Why do people keep saying Voyager weakened the Borg?

Those ships WERE intended from day one TO be lesser than cubes. Not so with the cubes in VOY. When you concoct the "message" where it didn't exist, that falls purely into the realm of fanwank.

I'm really getting tired of having to repeat myself because you keep rolling back the discussion as if it never happened and repeating your old arguments.

VOY cubes were based on FC cubes which were depicted to be as devastating as QW and BOBW cubes (enough to punch through Starfleet's entire line of defense and assimilate Earth). Saying otherwise is pure fanwank, NOT an intended or implied story element that I just happened to miss because I'm a hater.

"Assimilation Cubes" don't exist canonically.

 

...do you REALLY not see a difference between those? Seriously? "X could be better" means you hate something? I would follow that up with an ironic statement but I know it'd be taken at face value.

 

All you have to back this up is...what exactly? The Descent ship was shown to have all the same power as a Cube, not weaker at all. How did you come to the conclusion it was weaker?

The Probe had the same adaptive power as the Cube, so how are you saying it was weaker?

Tell me how you came to the conclusion that both were intended to be weaker than an Assimilation Cube, when NOTHING in the shows explicitly say so other than that they got destroyed.

Tell me how you came to this conclusion, and why the same cannot be said about the Tactical Cube being weaker than an Assimilation Cube.

The Cube from FC was already weaker and smaller than the one from Q Who?/BOBW, so that's covered.

 

I'm saying that unless you really DO have any ideas on how it really could be better, you shouldn't bother saying anything like that and just admit you just don't like the work in question.

 

Thank you, Gary 7.
Much appreciated.

 

"You have to know how to create something better to criticize a thing" is a frankly ludicrous concept and one I refuse to even consider to take seriously. And there IS a frigging middle ground inbetween "I HATE THIS" and "it's the best thing ever"; it's called "I like it but it has some problems". Whether you like it or not, that IS the case.

 

It's not a choice between "I like it but it has some problems" and "I HATE THIS", it's a choice between "This is garbage and could easily be better" and "I HATE THIS". Liking it doesn't even enter the equation. This is when it's a purely negative critique.

 

I agree with this.
Making Hugh a docile Borg for a "race"of people hell bent on assimilating mankind made the Borg weak because they represented the drones as punks. One drone alone is supposed to be able to assimilate an entire ship. He didn't and that represents a large tactical flaw. I feel it showed the Borg as having more bark than bite.

 

I like how you ignored my point asking you to prove that "Scorpion" is viewed badly by the hatedome, despite the fact that it was and is one of the most (if not THE most) beloved VOY episodes. Not that I'm surprised, mind you.

No. You can't "disagree" with that article, sorry. The article goes out of its way to acknowledge the difference between and informed and uninformed opinion, thus covering its bases. This is not a matter of opinion or interpretation, you are incorrect.

What you are saying is that if someone cannot come up with alternative storylines to fill in for the ones they don't like, they do not have the right to say that it could have been better. And that being the case, they should just 'fess up to "hating" it; to "being a hater". This is bollocks. First off, as RyuRoots pointed out, there is a HUGE LINE between thinking it was great with almost no major flaws, and thinking it was AWFUL. I know you hate the concept of middle ground for some reason, but you cannot ignore the fact that the vast majority of situations in life involve a LOT of middle ground; certainly a discussion about the quality of a show exists almost entirely in the middle ground. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, you are trying to say that if someone cannot come up with a better story, than for them to criticize the story that's there makes them a hater. In your world, someone cannot simply dislike a story or be disappointed by it. They either can come up with something better themselves, or they are an irrational hater (and "always will be", no less!) of the work in question.

And in asserting that, you are wrong. Period.

That's how this always goes. I've dealt with this phenomenon many times.

I actually thought of (and almost wrote up) a rebuttal to the whole "why do you need to be told a tactical cube is weaker than a normal cube, but not a probe ship?!" nonsense, but... eh, why bother, it will just be ignored or twisted.

 

Actually,liking it DOES come into the equation. Most people who say "[X episode or x concept] could've been better" explicitly have told you they don't hate it, not that I expect you to acknowledge it.

 

Based on how the debate has gone on in this thread... I think this thread has weakened the Borg more than Voyager.


