Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
03-24-2011, 08:02 PM
read my sig. I just think its a bad idea on top of what was said. However, a throw back design, sleek and stylish...maybe not a can body but we are talking a style.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
03-24-2011, 08:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yreodred
When i hear Star Trek i think of:
  • Picard
  • Enterprise - D
  • Riker
  • Data
  • Romulan Neutral Zone
  • Worf
  • Dr. Crusher
  • Keeping Peace
  • LaForge

Later:
  • Sisko
  • O'Brian
  • Dax (Jadzia)
  • Odo
  • Dr. Bashir
  • NOT the Defiant (i just hate that hideous little cartoony ship)

I never liked ToS very much because in Germany, ToS had an awful goofy dubbing, so i was never really interested in it. The first 6 Movies where ok, mostly becaues of a much more serious dubbing which made them very different to the series.

But when i watched TNG i felt in love with Star Trek. It had a very mysterious athmosphere for me in the beginning and the more i watched it the more i loved it.

DS9 was different.
In the first episodes of DS9 i missed my Heroes very much and i didn't liked that show very much anyway.
Several Years later i gave DS9 a second chance and i liked it very much but it became very militaristic, which was uncharactaristic for Star Tek then and i am not certain if it was good for Star Trek.

The Movies 7-10 where ok, but too different fromt TNG for my taste, especially the introduction of the Sovereign Class that is too militaristic and retro looking for my taste.
This is the point I was making with my post.

Each of us, every single Trek fan, has a very different interpretation of what Trek means to them.

This isn't a bad thing either, except when it comes to this game.

Personally, I'm of the mindset that all forms and variety of Star Trek should be celebrated in this game, because by doing so, the game will draw the widest possible contingent of fans, and the more players and fans we have playing the game, the longer the game goes and the more money the developers have to invest back into the game.

However, that means in some cases, canon of the specific time period will suffer in order to draw in the widest possible fan base. But, isn't that a better prospect than focusing on a very narrow window of fans, and the game not generating enough revenue to keep operating?

That's the question that players should be asking themselves when they go off on major rants about T5 Connies, whether it be Pro-T5 Connie or Anti-T5 Connie.

"Is it better to ban things from the game that people love in order to offer a strict canon interpretation for STO, and alienate potential customers, or can I accept that somethings in the game are done in order to make the game appealing to all fans, and that is the price I have to pay so the game can stick around?"

Quote:
My Question is:
IF a T5 Constitution i going to be introduced in STO and full capable to stand toe to toe with a Sovereign or Galaxy, won't it look somehow strange when such a small ship has the same firepower like a ship that has 5 or 7 times the mass?
I think the answer to your question is:

We don't need a T5 Equivalent Connie that can go toe to toe with a Galaxy or Sovereign, and rather it would be better to follow the example of the T5 B'rel or some of the other ideas players have come up with, to give the Connie fans a ship they can play with and have fun with at Vice Admiral, but doesn't unhinge the game balance.


Quote:
Thank you for reading and didn't intent to offend anyone with my writings.
It was a good post.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43
03-24-2011, 09:02 PM


Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMattSchwab
This is the point I was making with my post.

Each of us, every single Trek fan, has a very different interpretation of what Trek means to them.

This isn't a bad thing either, except when it comes to this game.
I don't think that it has to be a bad thing anyway, as long as it is (good) explained in the game i don't see a reason why there shouldn't be different forms of Trek.

But isn't it a great thing to be fan of something of what so much people have their own and sometimes very personal views ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMattSchwab
Personally, I'm of the mindset that all forms and variety of Star Trek should be celebrated in this game, because by doing so, the game will draw the widest possible contingent of fans, and the more players and fans we have playing the game, the longer the game goes and the more money the developers have to invest back into the game.

However, that means in some cases, canon of the specific time period will suffer in order to draw in the widest possible fan base. But, isn't that a better prospect than focusing on a very narrow window of fans, and the game not generating enough revenue to keep operating?


That's the question that players should be asking themselves when they go off on major rants about T5 Connies, whether it be Pro-T5 Connie or Anti-T5 Connie.

"Is it better to ban things from the game that people love in order to offer a strict canon interpretation for STO, and alienate potential customers, or can I accept that somethings in the game are done in order to make the game appealing to all fans, and that is the price I have to pay so the game can stick around?"
As long as STO keeps on going, there will always be people wanting something from their favourite series and that is perfectly alright.
But i think that the devs should keep in mind that STO is mainly set in the early 25th century and that Ships like the Constitution or the NX Class should be just gimmicks for the fans and not convert the game into a 23rd century one.

As long as this case is limited to two or tree ships some interiors and some uniforms, i am allright with it.
Anyway it shouldn't be forgotten that the MAIN timeframe and content should be 25th century centered and i think some people who are Anti-T5 Connie do have the fear that the game could become some wired mix of all timeframes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMattSchwab
I think the answer to your question is:

We don't need a T5 Equivalent Connie that can go toe to toe with a Galaxy or Sovereign, and rather it would be better to follow the example of the T5 B'rel or some of the other ideas players have come up with, to give the Connie fans a ship they can play with and have fun with at Vice Admiral, but doesn't unhinge the game balance.
I think most players (including me) could live with that, if that ship doesn't get too strong for its age and size, i don't see a reason not to include it.
I hope that the Devs alter the apperarance of the T5 Constitution to be reckognizable as a modern ship that is just inspired by the original Constitution Class.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMattSchwab
It was a good post.
Thanks and Dito
I hope i haven't forgotten anything.


