I will partially agree with you. I can understand your point from a "Star Trek" / storyline reasoning. My point is more in the context of the viewer.
From the viewer's perspective, Voyager looks very very bland and cheap. Minimalist it may be but i dont remember data or geordi's consoles ever exploding in their faces..(God .. can you imagine the trauma poor wesley might have suffered if it happend to him?)
Tuvoks station and Harry's station are practically identical just on opposite ends of the bridge. The bridge also looks so... cramped.
And as soon as the inertial dampeners fail (which usually happend as soon as the warp drive stopped responding) poor tommy ends up ROLLING in any which direction because some slobbering idiot forgot to bolt his chair to the floor! He's the pilot!!! AUUURGH!!
Your comment about the comparison to yesterdays enterprise sort of proves my point. It was YESTERDAYS enterprise. As advanced as voyager is supposed to be with its living circuitry and whatnot, it still looks like it was built at the Sanford and Son shipyards... YESTERDAY
Guy Gardener wrote:
So many new cadets in the recent week.
They're probably different people.
Picard's Enterprise was built in a time of peace.
Compare it to the Enterprise from Yesterdays Enterprise built after 15 years at war with the Klingons.
Same outer dimensions. More fire-power, 9 thousand soldiers.
Voyager was Built during a time of war.
The Brg were always coming and every one knew the Cardassians were on the verge of doing something stupid.
When did they start building the intrepid class? When did they lay the keel for Voyager? How different would the same ship be if it was built during a time of peace and a time of war?