|
Dr. Video Games 0081 posted:I feel like you can't jump ahead substantially in Star Wars because the setting isn't very coherent or compelling. You jump ahead 500 years and the setting might as well be anything. I wouldn’t hold my breath, the KOTOR games are set, like, 4000 years before the Star Wars films, and it’s all exactly the same. Starships, lightsabers, droids.
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 13:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Well either way, it's pointless because Star Wars isn't sci-fi or even high fantasy, even though George Lucas eventually believed it was. It's 90% about the characters, take that away and it has no real appeal. It's why I have no problem with the old characters still featuring in the new movies. They're sequels first and soft reboots second.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:46
|
|
|
Lol what kind of a messed up narrow definition of sci fi excludes Star Wars?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
Star Wars is Space Opera, Star Trek is soft sci-fi, the Expanse is hard Sci-Fi.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Star Wars is Space Opera. That’s a type of sci fi.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:54
|
|
|
Not gonna lie, I would love it if the next Star Wars was sung entirely in Italian.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
marktheando posted:That’s a type of sci fi. Yeah why not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:Not gonna lie, I would love it if the next Star Wars was sung entirely in Italian. Not quite Wars, but https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iauuuhpSfRQ
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 14:59
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Lol what kind of a messed up narrow definition of sci fi excludes Star Wars? I mean I don't get all "actually" when people call it sci-fi (usually) because genres are vague anyway, but really, it's nothing like most sci-fi aside from the presence of space ships and robots. It's explicitly set in the past in a place that has nothing to do with Earth so that it doesn't have to deal with the speculative aspect that typically defines even the shallowest sci-fi.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:Not gonna lie, I would love it if the next Star Wars was sung entirely in Italian. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNo3FOOuScQ
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
People getting restrictive about what is sci fi annoys me, especially when they hold up this often very silly show as somehow being harder sci fi than Star Wars or Doctor Who or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 15:05
|
|
|
Genre's exist for the sole purpose of giving people something to argue about. vv Alright Motherfucker, it's on! First of all, sci fi in the first place is unfairly...vv remusclaw fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Jan 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 15:09
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:Genre's exist for the sole purpose of giving people something to argue about. Bullshit!
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:I wouldn’t hold my breath, the KOTOR games are set, like, 4000 years before the Star Wars films, and it’s all exactly the same. Starships, lightsabers, droids. Is this because every race seems so devoted to military conquest and weapons development that their social and technical development stagnated millennia ago, and now everyone's just sort of swapping power? Or is it that every iteration of Star Wars, regardless of medium, presents itself so closely to the original successful formula because they want to avoid eviction from the canon by fans, and the result is an uninspiring, Star Wars-tinted smear?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:Is this because every race seems so devoted to military conquest and weapons development that their social and technical development stagnated millennia ago, and now everyone's just sort of swapping power? It turns out that given millions of years, technological development inevitably reaches a plateau.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:Is this because every race seems so devoted to military conquest and weapons development that their social and technical development stagnated millennia ago, and now everyone's just sort of swapping power? For a variety of reasons, brand recognition being one, and the limitations of graphics at the time being another, they decided to jettison the space Conan the Barbarian look of the "Tales of the Jedi" comics for a much more Star Warsy look.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:Is this because every race seems so devoted to military conquest and weapons development that their social and technical development stagnated millennia ago, and now everyone's just sort of swapping power? Why not both
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
jeeves posted:That Bruce Campbell fan wankery makes me wish Star Trek would stop looking to its own past for new material. I feel like Star Trek should be relatably about our future, and while the fan in me would love to see a post-Voyager continuation of the saga, I feel like the farther ahead in time you go the more you just get into crazy fantasy technology stuff that I don't believe the majority of writers can handle well. (When was the last time you saw anything post-24th century in Trek that wasn't just silly?) I'm probably the minority opinion, but I say just keep the 23rd/24th century setting but reboot the fucker from the ground up. Get some futurists to re-imagine the setting and its background science based on things we know now. Start with a blank slate as far as the races and how the political situations mirror today's. Kind of like what Discovery is doing but just give it license to be a hard reboot rather than doing backflips to make things awkwardly fit into the cannon as a prequel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Drink-Mix Man posted:I feel like Star Trek should be relatably about our future, and while the fan in me would love to see a post-Voyager continuation of the saga, I feel like the farther ahead in time you go the more you just get into crazy fantasy technology stuff that I don't believe the majority of writers can handle well. (When was the last time you saw anything post-24th century in Trek that wasn't just silly?) I don't understand this line of thinking, the technology is already insane and changes to fit the plot of the episode, what about it being slightly further in the future makes a difference "oh no transwarp is faster then regular warp the tension is all gone now"
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
Honestly, the biggest problem is the sheer absurd ability of holotechnology by the end of the 24th century.