Thank you for reading
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
03-25-2011, 06:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cattivo80 View Post
Careful now, you're going to alienate people. I may also think the constitution class has no place in STO outside of the kitsch T1 value, but TOS is my favorite Trek series, even though I'm only 30 yrs. old.
/shrug

Cant really discuss taste..

But

I just see the stereotypes, the bad acting, the bad effects, the bad stories and feel the urge to vomit.. Think how Captain Photon is depicted in Voyager and youre not too far off.. TOS is more a bad comedy than Science Fiction imho.

Id also rather watch "Aliens" or "The Thing" than "Evil brain from outer space"

Same reasoning
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45
03-25-2011, 08:03 AM
Whereas later series gave us such serious, dramatic offerings as "Code of Honor", "Angel One", and "A Fistful of Datas"; "Move Along Home", "Little Green Men" and "Profit and Lace"; "Threshold", "Cathexis" and "Concerning Flight"... and I'm not even going to touch the first couple of seasons of Enterprise.

Being a Trek fan means taking the bad with the good, in any era.

Seriously, go watch any random first season TNG episode and try not to cringe. They have everything you say you dislike and more.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
03-25-2011, 08:30 AM
Wow, Meline you must be great at parties....

TOS is very hit or miss, but the hits are excellently written pieces of sci-fi. When the writing is superior, it is very easy to ignore inferior special effects (Amok Time is a great exemple of this, to me). Buttressing all of that are the great characters.

The show is still a product of its time, so you're going to get some stereotypes, but for the era it came from, it was very progressive.

As for the acting, that's more personal taste. Coming from Kirk, I like the scene-chewing, Sisko, on the other hand, I don't like his style. The captain is the lynch-pin, and if you don't like him or her, it's very difficult to get in the series.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
03-25-2011, 09:39 AM
Star Trek TOS, like Doctor Who, was a product of its time. They were very good shows (most of the time) filmed on a limited budget, with primitive technology. Of course, in the era of Lucasarts and CGI technology, it looks cheesy. Even updated with the Remastered episodes, the CGI had to retain a lot of the look of the original.

It's also very important to note, on the subject of stereotypes, that the show was itself created to FIGHT those kinds of stereotypes. Gene Roddenberry had to package his show as something else (a Western set in space) in order to sneak his attacks on prejudice and intolerance in under the radar. It was a very subversive show, and did a good job of hiding it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 48
03-25-2011, 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blayyde
Star Trek TOS, like Doctor Who, was a product of its time. They were very good shows (most of the time) filmed on a limited budget, with primitive technology. Of course, in the era of Lucasarts and CGI technology, it looks cheesy. Even updated with the Remastered episodes, the CGI had to retain a lot of the look of the original.

It's also very important to note, on the subject of stereotypes, that the show was itself created to FIGHT those kinds of stereotypes. Gene Roddenberry had to package his show as something else (a Western set in space) in order to sneak his attacks on prejudice and intolerance in under the radar. It was a very subversive show, and did a good job of hiding it.
Oh like the strong woman swaying captain, the nerdy scientist, the robust engineer etc?

Now, Im not too keen on DS9 myself (Babylon 5 was 1000 times better), but the Voyager, Enterprise and to some extent the TNG crew/captain was much more believable.

Im sure it was a good series, in the mid/late 60s.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49
03-25-2011, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HF_Mudd
Whereas later series gave us such serious, dramatic offerings as "Code of Honor", "Angel One", and "A Fistful of Datas"; "Move Along Home", "Little Green Men" and "Profit and Lace"; "Threshold", "Cathexis" and "Concerning Flight"... and I'm not even going to touch the first couple of seasons of Enterprise.

Being a Trek fan means taking the bad with the good, in any era.

Seriously, go watch any random first season TNG episode and try not to cringe. They have everything you say you dislike and more.
Like mentioned before, TNG was only decent, and the first few seasons absolutely blew.

I know this is unpopular, but I like Ent, Voy, and TNG best (last 3 seasons of DS9 were ok as well), in that order.. Sure they had some bad episodes, but most were good.

Every single TOS episode Ive seen have been bad - And dont get me started on the movies, please.. Spock running around on Earth in a bathrobe, with a sweatband covering his ears.. 'nuff said.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
03-25-2011, 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cattivo80 View Post
Wow, Meline you must be great at parties....

TOS is very hit or miss, but the hits are excellently written pieces of sci-fi. When the writing is superior, it is very easy to ignore inferior special effects (Amok Time is a great exemple of this, to me). Buttressing all of that are the great characters.

The show is still a product of its time, so you're going to get some stereotypes, but for the era it came from, it was very progressive.

As for the acting, that's more personal taste. Coming from Kirk, I like the scene-chewing, Sisko, on the other hand, I don't like his style. The captain is the lynch-pin, and if you don't like him or her, it's very difficult to get in the series.
Im actually quite good at parties, granted Im at the age where we dont gather every friday and saturday..
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:24 PM.