up of simple geometric shape slices with very little actual detail work makes me wonder how long they actually plan to keep the series there.
    they have said there are no plans to return to the past.

    Discovery has never put much detail into ships beyond the Discovery, Sarcophagus, Enterprise, and D7, since none of them ever really factor in.

    Plans change. However, if Discovery's crew returns to the past, then it would be without the Discovery. There is still the Section 31 series with Empress Georgiou, but we don't know if it is set before Discovery travels to the 32nd Century, set during the 32nd Century, or involves Empress Georgiou and maybe a few others to travel to the 23rd or 24th Century. So until we know the fate of Empress Georgiou at the end of Season 3, then there is no way to know now if she won't return to the past.
Sign In or Register to comment.