Page 8 of 19  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Thu Apr 11, '13, 2:46 am 
That is a great trailer. I love that they get Shatner to play along with that; definitely made it hilarious. I hope the game is as good. So far, it looks to be one of the best Star Trek video games.

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, '13, 10:48 pm 
Found some more info on this "Star Trek" video game: ... 08860.html

I'm glad Shatner got in on this thing too. He will truly help capture the eye of many Trekkies! :yes:

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Tue Apr 30, '13, 7:53 pm 
I am rather disappointed that only a few achievements in Star Trek are named for Original Series episodes/classic lines. (On the other hand, "Arena: Get hit in melee as Kirk" was a given, considering the villains of the game are the Gorn.)

Anyway... the first expansion for Star Trek Online, Legacy of Romulus, is coming out soon, and it introduces the Romulans as a playable storyline, just like the core game had Starfleet and the Klingon Empire as playable. (The game takes place in 2409, which is after the Hobus Supernova destroyed Romulus and Remus according to Star Trek '09, so... yeah.)

(Forget everything I just said here about speculating who the villain of Into Darkness is. I just had it spoiled. My reaction was "...what." at first, but given the other spoilers I've seen, I think I'll still enjoy Into Darkness, just not as much as '09.)

So, some pictures of the ship classes from '09 in all their glory for your viewing pleasure:

Armstrong-class dreadnaught. This is the equivalent of the sadly questionably-canon Federation-class dreadnaught from TOS.

The alternate universe USS Enterprise, a Constitution-class heavy cruiser (just like in the prime universe.)

Mayflower-class frigate. Roughly equivalent to the Miranda-class light cruiser from the movie/TNG era, except it came into service between 2233'-2258', instead of around 2285. (the apostrophes in front of the years are not a typo.)

Newton-class strike cruiser. I have no idea what the hell this would be equivalent to from TOS.

Last edited by Snorb on Tue Apr 30, '13, 7:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Mon May 13, '13, 10:15 pm 
Right now, Star Trek: Generations is on Syfy, and watching it makes me ask myself several questions I don't really want to answer. These are the kind of questions you should not be asking yourself when watching a sci-fi movie:

*Why didn't the Enterprise just remodulate their shield frequency once Lursa and B'Etor started firing through it?
*Why didn't the Enterprise put up more of a fight beyond four phaser shots and one photon torpedo?
*Why didn't the Enterprise start dodging once Lursa and B'Etor opened fire on them?
*Why does it only take three disruptor blasts from a crappy eighty-year-old Bird of Prey to take out the top-of-the-line, less than ten-year-old Galaxy-class Enterprise? (Besides blowing up the Galaxy-class to make room for the Sovereign-class Enterprise, of course!)
*Why were the primary stabilizers so easy to knock out on the Enterprise's saucer section? (So we can get that nice shot of Veridian III rapidly filling the viewscreen and a cut to Data saying "Ohhhhh, #&%*!" that Syfy insists on muting, of course!)
*If Picard had the chance to go back in time to any moment with Kirk, why did they both choose to go back to Veridian III and fight Soran? Why didn't Picard just go back in time a day or so and kill Soran while he was on the toilet?
*When Soran has Picard at disruptor-point and yells at him to get away from the solar probe's launcher, why does Picard do it? The probe's right between them, and Picard can be sure Soran won't take a risk trying to shoot at him if he's that close to the probe.

...Star Trek: Nemesis is gonna be on in about 45 minutes. Expect me to go complain about that movie here, too. >=(

Last edited by Snorb on Mon May 13, '13, 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Tue May 14, '13, 12:59 am 
...So. Star Trek: Nemesis and its many many questions I don't want to ask. Why did this movie suck so much?

