Star Trek Online

Star Trek Online (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/index.php)
-   Star Trek Online General Discussion (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/forumdisplay.php?f=128)
-   -   Into Darkness vs. STO (mega spoilers) (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=685181)

stoleviathan99 05-18-2013 10:36 PM

Into Darkness vs. STO (mega spoilers)
 
It's interesting to me how Star Trek (2009) was cited as a model for STO by many fans, players, and reviewers. The action focus. The design sensibilities. Even the lens flares.

What's interesting to me was how Into Darkness managed to be non-stop action while being the anti-STO in certain respects... and simultaneously having designs that reflected STO.

The similarities can be boiled down to three points.

1. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. The aliens were often very alien. From Kirk's one night stands to Ruk serving on the bridge of the 1701. It practically seemed that the briefer a character's appearance, the more inclined the filmmakers were to make the character look inhuman or alien. Even the Klingons got their "character slider" restrictions tossed. In turn, Starfleet had so many uniforms as to render the idea of a uniform moot. The TOS short skirt mods were back but in short and long sleeved variants. Kirk wore probably 3-4 uniforms in the film. The jackets with transparent windows to show division color undershirts seemed especially STO-like.

2. Action! Rifles are everywhere!

3. Ship combat is often stationary and on a plane. Small ships turn. Big ships point and fire.

The differences can be boiled down in several points:

1. Clunky ships = bad guys. Menacing ships? Bad guys.

2. Never trust an admiral. An old Trek trope, reinforced here. Admirals are not your friends and not the heroes.

3. Orders are a suggestion.

4. You can always team with the bad guy.

5. The Prime Directive matters.

6. The Federation doesn't want to fight the Klingons. Section 31? Yes. Starfleet? No.

7. Starfleet officers always try to reason with their enemies.

7. Phasers set to stun. In an action packed movie with lots of fighting and a massive bodycount, the heroes walked out of this film responsible for none of the deaths. Hated how they killed Nero last time? They went the opposite route this time. There is precisely one death in the entire film attributable to a Starfleet officer and that's an indirect death, when Scotty opens the airlock and the Section 31 grunt proves too stupid to recognize a countdown.

The officers in this film saved their enemies every time they could. They rescued the augments. They rescued Khan. They didn't kill Marcus and locked phasers on stun. They didn't kill the Klingons (Khan did).

Try finding a mission in STO with a player-driven bodycount as low as Into Darkness.

Heck, try find as many lines about how Starfleet isn't supposed to be military, how exploration is the prime focus. How often do you see a pacifist willing to resign over moral objections?

I was even dismissive of some of this criticism three years ago but after watching Into Darkness, I'm left feeling that the Starfleet of STO isn't run by Undine and isn't making necessary sacrifices but is Section 31.

Section 31 in the film wears one of the STO uniforms. They use rifles. They want cannons on their cruisers and use dark hulls on ships with kibble-heavy designs. They want war with the Klingons. They want better gear and are involved with weapons crafting and special weapons consoles (long range drone torpedoes). The STO similarities were so pronounced that I'd practically expect a Featured Episode series in STO where it turns out Quinn, Yanishev, and T'nae are ALL Section 31, along with others.

cynder2012 05-18-2013 10:45 PM

hehehe, yeah i saw the same stuff.....particularly the one night stand :P...and the fact that the actresses for were probably sisters, as they had the same last name :P......now my question was with the dreadnought class....cannons and were those Missiles? i swear i saw alot of smoke coming from the backs of those.

Loved the Section 31 references

tails rule hahaah...hmm memory alpha (for the summary) says the girls in the one night stand were caitians....did they actually look like caitians? hehehh

I found the part with Bones talking about the emergency c-section for the Gorn pretty funny

kaevwrynn 05-18-2013 10:53 PM

If it bums you out that much, you can always pretend your weapons are set to 'heavy stun' like one of your officers says in the Drozana time travel missions. There was no real change, but somehow, shooting the Starfleet officers repeatedly just like, say, the Devidians, just stunned them as opposed to icing them like everyone else. 'course, that doesn't get rid of the vaporizations, but... some people aren't as hardy as others, ya know? Just a bad reaction to 'heavy stun' setting. XD

So you can say you're not really killing anyone... you're just stunning them badly so they can be put in Starfleet prisons.

wildweasal 05-18-2013 10:56 PM

stop the silliness please sto was based on the star trek in the PRIME time line not that JJ crap....and for the 15 0000 th time thenjg done in a movie cannot or should not be done in GAME..going by that montra the JHAS would not be as uber as it is in this game and the galaxy class would melt faces.....dissmissed

skyranger1414 05-18-2013 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 (Post 10038081)

Section 31 in the film wears one of the STO uniforms. They use rifles. They want cannons on their cruisers and use dark hulls on ships with kibble-heavy designs. They want war with the Klingons. They want better gear and are involved with weapons crafting and special weapons consoles (long range drone torpedoes). The STO similarities were so pronounced that I'd practically expect a Featured Episode series in STO where it turns out Quinn, Yanishev, and T'nae are ALL Section 31, along with others.

So... JJ turned the unsung heroes of the Federation into mustache twirling villains? Surprised I am not.

rickeyredshirt 05-18-2013 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 (Post 10038081)
In turn, Starfleet had so many uniforms as to render the idea of a uniform moot. The TOS short skirt mods were back but in short and long sleeved variants. Kirk wore probably 3-4 uniforms in the film. The jackets with transparent windows to show division color undershirts seemed especially STO-like.

I agree with all of your points except this one. Each uniform displayed in Into Darkness had a specific purpose or utility but there is only 1 standard duty uniform.

mirrorchaos 05-18-2013 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 (Post 10038081)
It's interesting to me how Star Trek (2009) was cited as a model for STO by many fans, players, and reviewers. The action focus. The design sensibilities. Even the lens flares.

What's interesting to me was how Into Darkness managed to be non-stop action while being the anti-STO in certain respects... and simultaneously having designs that reflected STO.

The similarities can be boiled down to three points.

1. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. The aliens were often very alien. From Kirk's one night stands to Ruk serving on the bridge of the 1701. It practically seemed that the briefer a character's appearance, the more inclined the filmmakers were to make the character look inhuman or alien. Even the Klingons got their "character slider" restrictions tossed. In turn, Starfleet had so many uniforms as to render the idea of a uniform moot. The TOS short skirt mods were back but in short and long sleeved variants. Kirk wore probably 3-4 uniforms in the film. The jackets with transparent windows to show division color undershirts seemed especially STO-like.

2. Action! Rifles are everywhere!

3. Ship combat is often stationary and on a plane. Small ships turn. Big ships point and fire.

The differences can be boiled down in several points:

1. Clunky ships = bad guys. Menacing ships? Bad guys.

2. Never trust an admiral. An old Trek trope, reinforced here. Admirals are not your friends and not the heroes.

3. Orders are a suggestion.

4. You can always team with the bad guy.

5. The Prime Directive matters.

6. The Federation doesn't want to fight the Klingons. Section 31? Yes. Starfleet? No.

7. Starfleet officers always try to reason with their enemies.

7. Phasers set to stun. In an action packed movie with lots of fighting and a massive bodycount, the heroes walked out of this film responsible for none of the deaths. Hated how they killed Nero last time? They went the opposite route this time. There is precisely one death in the entire film attributable to a Starfleet officer and that's an indirect death, when Scotty opens the airlock and the Section 31 grunt proves too stupid to recognize a countdown.

The officers in this film saved their enemies every time they could. They rescued the augments. They rescued Khan. They didn't kill Marcus and locked phasers on stun. They didn't kill the Klingons (Khan did).

Try finding a mission in STO with a player-driven bodycount as low as Into Darkness.

Heck, try find as many lines about how Starfleet isn't supposed to be military, how exploration is the prime focus. How often do you see a pacifist willing to resign over moral objections?

I was even dismissive of some of this criticism three years ago but after watching Into Darkness, I'm left feeling that the Starfleet of STO isn't run by Undine and isn't making necessary sacrifices but is Section 31.

Section 31 in the film wears one of the STO uniforms. They use rifles. They want cannons on their cruisers and use dark hulls on ships with kibble-heavy designs. They want war with the Klingons. They want better gear and are involved with weapons crafting and special weapons consoles (long range drone torpedoes). The STO similarities were so pronounced that I'd practically expect a Featured Episode series in STO where it turns out Quinn, Yanishev, and T'nae are ALL Section 31, along with others.

all this tells me is that jjcrapverse has a twisted morals universe and unpredictable behavior, which by itself is nothing special as just one person, but as a starfleet officer representing starfleet and the people of the federation and their needs it just shows how bad abramscrapverse is if its all shoot first ask questions later, then suddenly save everyone even your enemy in a naive way to hold hands and play friends... no, it's likely to swing the other way doubtless in the next film.

walshicus 05-18-2013 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyranger1414 (Post 10038561)
So... JJ turned the unsung heroes of the Federation into mustache twirling villains? Surprised I am not.

I think if you're reading Section 31 as "unsung heroes" then you really didn't pay attention to their portrayal in DS9 or Enterprise.


EDIT: I love the nerd-rage some of you show toward the newer Trek movies. And even better that you're completely ignoring what the OP wrote in order to get a snide remark in, aimed at? Nobody in particular?

daan2006 05-18-2013 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyranger1414 (Post 10038561)
So... JJ turned the unsung heroes of the Federation into mustache twirling villains? Surprised I am not.

don't forget they used odo to try and kill off all changeling sorry but they where not good guys in the show to

this why I didn't expected to play Tal Shiar because they where bad guys to a point in the show but I did expect to play for the romulan military

thratch1 05-18-2013 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by walshicus (Post 10038671)
EDIT: I love the nerd-rage some of you show toward the newer Trek movies. And even better that you're completely ignoring what the OP wrote in order to get a snide remark in, aimed at? Nobody in particular?

Seriously! They're way better movies than any TNG film.

Don't go into the movies looking for the slower pacing and action-less scenes of the TV show. TV and movies are completely different mediums in regards to pacing. The last time someone tried to make a Trek movie like the TV show, we got Insurrection -- I'd rather see an actual film, thanks.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:43 AM.