MikeJF fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Jan 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
Drink-Mix Man posted:I feel like Star Trek should be relatably about our future, and while the fan in me would love to see a post-Voyager continuation of the saga, I feel like the farther ahead in time you go the more you just get into crazy fantasy technology stuff that I don't believe the majority of writers can handle well. (When was the last time you saw anything post-24th century in Trek that wasn't just silly?) To be fair the post 24th century stuff we saw was 15 years ago, and by that point Trek technology and design aesthetic had largely frozen for the previous 10 years at least. If you had a ship that looked like JJ Trek, or Discovery, and said it was 100-200 years after Voyager I think most people would buy that. The issue always is that if you want it to look futuristic, it has to look futuristic to the Current Year. As unfuturistic as TOS is to Trek fans now, I'd say that a lot of teens now would say that TNG looks just as old and dated and not "from the future" to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
Why don't they just make a Trek during the genetic engineering wars, since that's getting more relevant by the day and it would let them be as gritty as they want since it's before we all straightened our poo poo out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
I really want a Trek that's gone further along the overall timeline instead of being yet another loving prequel. Everything made after Voyager was a prequel. It's getting tiresome. Advance the timeline. There are entire quadrants of pissed off aliens ripe for storytelling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
No, more prequels, but further back. Like, gently caress holo da Vinci, let's have a Star Trek all about the real guy and how dealt with encountering the inhuman race known as "Venicians"
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Astroman posted:To be fair the post 24th century stuff we saw was 15 years ago, and by that point Trek technology and design aesthetic had largely frozen for the previous 10 years at least. If you had a ship that looked like JJ Trek, or Discovery, and said it was 100-200 years after Voyager I think most people would buy that. You're just talking about design aesthetics, though. You don't need to jump ahead in the timeline to change up the design aesthetics. Set your show in the TNG era if you want to and just go ahead and make everything look more modern and futuristic, and never acknowledge the changes. Canon isn't something that you have to make a binary decision about. You can take things that are interesting from past shows, ditch things that aren't, and update things that need updating. Pull the shared story that makes Star Trek what it is into your show and ignore anything that limits your stories or is going to seem dumb to modern audiences. Only the turbo-est of turbonerds are going to care. As much as I dislike a lot about Discovery, I think this is one thing they're doing right. They're changing things to fit a more modern aesthetic and not bothering with any kind of in-show justification for it. That's good, even if their execution is generally lovely as hell. It beats JJTrek's awful attempt to "reboot" the franchise while still tying it directly to the existing canon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
Black Mirror 4:1 sets were better trek prequel sets than Discovery by a wide margin. "Push any button they're all the same"  even the turboest of nerds couldn't make the jolly rancher panels actually meaningful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
Jeb! Repetition posted:Why don't they just make a Trek during the genetic engineering wars, since that's getting more relevant by the day and it would let them be as gritty as they want since it's before we all straightened our poo poo out. The funny part is the eugenics wars were supposed to be in the 90s
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:The funny part is the eugenics wars were supposed to be in the 90s Trek is fast becoming the Future of the Past much like Buck Rogers. A total reboot with zero ZERO continuity would be the only real solution to that. edit: lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
While the established roster of technological fixes is a definite factor, the main thing with the 21 seasons of TV is that you just got a lot of established poo poo to deal with and look at. Doctor Who, as far as I can tell, did this right, although the facile "war! everything was awful! only survivor, until we decide he isn't! rose!" business was kind of chintzy. A Whovian can correct me but they basically pared it back to the core premise and only reintroduced various aliens and monsters when they had stories to deal with them. It has also been two generations since the original TOS stuff so I do not mind if they retread some of those stories to some extent. As for Star Wars my impression was that they had in fact reached a technological plateau so things like the Death Star were remarkable for using the established technologies in new ways; Sheev could've probably gotten better results spending that time and money on an equivalent volume of star destroyers but he didn't want an extra 4000 star destroyers, he wanted a Death Star.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:The funny part is the eugenics wars were supposed to be in the 90s God, how juicy would a Star Trek-universe 90s-alternative-styled genepunk setting be? All sorts of heavy-handed environmental and social issues. "poo poo, it's the Little Khans, the most dangerous Freaker gang in the city!" "Defaults! Come out and play!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Riker looks like late 70s Barry Gibb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:Is this because every race seems so devoted to military conquest and weapons development that their social and technical development stagnated millennia ago, and now everyone's just sort of swapping power? Pretty much both. KOTOR 2 even plays with the former reason by having its main antagonist reveal that they want to destroy the Force altogether since they believe that all it does is cause endless conflict between Jedi and Sith with the galaxy caught in the middle. The only reason that's presented as bad is that it would also kill a LOT of people (in fact, the writer, Chris Avellone claimed that said antagonist's beliefs were pretty much the ones he came to once he read all of the EU stuff he got in preparation for the writing job).
