Are the Voyager novels not as popular?

[ronny]

I prefer the ongoing 24th century plot line because it's outpaced the shows and I don't know where it's going. With the TOS books I know more or less where I'm going to end up. We might get a good adventure with a TOS book but I'm not going to be surprised on the level of something like Andoria leaving the Federation or much of what happened in the Destiny books.

[Patrick O'Brien]

I also prefer the ongoing 24th century plot line, due to the interconnectedness. It has caused me to become an avid Trek lit reader as apposed to casual. The stand alone novels are good, but I don't get the same sense of anticipation from them as I do 24th Century lit. I love the character/plotline development we are getting from the TNG, DS9, and Voyager books.

[BillJ]

Ktrek wrote:

---

TOS may sell better but that doesn't mean that the TOS books are very good.

The 24th century books publish just as many poor books as the 23rd century books.

[Christopher]

Well, as I've said many times before, one of the strengths of the Pocket Trek line is that it doesn't do just one type of story, but encompasses a variety of tastes. Some people like interconnected stories while some prefer standalone stories, and Pocket offers both.

[Ktrek]

Christopher wrote:

---

Well, as I've said many times before, one of the strengths of the Pocket Trek line is that it doesn't do just one type of story, but encompasses a variety of tastes. Some people like interconnected stories while some prefer standalone stories, and Pocket offers both.

But nobody likes spending $8.00 on sub-par stories. Pocket releases a lot of books that never would be released by other publishers if they didn't have the name "Star Trek" attached to them. The line's consistency has also declined greatly since Marco left. His love of and care for Star Trek was obvious in the quality of stories he let come out. This month's TOS novel "Devils Bargain" was one I had high hopes for because we have a new author in the Trek line, and one who is a friend of Greg Cox, but sadly it's one of the worst Trek books written since the 1990s. I kind of wish Simon and Schuster would lose the Trek line as it may be time for CBS to look to another publisher for the series. It's not just a series that needs a "relaunch" but the whole franchise in my opinion.

Kevin

[Thrawn]

The only 24th century novel published in 2012 that I didn't like was Fallen Gods, and that was one of eight. I think that's pretty similar to the success/failure rate Marco had, actually.

I'd have agreed with you up until last year, but I thought last year kicked ass.

I don't read TOS so I don't have much to say about that part of the line, though.

[King Daniel]

While my fondest Trek novel memories are from TOS, my enthusiam for new generic TOS (for lack of a better term) books is very low. The planet-of-the-week-all-toys-back-in-box formula been done to death, pretty much.

That said, I can't disagree more with Ktrek. For the most part, I've loved the 24th century stuff that's come out over the past couple of years.

[ryan123450]

I don't think quality has changed much over the last few years, but I do wish there was an effort made to pick up/ continue some of the plot threads left hanging from the Marco days. The Fall of Section 31, the Ascendants, Klingon Empire, and New Frontier. And then there was the whole indistinguishable From Magic issue.

[Relayer1]

King Daniel wrote:

---

While my fondest Trek novel memories are from TOS, my enthusiam for new generic TOS (for lack of a better term) books is very low. The planet-of-the-week-all-toys-back-in-box formula been done to death, pretty much.

That said, I can't disagree more with Ktrek. For the most part, I've loved the 24th century stuff that's come out over the past couple of years.

I'd assume that the majority of posters here feel much the same - I certainly do. The more casual (and more numerous) TOS fans don't seem to be here on these forums. Probably because they are more, er, casual.

It would be nice if the Trek novels were written with us in mind. The 50 or 60 copies they would sell would be fantastic...

[zarkon]

eighties continuity was best continuity

The only TOS books I've really enjoyed in the last fifteen years are pretty much the errand, brothers keeper & shatnerverse books

[JD]

King Daniel wrote:

---

While my fondest Trek novel memories are from TOS, my enthusiam for new generic TOS (for lack of a better term) books is very low. The planet-of-the-week-all-toys-back-in-box formula been done to death, pretty much.

That said, I can't disagree more with Ktrek. For the most part, I've loved the 24th century stuff that's come out over the past couple of years.

This is pretty much my opinion as well. I definitely prefer the 24th century novelverse stories over stand alone TOS stories. While I can enjoy stand alone adventures, over all I prefer arcs in general so I tend to lean that way with Trek Lit. The only reason I have any interest in stand alone adventures is because I enjoy what the people in charge of Trek Lit do with the arcs.
Other than Seize the Fire, which I set aside after about 100 (I'll probably finish it eventually...maybe) I've been enjoying what I've been reading and haven't really seen to drastic of a drop in quality since before the editorial shakeups at Pocket. The only thing that has disappointed me is the treatment of Indistinguishable From Magic.

[Greg Cox]

Fair enough, although again I think it depends a lot on which series you're talking about. DS9 was a very arc-based TV series, so it makes sense that the DS9 books should have the same sort of ongoing continuity.

TOS, on the other hand, only featured standalone episodes, so it makes sense (to me) that the books should do the same.

In theory, you wouldn't want a TOS book to feel like a DS9 book, or vise versa. You want to cater to each show's strengths--and give readers what they expect from each particular flavor of STAR TREK.

[ryan123450]

But something like "Kirk encounters Section 31" or "Kirk is involved in the formation of the DTI" are still TOS style while connecting to something greater. That's the kind of TOS I want to read.

[Paris]

ryan123450 wrote:

---

But something like "Kirk encounters Section 31" or "Kirk is involved in the formation of the DTI" are still TOS style while connecting to something greater. That's the kind of TOS I want to read.

I'm with Ryan. Greg said, "you wouldn't want a TOS book to feel like DS9 book, or vise versa." - Actually...I would. I'd love to get an arc based story for TOS. I'm in the boat with the people who are not fans of the 5YM books where everything goes back to the way it was. Give us some growth!

...But I do understand from a sales POV, why the 5YM books keep on coming out. If they are the neccesary evil that allows us more 24th Century books, then so be it..

[Relayer1]

I can't see why they can't have c or d level subplots that could give something of an 'arc'. They could be self contained in each novel so that they don't 'put off' casual readers but still fit together to give some continuity and development between books...