The original plan for Countdown

[JD]

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

Sure, but as a Pocket collector, I've seen the book line endure. Every few months/weeks, another title is added to my collection. Since December 1979.

I'm not a gamer, but have collected some ST games - and each run has arrived with a blast, run its course and vanished a few years later, only to be replaced by a different licensee's take and using a different gaming format. ST gaming has endured, but you have to be prepared to learn new sets of rules, switch formats, and see your older games become unusable as tech moves on.

But that's an element of the video game industry itself, it's not really something you can hold against the Trek games.

[rfmcdpei]

Defcon wrote:

---

Based on the evidence that most MMORPG in the west (not named WOW ) have only the life expectancy of a few years until they're discontinued or aren't supported anymore by the developers.

A function of video games themselves, not of the quality of the video games. Technology advances and trends change.

Granted, I may worded that a bit flippantly, but it was more aimed at the guy giving the interview thinking that CBS would give a crap about killing of Sela, only because she has a bit of prominence in STO right now.

Am I wrong in thinking that Denise Crosby is the only actor from any of the five series involved in producing CBS-authorized Trek content? Or do the various fan productions count? That's something, regardless.

I am willing to bet that CBS would have cared and intervened had the character's end been treated less capably.

[Jarvisimo]

Actually Chase Materson is on it too: in a podcast a while ago with her and David Mack, he apologised about killing mirror Leeta and she was worried her STO work would end.

[Defcon]

rfmcdpei wrote:

---

A function of video games themselves, not of the quality of the video games. Technology advances and trends change.

Am I wrong in thinking that Denise Crosby is the only actor from any of the five series involved in producing CBS-authorized Trek content? Or do the various fan productions count? That's something, regardless.

I am willing to bet that CBS would have cared and intervened had the character's end been treated less capably.

Please show me where I said anything about the quality of the game. All I said is that STO will be dead in a couple of years based on past experiences with MMORPGs, which you don't seem to deny.

And with the second point I don't even know what your problem is. The STO guy indicated that Pocket Books would do things behind CBS' back, and all I did was pointing out how ridiculous that it. Honestly, I think it is kind of frightening how little that guy seems to grasp the world of tie-in and licensing.

[Christopher]

^To be fair, I don't think he was accusing Pocket of doing anything sneaky or deceptive -- just assuming that CBS didn't care about what Pocket was doing. Which, granted, is still rather unflattering and entirely wrong.

[JD]

rfmcdpei wrote:

---

Am I wrong in thinking that Denise Crosby is the only actor from any of the five series involved in producing CBS-authorized Trek content? Or do the various fan productions count? That's something, regardless.

I just looked the game up and both Spock actors voice characters in STO, although Quinto is a new EMH not Spock. I know they're not actors, but David R. George III co-wrote the story for one Voyager episode, and David Mack co-wrote two DS9 episodes, so the books have people from the shows involved too. There have been other writers who have done both the books and shows in the past, but I believe they are the only two currently active. Several actors have also written books focused on their characters. Other than the actors doing voice work for the games, I think the books have probably had the most crossover between themselves and the shows.

[rfmcdpei]

Defcon wrote:

---

Please show me where I said anything about the quality of the game. All I said is that STO will be dead in a couple of years based on past experiences with MMORPGs, which you don't seem to deny.

And with the second point I don't even know what your problem is.

I read in your comment a certain snideness directed towards Crosby ("the actress playing [Sela] seems to be the only one desperate enough for money/attention to be used as a marketing tool for a semi-successful MMORPG"). That strikes me as ungenerous. The point about Star Trek Online being unsuccessful, perhaps because of issues of quality, is something I may well have inferred incorrectly.

[OverlordSpock]

Tosk wrote:

---

Why is it unfair though? People are just annoyed that something so sweeping was even considered.

Are you aware of some of the original plans for Star Trek Phase II/The Motion Picture? While perhaps not quite as sweeping in scope, there were originally some pretty big changes planned there as well.

This type of thing happens everywhere in the creative process. Most of them end up getting toned down a great deal.

[Christopher]

^Or how about when they considered killing off Will Riker and replacing him with Tom Riker? Or not bringing Picard back after "Best of Both Worlds Part I" and having Riker take over as series lead?

[Avro Arrow]

Christopher wrote:

---

^Or how about when they considered killing off Will Riker and replacing him with Tom Riker?

That one actually would have been kind of cool.

[Paris]

Christopher wrote:

---

^..Or not bringing Picard back after "Best of Both Worlds Part I" and having Riker take over as series lead?

I remember when this was going down. The thing is, I'm not sure where, but I heard that this was actually never really going to happen. The whole 'contract dispute' was a ratings ploy...which worked. Patrick Stewart was always planning on coming back. Please correct me if i'm mistaken..

