It's also just not factually true: TNG towards the end (when it was arguably going downhill) was still rated higher than DS9's when they were both on the air (when DS9 was something new and fresh). It's not like there was a massive upheaval in media viewing between 1993 and 1999 anyway. There were slightly more channels on at the end of the decade than at the beginning, and there probably wasn't one cable market that got enough of the new ones to matter. If 100 new channels signed on, any individual market only got a handful of them.
Perhaps. But so many fans get a kick out of pointing out the sliding household numbers for Trek after TNG. The truth is the HH numbers are only a fraction of the picture. Another thing to consider is how did the numbers beak down in the different demos? How many stations purchased DS9? What timeslot did they give DS9, and what shows were airing on the other stations at that time in that timeslot -- or if it was late, how many people generally watch at that hour? When and how often did they change the timeslot? How and how often did the station promote the DS9? How do the answers to all of these questions compare to TNG if that's what we are comparing to? But the bottom line is DS9 was given the green light for 7 expensive-to-produce seasons. That just doesn't happen when a show is a failure for studios, stations, advertisers and audiences.
Most of the time, the same stations that aired TNG aired DS9 with similar time slots or TNG's actual airtime after DS9 S1. A station wasn't going to go through the expense of buying the show to burn it off in the middle of the night.
From that graph, it appears DS9's ratings were trending downward even before TNG went off the air, at the same time TNG's ratings were perfectly stable.
What's interesting in that graph is if you look closely you see how TNG dropped rather precipitously in the second half of S6 from a 14.1 ("Aquiel") down to a 10.6 ("Rightful Heir"), a 10 episode slide that goes almost in parallel with DS9's first season, following the airing of its pilot in January 1993. It looks like TNG rebounded a bit to an 11.5 with the S6 finale and the promise of the return of the Borg and Lore. S7 starts strong with a 13.0, drops back down in the sub-12.0 range, then peaks at a 12.8 ("Parallels"), then back down again, then up again with a 12.6 ("Eye of the Beholder"), then back down again until the series finale with the show's highest rating, a 17.5. But again, most of S7 was in the sub-12.0 range, similar to the first half of S4 and the remainder of S5 after the 15.4 ratings high of "Unification" and the cross promotion with STAR TREK VI inexorably wore off. So it looks like a TNG ratings dip began in early 1993 and lasted through the spring when there was suddenly two Trek shows on TV simultaneously with one another, a new situation which, as we all know, lingered on for the remainder of the decade. But it certainly looks like the signs were there way back in 1993. I think TNG only held in there in S7 due to the built-in audience it already had and the knowledge that it was the final season. If it had come back for an 8th season, I have little doubt it would have continued with the overall downward slide you see in the other shows. It would probably have looked a lot like the ratings in S4.
What I see: The more DS9 became a show about war, the lesser the interest of the audience. Doesnt surprise me, because it made me lose interest in DS9 also. When I want to see war, I look at the news, not at Star Trek. The obsession with conflict is more one from the writers (makes the job more easy) not from the audience.
It was unimaginative stories in general that pushed me away from Berman Trek -- both DS9 and VOY. DS9's war stories weren't particularly imaginative or interesting, aside from "In the Pale Moonlight," which I only saw years after I'd given up on the show.
I always thought TNG went on for one season too long. Outside of Parallels and AGT, the entire season was very forgettable. Stick AGT at the end of season six and it would have been a much better final season, and they would have MORE time to make Generations a better movie. I guess Paramount was too scared of having DS9 start out as the only Trek series on the air, but I'd argue it would have done better if they had wanted until TNG was over with before doing DS9. I think DS9 and VOY leeched viewers away from each other.
The irony is that Moore and Braga had a lot of time to write "Generations" and very little time to write "All Good Things." In the commentary for "Generations," Braga talked about getting worried when he realized the quickly-written "All Good Things" was a better script than "Generations."
I think both Generation and AGT are great. A one two punch to finish the series on a high note. I don't like remaining movies all that much.... In terms of DS9 on blu-ray, I'm still holding to a thin thread of hope. Don't know why, really, since FrontierTrek has seemingly thrown quite a bit of cold water on the hope, at least in my interpretation.
Even a hybrid upscale would be a mess, as the effects shots would've gone through a couple of tape generations to where they are now, compared to shots that had no SFX, plus the effects were rendered with interlace scanning in mind, not progressive, so even de-interlacing the SFX could lead to loss of quality. Plus D2 videotape has already compromised the picture quality by being a composite video source. Essentially what you are suggesting is a Babylon 5 situation, although without conversion to 16:9. Even if you rescanned all the live action footage, every time that you went to a FX shot the quality would drop---think of how terrible looking the upconverted shots on the TNG Blu-Rays for the few scenes where the remastering team could not find the original film. Also a hybrid upscale would not be good as future compression algorithms will be able to provide HD video that is closer to Blu-Ray 1080p than current broadcast and internet download 1080i/p HD allow. Right now Blu-Ray currently offers the highest quality HD and 4k video available to consumers.
Why would they do that? The books are currently taking place about 10 years after "What You Leave Behind".
They can't do that, because Spoiler: novels they are different stations. The Nor-class DS9 I was destroyed and replaced by the Frontier-class DS9 II. There is literally no reason to make #1 look like #2. And if you're referring to the cover of Raise the Dawn: That's not DS9 II. That's the construction platform used by the workers who built DS9 II.
I'm re-watching them on DVD with my sister (her first time) on my 60" alternating with the TNG blu-rays (season 6 of TNG, season 1 of DS9) The stories and acting seem just as compelling as they used to. HD or not.
Yes. Other than "Emissary," "In the Pale Moonlight," and "Trials and Tribble-ations," I don't have any interest in seeing the series again. (Incidentally, that's three more episodes than I'll ever watch again of VOY or ENT. I stopped watching VOY after the first couple of years, and I've only bothered to see four or five full episodes of ENT.) "Emissary" is still one of my favorite Trek episodes of all time, though.
I started in on DS9 while waiting for TNG S7 on BD later this year. It's hard to watch coming from such clear, vibrant picture on the TNG BD sets. But of course it's DS9, it's a great show, you get used to it, and just watch the show. It does make me a little sad that DS9 remastered doesn't seem like it will happen anytime soon. I really want to see the details in the sets, etc. like we can now with TNG-R.