The main problem is one of ambiguity. It exists quite a bit in Star Trek and essentially we have plenty of it regarding the Borg. So, to try making it all "fit together" between the various series, we have to make some assumptions and theories. But... there's a limit. And there is definitely no black-and-white. Usually there's plenty of gray. Yet every argument needs to have clear logic and fit within the framework. I've seen plenty of things said which are very loosely tied to anything we've seen in Star Trek...

On TBBS, there are members who will offer up their own theories and then stand by them through thick and thin, despite compelling arguments against. The sure sign of that is when someone ignores a very clear point made by one person, and instead focuses on what remains as ambiguous, in hopes of "scoring" a win. Or, falling back to a previous point in an argument that had already been discussed enough. It all turns into a game. A fruitless one at that.


The Borg was a boring villain.
The Borg have been weakened by VOY.
The Borg are...[insert claim].

These are very generalized statements. And unfortunately, arguments surrounding them have gone in circles in this thread. I really thought it was going to be one that would become an interesting reference about the Borg in Star Trek. Instead, it just goes on and on and on... not really accomplishing anything except that the realization that the debate has been going nowhere, thanks to original poster #2.

And so I will now step out. Good day.

 

I didn't ignore it, I told you that whenever anyone mentions Voyager and the Borg in the same sentence it's always "Voyager ruined the Borg". No one ever mentions Scorpion as a "good Borg story" when discussing Voyager and the Borg, no one ever remarks that it was sensible to introduce other aliens as rivals to the Borg. All they ever say is "Voyager ruined the Borg" and that's it.

If Scorpion WAS that well-liked, it would withstand these critique and folks would say "Scorpion was good, but the other stories weren't."

So it supports everyone then? That sometimes a loudmouth critique really is just a loudmouth critique and there's no weight to their words?

If they have NOTHING nice to say about it, then that's what they are. This isn't "I think this could've been better, but it's not horrible", it's "This was complete and utter garbage from start to finish and might've somehow been better in some form."

If they give a utterly negative critique, offer NOTHING save "might have been better, somehow." and this is repeated in most reviews of said shows multiple stories, I'd say it's clearly NOT a case of "It could have been better".

Zar can't be bothered, you go ahead.

 

Let's compare what we were told about these ships.

The Descent ship fired, I think, a total of two torpedoes. I have no idea where you got the idea that it was "shown to have all the same power as a Cube". In fact, it was suspected by Picard of not being Borg at all, rather an assimilated alien ship.

The Dark Frontier ship was clearly presented as weak, with Chakotay commenting "this was just a probe, we might not be so lucky next time."

Finally, the tactical ship was introduced by Seven as being heavily armed and having advanced sensors. Her tone and facial expression implies that the crew is insane to even consider going up against it. The Doctor fearfully complains, "Can't we find another Borg ship? Something less imposing?"

 

Back to the original question I believe the borg were way overused on Voyager. That being said the "beginning of the end" for the borg as "First Contact". Borg queen!? Really!? They were scarier when you didn't know what was driving them, imo.

 

If you wish, I will set my signature to "but it's not horrible."

 

You won't find that in the Voyager forum, folks who hate the show will always use the Borg as an excuse to stir up another hate-thread and the defenders will shoot right back. There's too much over-the-top hatred for the show for there to be a calm discussion about things like the Borg here because it'll always end up as ammo in another hate-thread.

 

And these torpedoes were no weaker than the cutting beams used by the Cube. They were extremely powerful torpedoes.

It was huge, fast, had powerful weaponry and none of the ENT-D's weapons could scratch the thing. That description matches an Assimilation Cube pretty well.

So, if that line was not spoonfed to us, we wouldn't have known it was weaker?

Heavily armed and having advanced sensors in relation to what, exactly? Compared to VOY, or compared to an Assimilation Cube?

She thought their plans in "Scorpion" were insane too, and she was wrong about their ability then as well. It's just a character trait of hers to underestimate the VOY crew.

So he's a scaredy-cat?

 

No, you "replied" with a bunch of nonsense. None of what you are saying about "no one ever says X" and "people always say Y" is true. Furthermore, your personal anecdotal experiences do not count as "proof", in the context of backing up a claim that "Scorpion" is not well-loved, when it, in fact, is well-loved.

And this question has been asked numerous times, but we've rarely gotten a good answer. Who, exactly, are "they"?

IT WAS. Want "proof"?
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Scorpion_(episode)#Reception

People DO say that. I've said it myself countless times.

As I said, it touches on the difference between an informed opinion and an uninformed one. The article isn't ABOUT those who really ARE just irrational haters; of course they exist, no one is claiming otherwise. But you are labeling EVERYONE who didn't LOVE the show as such.

