Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 221
02-26-2012, 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartzilla2007 View Post
There are so many things that article got wrong its not even funny.
Well I´m not laughing.
Apart from two or three obvious errors and a sensationalist slant this article is pretty much spot on, judging from what we´ve seen in the episodes and movies trying to hesitantly describe life outside of Starfleet.

Oh and WHOA, where the heck has this thread ended up in??
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 222
02-27-2012, 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartzilla2007 View Post
There are so many things that article got wrong its not even funny.
There are also so many things hilariously right in that article.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 223
02-27-2012, 01:37 AM
I don't mind the darker tone and war themes, but I do agree partly with the OP in that I wish that just sometimes I would be on a rescue mission that involves actually rescuing people, and not with one of my bridge officers telling me that everyone's dead, so we'd better just head back to the ship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 224
02-27-2012, 03:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs7200
Although Star Trek shows a brighter future for humanity; it has never shown a future completely devoid of war and strife. Even if you ignore the dark turns that Deep Space Nine takes, If you look up Federation history on Memory-Alpha, Next Generation itself mentions several conflicts that happen before the series starts.

The Tomed Incident of 2311 costing several thousand lives and leading to half a century of Romulan Isolation. The Federation-Cardassian war which didn't even technically end until part way into Next Gen. The Tholians destroyed a Starbase in 2353. A 3 year conflict with the Talarians in the 2350s. That's just Next Gen references to wars, not to mention the Tzenkethi somewhere the 2360s that Deep Space Nine adds to the lore or any of the conflicts The Original Series mentioned.

Yes the Federation may prefer peace, and it may look for a diplomatic solution, but they are not strangers to fighting. Depending on when some of those conflicts that had more nebulous dates, they may not even be a stranger to fighting multiple small wars or border skirmishes simultaneously. The big difference between STO (and Deep Space Nine) and Next Generation is that for once we see the conflict.

Star Trek is a brighter future, but it was shown as a future that was bought with struggle and hard work. And sometimes that struggle is a fight for survival.

The struggles that Cryptic is showing is actually more upbeat and optimistic compared to what the books did. The book line has the borg invade in 2381 and ends up killing sixty-three billion people in the Alpha/Beta Quadrants, the destruction of 40% of Star Fleet and entire Federation worlds, including Risa, being killed off.

Here is a memory-bata link to what the books did if you are interested (there will be spoilers)
http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Borg_Invasion_of_2381

Between the two I think I prefer what Cyptics doing story wise (so far).

That being said, I would not mind a more peaceful setting. I'm just saying its not as 'out of character' for the IP and lore as some people would say..
Those books are a fantastic read though, and though nothing you say is incorrect I guess a great deal depends on interpretation.

Whilst the Borg invasion clearly had catastrophic results, the way that pretty much ALL of the Alpha (and Beta?) Quadrant races were brought together to face the Borg was nothing short of brilliant. Furthermore, the aftermath makes very interesting reading. And it has branched off, with the Voyager series of novel depicting Voyager leading a task force with a mandate to explore the Delta Quadrant.

Whilst in STO you have the Federation at war with… well, everyone. I don’t want to say one form of warfare is better than another and I don’t think that there is an argument that the war(s) depicted in STO would (or could) have the same end result as the Borg invasion depicted in the Destiny series. The simple fact is that STO is depicting a long, drawn out war with no obvious conclusion (yet) whilst the Destiny book series, basically, depicted a slaughter as well as the aftermath, and further consequences of what occurred.

All in all though, I actually prefer the Destiny book series storyline – granted the events had a pretty catastrophic outcome, but I prefer the idea of Starfleet trying to rebuild, facing the associated challenges subsequent to those events, and still wanting to maintain their ideals pertaining to exploration over the idea that it’s Starfleet vs everyone else.

And I understand what people are saying with regard to the disconnection from the TV series, but disconnection isn’t the same thing as downright ignoring some of the events in the series; and the one thing that bothers me the most is that the Federation’s relationship with the Klingon Empire. Another war? After all they’d been through? Aside from the fact that it invalidates the events of STVI and several episodes of DS9, I don’t find this necessary at all - remove the Klingons as adversaries in STO and you still have plenty of enemy races for Starfleet to be at war with, especially now that the Dominion have been dragged into the storyline.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 225
02-27-2012, 03:59 AM
I like the storyline that Perpetual had set up for the game, with the Federation and Klingon Empire being closer than ever, at peace with the Romulans, and the Borg licking their wounds after suffering a massive defeat.

It would have felt much more like Star Trek, even if it would have been difficult to set up stories and conflicts in a game environment, it feels like Cryptic really took the easy way out with what they did instead. Perhaps we can see an expansion at some point, that adds a real shift in what's going on. I think that would really help shake things up and make everything a lot more interesting.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 226
02-27-2012, 05:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diotw
I don't mind the darker tone and war themes, but I do agree partly with the OP in that I wish that just sometimes I would be on a rescue mission that involves actually rescuing people, and not with one of my bridge officers telling me that everyone's dead, so we'd better just head back to the ship.
The Azura mission.
Rescuing diplomats with the help of Miral Paris.
Rescuing Miral Paris. :p
And basically the entire Devidian series.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 227
02-27-2012, 06:38 AM
Moar unicornz and glitter!

Seriously, tho. Would be nice to see blood and decapitations.

This future just feels so mamby-pamby.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 228
02-27-2012, 07:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartzilla2007 View Post
There are so many things that article got wrong its not even funny.
You should list those things so we can have an awesome discussion about it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 229
02-27-2012, 08:34 AM
Exact opposite here i hate the diplomacy missions much prefer to shot to kill personally the current FE first 2 missions were so boring its untrue more action less chat for me but see nothing wrong with saving people at the end of missions as long as we can shot the bad guys!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 230
02-27-2012, 09:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgotten-Nemesis View Post
You should list those things so we can have an awesome discussion about it.
Can we please not? Or at least, not in this thread?
Reply

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 06:48 PM.