[Therin of Andor]

Thrawn wrote:

---

But that's a fundamental difference between gaming and books in the first place, not a symptom of varying levels of quality with Trek in particular.

I wasn't saying anything about gaming and "levels of quality". To this ST reader, the Pocket novels have had longevity, while to this non gamer, the ST gaming phenomenon seems more like a series of little passing fads.

I was attempting to answer this, IIRC:

rfmcdpei wrote:

---

Star Trek Online is easily the biggest new development in Trek apart from the Abrams movie. Criticizing it as doomed to fail (based on what evidence?)...

And my thoughts were simply what came to mind at the time.

To me, each ST gaming platform seems to have had a rather short shelf life.

Paris wrote:

---

Patrick Stewart was always planning on coming back. Please correct me if i'm mistaken..

I'm sure he was planning to return, but his agent really did fight for some contractual changes at the time. Changes that Stewart got that others didn't.

[Psi'a Meese]

I play the game and I read many of the novels. Both perspectives have their place. While it's nice to read loose continuities between the works of some Trek authors, I know not to assume a rigid continuity between novel works is even necessary. Let alone between the novels and a computer game of the current day. It's nice when they do compliment one another. It just isn't necessary.

I listened to the Priority One podcast as well. I don't always agree with STO's Lead Designer. But find his frankness enlightening at times. I'm surprised at how far the original set-up for Trek 2009 had been willing to go. I'm also relieved that both Countdown and the finished film didn't go quite that far.

Specific to computer games and STO, I would point out that while some games - including past Star Trek - come and go, not all of those games are gone. There are proven exceptions within that market. The original EverQuest MMORPG is currently celebrating it's 14th anniversary.

Star Trek Online has had extremely hot and cold responses to what it offers for three years now. Just as a computer game for so-called Gamers. Let alone it's pedigree of Trek-ness. However, IMO, it may just now be moving toward what is needed to insure it's longevity within it's own market. As well as its Trek-ness. Crosby's participation being only one of those reasons. Time will tell, I suppose. Over three years of various interviews with different members of their development team, I've gleaned that they can pick and choose elements from the published novels which compliment the story they wish to tell the player's.

Not to say an author's entire work is - or would be - converted. Perhaps more as homage or borrowed to recycle into their games 25th century continuity as it makes sense to do so. Clearly, STO disregards the Destiny trilogy. So do some readers of the those novels. Some STO player's are bored with the Borg and wish STO had acknowledged Destiny. STO purposely disregards the deaths of both Sela and Donatra in favor of those character's place in their own story.

[Christopher]

It's been standard operating procedure throughout the history of Trek tie-ins for different licensees' publications to present different continuities. This goes back as far as the '70s, when Gold Key Comics offered one version of McCoy's daughter and divorce history while Bantam's Planet of Judgment offered another. In the '80s we had Pocket offering one version of Kirk's first mission on the Enterprise within a year of DC offering a separate version. And to date we have at least seven different versions of the end of the 5-year mission: four from various Pocket continuities, one from each of DC's two TOS volumes, and one from IDW. And David Goodman's book Federation: The First 150 Years handled the Romulan War/UFP-founding era differently than Pocket's novels (including my upcoming Rise of the Federation) have done. Not to mention, of course, that Pocket and IDW both have more than one continuity apiece.

So the games doing things differently from Pocket or IDW is just par for the course. If anything, the exception to the rule is when one licensee does reference anything from another.

Just yesterday I was looking over the Marvel Wiki, and they have this insanely huge list of alternate "Earth-###" realities, a different numbered universe for every alternate version of Marvel Comics continuity, from the mainstream comics to all the alternate worlds visited therein to every single issue of their What If? comic to every movie and TV and video game adaptation ever done. So not only do you have Earth-616 for the main comics universe and Earth-1610 for Ultimate Marvel, but the Marvel Cinematic Universe is Earth-199999, the X-Men movies are Earth-10005, the '90s X-Men and Spider-Man cartoons are Earth-92131, the 1967 Spidey cartoon with the catchy theme song is Earth-6799, etc. No attempt to reconcile different tie-ins unless there's an explicit crossover -- they're just accepted as parallel tracks of the multiverse. (And no, I have no idea what the source is for those numbers or who came up with them or what system they use.)

[Allyn Gibson]

Christopher wrote:

---

(And no, I have no idea what the source is for those numbers or who came up with them or what system they use.)

616 was created by Alan Moore. It was a reference to DC Comics' address -- 666 5th Avenue -- because in some translations of the Book of Revelations, the Number of the Beast is 616, not 666.