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
It makes a lot of sense. There's obviously trillions of sentient life-forms just going about their business every day, but the galaxy is constantly wracked by massive planet-ending weaponry over something most people don't see, don't feel, and don't believe in. It's like having your town randomly nuked over an epic conflict between actual gods. Best be rid of the whole thing so we can have Star Peace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:Genre's exist for the sole purpose of giving people something to argue about. Actually they exist for marketing purposes and were invented by 1930s ad men
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:It makes a lot of sense. There's obviously trillions of sentient life-forms just going about their business every day, but the galaxy is constantly wracked by massive planet-ending weaponry over something most people don't see, don't feel, and don't believe in. It's like having your town randomly nuked over an epic conflict between actual gods. Best be rid of the whole thing so we can have Star Peace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
I want the Star Trek equivalent of the old Tales of the Jedi comics, where everything is both vaguely recognizable and wildly different simultaneously. Give me something set 1,000 years after DS9 where The Sisko is worshipped as a legend with wars fought in his name and the Klingon and Cardassian Empires have merged and rule the entire alpha quadrant. Give me a Federation where pure-blood humans, Vulcans, etc no longer exist and everyone has traits from various races.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:You're just talking about design aesthetics, though. You don't need to jump ahead in the timeline to change up the design aesthetics. Set your show in the TNG era if you want to and just go ahead and make everything look more modern and futuristic, and never acknowledge the changes. Canon isn't something that you have to make a binary decision about. You can take things that are interesting from past shows, ditch things that aren't, and update things that need updating. Pull the shared story that makes Star Trek what it is into your show and ignore anything that limits your stories or is going to seem dumb to modern audiences. Only the turbo-est of turbonerds are going to care. If, for example, you set your show during the TNG era but it doesn't look anything like TNG, then what's the point of saying "It's set during the TNG era" except to pander to nerds that would otherwise have little to no interest in your generic space opera? If slavish adherence to prior continuity is a problem then how is half-assing it any better? It's more honest to ignore any crap about "eras" and just start from scratch if your show is going to end up looking like a cross between a thoughtless knock off of The Expanse and a lovely nightclub anyway. Maybe this version of Star Trek "starts" in the 24th century or maybe it's in the 22nd and there are some version of the Cardassians in it, it doesn't matter anymore because you're just pulling ideas from older versions of the property and remixing them. And there's nothing wrong with that, even though I really loved the visual continuity between all the shows and movies regardless if most of it was basically accidental due to the economics of reusing props/models and costumes. I think STD's approach to that can work, but they needed to actually make the show more closely resemble what they tried to sell it as, because to my eyes it only barely resembles Star Trek let alone evoking feelings of TOS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Tighclops posted:If, for example, you set your show during the TNG era but it doesn't look anything like TNG, then what's the point of saying "It's set during the TNG era" except to pander to nerds that would otherwise have little to no interest in your generic space opera? If slavish adherence to prior continuity is a problem then how is half-assing it any better? Because it's possible to take the same approach as Discovery, but execute it better? I've got a bunch of posts in this thread already whining about how lazy Discovery's look is, but that's because it feels like the designers barely even tried to tie it back to anything else. TNG's look would be comparatively trivial to modernize since it's already glass paneled touchscreens all the way down. I don't really have any deeper answers, though. There's no real "point" in setting any story in any shared universe except... to have a shared universe, shared characters, etc. I'm not trying to make an argument for or against that, I'm just saying that if you're going to do it then there are perfectly valid approaches that fall between slavish adherence to continuity and complete reboots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:You're just talking about design aesthetics, though. You don't need to jump ahead in the timeline to change up the design aesthetics. Set your show in the TNG era if you want to and just go ahead and make everything look more modern and futuristic, and never acknowledge the changes. Canon isn't something that you have to make a binary decision about. You can take things that are interesting from past shows, ditch things that aren't, and update things that need updating. Pull the shared story that makes Star Trek what it is into your show and ignore anything that limits your stories or is going to seem dumb to modern audiences. Only the turbo-est of turbonerds are going to care. I guess I'm a turbonerd then because I care.  This is a large universe with an existing history fans and writers have spent decades chronicling. To me, it would be the same thing as doing a show set in the American Revolution era but updating the guns and uniforms to WWII or modern era because flintocks are lame or whatever. It just becomes alternate history or a reboot. I get that you don't care, but you're not convincing me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
To me, the complete lack of effort in discovery look just highlights that it's a soulless corporate cash grab. It's not even appealing to nostalgia, it's just like your standard gritty sci-fi drama with trek trappings
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2018 01:15
|
|