What is underlined is EXACTLY what it is, and has been for quite a long time.

This is why these blow-ups keep happening. For reasons known only to you, you like to pretend that almost all criticism of VOY falls into "I HATED IT IT WAS AWFUL" territory. I've lost track of how many times I myself have told you that I don't HATE the show, or think it's horrible, but just felt it had a lot of wasted potential; it was still a good show. That's ALL that I - and many on this BBS who have gone in circles with you over the years - have EVER SAID IN THE FIRST PLACE. Yet every time this happens, you act as if you are responding to frothing anti-VOY hatred, when there hasn't BEEN any frothing anti-VOY hatred (and because you like to interpret things literally: no, I do not mean "NONE EVER LITERALLY NOT A SINGLE PERSON EVER SAYS THEY COMPLETELY HATE VOYAGER." I'm sure there are people out there who just hate everything about it, as with ANY show, and some of them might even post here every now and then. But you treat it as if it is the majority opinion among those who don't LOVE the show, when it is clearly not).

You also, as zar pointed out, roll things back in time every time this stuff comes up. You and I have had DIRECT conversations in previous threads about these very subjects, and I have laid out my opinions on various aspects of the show, and the show as a whole, VERY VERY plainly multiple times in those threads. Yet here you are again, asserting that all you ever hear from "us" is VOYAGER RUINED THE BORG HATE HATE HATE!

And again, as I said above: who are "they"??

zar has since done so, and pretty well at that, so never mind.

Just one little thing I will touch on regarding that subject. "Probe ship" implicitly implies a weak ship because IT'S A PROBE. Common sense (in Trek and the real world) makes "it's much weaker than a cube" the default position.

"Tactical Cube" implies a cube (thus, something on the same general level as the cube from BoBW, even if it's not exactly the same). And "tactical", of course, refers to combat ability, certainly in real life, but even more so in Trek, where the term "tactical" subs in for "specialist in offensive/defensive systems" quite often (and can refer to an individual or a ship). The default assumption in that case is a very POWERFUL ship; for it to be far less powerful than a Borg ship seen previously is backwards. And even if it's smaller (it may or may not be, I lost track of the debate on that point a while ago), so what? The Sovereign is smaller than the Galaxy, yet it's tactically superior.

I agree. FC is one of my favorites of the movies, but I like it in spite of the Queen, because everything else about it is just so damned good that I can overlook the big, glaring flaw. But that said, I think she was a bad idea (in particular, as not only an "individual" villain, but a rather emotional, obtuse, mustache-twirling VILLAIN), and would have preferred the movie to not have her.

The one thing that Saves the Queen is the explanation for her existence offered up by the Destiny novel trilogy (as part of the Borg origin story revealed in that trilogy). It actually makes it kinda make SENSE.

I also agree that one of VOY's biggest problems with the Borg was simple overuse. They shouldn't have showed up that many times; the Borg do work better when they are not around so much (but that doesn't excuse all of the lazy writing that went into several of those appearances, IMO).

 

THANK YOU!!!

They could've easily spent that time showing us things we didn't know about the borg:

1. Origin (the
   Spoiler: origin

   Saelar
   origin, from the trilogy Destiny, was particularly satisfying)
2. An assimilation of a species that involved ripping up whole cities off the planet, like we've been told in TNG, and that only required 1 cube, instead of the 2 we saw in Dark Frontier (a silly portrayal of assimilation, by the way. Borg compassion? 2 cubes to assimilate a single colony? Give me a break).
3. An explanation as to why the Borg don't just swarm through the Federation.
4. An explanation as to why that original Borg cube (TNG: The Neutral Zone) only assimilated those Romulan and Federation outposts and then turned around, instead of heading to the respective home worlds and continuing the onslaught.
5. Explain the Borg Queen's existence

These things build on the character of the Borg. Four or five episodes of potential great Borg stories that don't diminish their power. Anyway, I'm bowing out of this debate. It's run it's course.

 

1) No one would really care about that. It wouldn't add to the show.

2) How exactly would this be pulled off? By having VOY run into a world being attacked by the Borg and just standing there watching them kill off a people and then run away like a bunch of spineless cowards?

3) They tried that with "Scorpion", the reaction to that speaks for itself as to why they didn't try other stuff like that.

4) They were unimpressed with what they found, easily rationalized.

5) To try and give them a noted individual, like Dukat for the Cardassians.