*Why did Picard, Data, and Worf take a 24th-century ATV down to Kolarus III instead of an armored, flying shuttlecraft? (Because Patrick Stewart likes off-roadin', of course!)
*If a Sovereign class starship has 36 decks, how did Worf, Riker, and the security team get to Deck 29 first if they started at Deck 1 (the bridge) and the Reman boarding team started at Deck 33 (where the shields were down)?
*Why does the Enterprise have a random murder shaft on Deck 29 for Riker to hurl Vkruk to his death down?
*Why doesn't Shinzon just move the Scimitar out of the way at full impulse reverse instead of letting the Enterprise ram him?
*Why did Data have to space jump through a hull breach to get to the Scimitar? Yes, Geordi said the transporters were down, but the cargo transporters are a separate system! Same with the shuttle transporters!
*Why is it, when Picard has Shinzon staring down the wrong end of a phaser rifle, Picard decides to not impulsively shoot Shinzon dead where he stands and end this turkey early? Instead, he just stands there glaring at Shinzon long enough to let reinforcements show up.
*When Picard finally breaks his phaser rifle across one of the Reman's faces, why doesn't he just pick up one of their disruptor pistols and blow a hole through Shinzon's chest? With all the Remans Picard killed on his way to the bridge, it's not like there's any shortage of resupply (I counted at least eight.)
*Why doesn't Shinzon grab one of the dead Remans' disruptor pistols and open fire on Picard? (So he can get into a fight with Picard that ends with Picard running a big metal pole through Shinzon's guts, of course!)
*Why didn't Geordi just transport an IED aboard the Scimitar instead of Picard?
*Why am I insisting on watching this even worse Star Trek movie? Star Trek VI was so much better than this dreck.
*So, is B4 Data now? (The IDW comics and Star Trek Online seem to suggest this.)

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Tue May 14, '13, 12:23 pm 
Since I very much enjoyed Generations and kinda liked Nemesis, I expected to read your last two posts and come in guns blazing, rebuking everything you said but you know what? Besides maybe 1-2 of those, these are all pretty valid and sensible questions you ask there.

And they all have the same answer: Terrible story-writing, welcome to Hollywood.

I feel the same way about the new Star Trek reboot and I absolutely 0% interested in the movie that's about to come out. The first one was filled with so much idiocy, it made me rage.

I'll go back to watching my TNG and DS9 DVDs. *Hands Snorb a cup of raktajino.*

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Tue May 14, '13, 12:33 pm 
Mmmmm raktajino

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Tue May 14, '13, 11:49 pm 
Must say as a die-hard Trekkie fan, some of your posts above have me interested but alas I just don't have time right now to watch those shows again and refresh my memory enough to comment on them here. Except for saying one thing and that is, imho the "idiocy" of some of the things in "Star Trek" (and possibly it's successors) is one thing that made the show(s) successful to some degree. Always, but always darn well entertaining and shows that almost always managed to capture the interest of most fans, thus one reason why there are so many trekkies out there...again, imho!! :)

And, for the record I just knew that I was not going to like this newest version of "Star Trek" with a different cast as Shatner, Nimoy, Nichols, Koenig (sp?), etc., will always be the true characters to me. However, I think the new cast did a fairly good job and I so clearly understand the need to keep the show going in some form since so many of the older generation of actors have passed away, retired, etc.

That said, I'm still gonna try and take a look at some of these things mentioned when I have the time to further comment. If nothing else, "Star Trek" can still keep you watching in some version or form after so many, many years. Applause to the show for that too. :clap:

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Wed May 15, '13, 5:28 am 
Star Trek: Nemesis should have been named Star Trek: How Many Plot Holes Can We Fit in One Movie?. The ATV sequence was the high point of that movie, IMO. I find it sad that the Next Generation cast ended with such a poorly written flick.

Generations is one I don't recall very well. It definitely had some plot holes, but I think Nemesis was worse overall. Both movies left me wondering if the writers had ever watched any of TNG, though.

 Post subject: Re: Star Trek
PostPosted: Wed May 15, '13, 12:41 pm 
Thoul: The director for Nemesis outright stated during production that he hated Star Trek and has never seen it. He kept insisting that LaForge was an alien (instead of a human with cybernetic eyes) and kept calling LeVar Burton "Laverne." Small wonder that the director's career has been reduced to film editing. (A WORTHY PUNISHMENT) There's a clip somewhere on YouTube of Burton and Marina Sirtis being asked how they liked Nemesis, and Burton said "Because Nemesis sucked." Marina added "Not as much as Insurrection."

And you're wrong, the high point of Nemesis is the Enterprise full-impulse ramming the Scimitar. =p

 Page 8 of 19  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 19  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Display posts from previous:
Sort by  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to: