How do you feel about CBS/Paramount's general handling of the Trek license?

[Donker]

Something I was thinking about recently is just the complete lack of modern Video Games there are for Star Trek, It's one of the biggest and most iconic franchises in all of pop-culture, but CBS and Paramount all but seem to just completely ignore a hundred billion dollar market and even when we get Star Trek games once in a blue moon, they tend to be... lacking in quality.
This just got me thinking about in general how CBS and Paramount handle the Trek license and how they seem to just not all that much with it despite, again, being one of the biggest and most iconic licenses in all of pop-culture. How have you felt about CBS and Paramounts handling of Star Trek over the years? If they both went under, who would you like to see pick up the license?

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Probably the history of the game quality would make them wary of sinking that potential cash cow, though seeing as how they don't much care for the quality of story telling in scripts it is quite surprising they've not done the same on the gaming front.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I don't think anyone wants the Trek videogame license following the huge flops that were Elite Force 2 and Star Trek (2013).

As for TV/movies, I liked the 1st season of DSC overall despite a flat finale, and loved the last 3 movies so I'm pretty okay with them carrying on as they are.

 

[ChristopherPike]

We were better off before Star Trek went to CBS and Paramount was in full control of everything whether on the small or big screen. Some nice things have happened on their watch, like HD remastered TOS and TNG but you have to wonder if left to its own devices, Paramount wouldn't have sought to exploit its library like that anyhow. And obviously green lit a new TV show from Bad Robot sooner to keep the franchise in the public eye, while the iron was hot between 2010 and 13.

Of course, I'm ultimately speaking from a preference of there having there been no split in the first place and the CEO of CBS not having any say in the cancellation of Enterprise.

 

[The Wormhole]

Was it Activision that had the license to do Trek video games in the early 2000s that sued Paramount for allowing the franchise to stagnate in response to piss-poor video game sales? And the Kelvin timeline game as mentioned above certainly didn't light the world on fire either.

 

[Phily B]

The Trek games thing has been a mess for a long time, they didn't just hand out the Trek license, they handed out a movie license, a specific series license etc etc. Games were hamstrung because of it, Birth of the Federation had no ships outside of what was on TNG for example. They should just sell the gaming license to a company, doesn't even have to be a big company. There is a quality Battlestar Galactica game out right now made by a small company that has great success. There would be money to be made in TellTale type games and there is a resurgence in the click and point genre. It doesn't help that the last few titles have been a mess, the JJ Trek game was delayed by a year and was still a notoriously buggy mess on release with absolutely no redeeming or unique features.

There likely are a ton of companies who'd love to take a crack at it, but they seem happy with Trek Online and the mobile games.

 

[BillJ]

I don't honestly care. They'll either make Trek related stuff, or they won't. Other things to do.

 

[urbandefault]

I don't honestly care. They'll either make Trek related stuff, or they won't. Other things to do.

This.

CBS manages the property the way they see fit. In the grand scheme of things, it's not a big deal.

 

[Kronos]

They know no matter what they do the money will roll in.

Nothing to be done about it.

 

[-Brett-]

It's one of the biggest and most iconic franchises in all of pop-culture...

It was. It's a fairly obscure, niche property now.

 

[The Wormhole]

Honestly, even at its height, I don't believe Star Trek was ever as popular as is commonly believed anyway.

 

[dswynne1]

Poorly. And that Kree-O nonsense really burns me.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Trek kind of reached its peak in popularity in the mid 1990s and in the years since then, it's kind of been like a market correction in which it got back to realistic numbers as far as its fanbase is concerned, IMO. There's really only one company in charge of overseeing Star Trek merchandise--CBS (though CBS Consumer Products)--and I'm sure they wish they did the kind of business like Lucasfilms and Marvel (a.k.a. Disney) does, but I think there's a sentiment among potential licensees that Trek skews older than the demographic they're after.

I've always looked at brick and mortar department stores as a good indicator of how popular a brand is beyond its already won-over core audience. You can go into any Walgreens, Wal-Mart, or Target store and find Star Wars and Marvel merchandise. Star Trek, not so much these days. And it may not be so much the fault of CBS not pushing Trek as hard as they can as it is that the demand for Trek merchandise doesn't extend much beyond the generally smallish adult collector's market.

But that may be changing with companies like McFarlane and Gentle Giant proposing to put Trek toys back on retail store shelves.

 

[drt]

And it may not be so much the fault of CBS not pushing Trek as hard as they can as it is that the demand for Trek merchandise doesn't extend much beyond the generally smallish adult collector's market.

You basically hit the nail on the head here, Star Trek hasn’t done anything to cultivate kids in decades. It’s also interesting that the adult collectible market is so TOS-focused, which means a lot of those who were kids during the Berman era don’t seem to have much interest in Star Trek anymore either.

 

[Timewalker]

Probably the history of the game quality would make them wary of sinking that potential cash cow, though seeing as how they don't much care for the quality of story telling in scripts it is quite surprising they've not done the same on the gaming front.

How much attention do they pay to the obvious knock-offs that make a potential buyer suspicious that the thing is probably not licensed? Chapters-Indigo was selling some thingamajig labeled "Dr. Spock" - which is something I doubt a properly licensed company would be allowed to get away with.

 

[ProwlAlpha]

They need to have more integration between the various merchandise, like how Star Wars does it.

 

[Starbreaker]

The novels are comics are certainly in good hands. I've been impressed with the Funkos. Star Trek Online seems to be fairly popular.

 

[timmy84]

Since you mentioned video games with the franchise, games currently exist. Star Trek Online is still going (considering how much they update it, it must make money). They also must have access to the entire library, because it is possible to get a couple ships from the Kelvin timeline as well as ships from the rest of the tv shows (they even rolled out the Walker-Class and Crossfield-Class from Discovery). Also where the money is right now is in mobile. Low investment with potential huge gains. So they have three mobile Star Trek games that I know of (Star Trek Timelines, Star Trek Wrath of Gems, and Star Trek Trexels). So while they may not be hitting the type of games I want, they are making games.

Also the last people to have the license to make games (Bethesda Softworks) put out a couple games that I don't think were terrible, but didn't sell well despite the license.

So its not the license isn't being handled well, its just the demand for the games isn't there. Back in the "golden era" of Star Trek games by Interplay, I have to wonder how many units were actually being sold and how much they had to sell to make a profit. They had some cool games but they weren't "big budget" games as we know them today.

 

[2takesfrakes]

The Classic Series broke so much new ground -- not for entertainment, at large -- but for itself; for what was possible for this -- seemingly -- failed TV show. Syndication, Merchandising, Cartoons, Movies, Conventions ... it kept rediscovering and reinventing itself and some of it is still pretty damned impressive. Even when there would be gaps of years where nothing was happening with the show, TOS still managed to keep the demand growing, despite a rapidly-aging cast. Considering the era and everything ... that's mind-blowing.

Rick Berman and his team kept 24th Century STAR TREK going for decades -- plural -- and I can't help but be very impressed by that, because it actually is an impressive feat. But I'm also conflicted by that ...

Having given the Man his due, I have to say that I'm kind of disappointed by his "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy, regarding the STAR TREK series he'd worked on after The Next Generation. Keeping TNG -- more, or less -- the way Gene Roddenberry had established it made perfect sense and was a fine tribute to Rick's friend and mentor, indeed. On the other hand ... the rest of the franchise, up to and including Enterprise just felt like STAR TREK didn't have anything new on offer besides just keeping the "party" going. After TNG, Rick Berman should've -- respectfully, of course -- boldly gone where Gene Roddenberry hadn't taken STAR TREK before. Rick's Vision, as it were ... or at least other Artists he brought onboard to take the show in bold new directions to show that STAR TREK's a modern-day product, not a nostalgia offering. It just felt like more of the same and that's not necessarily a bad thing. I mean ... it's nice to see certain themes active and continuing, like an optimistic future and the sense that The Final Frontier belongs to all of us ... not just The Chosen Few.

But Artistically, it got kind of stale, especially when DS9 lost faith in its initial concept and did everything it could to diminish it in favour of becoming more like TNG. It's got a mini-starship now, instead of having the Galaxy come to the station, as the show started. It recruited Michael Dorn and relied heavily upon Klingons, ever after, as they're a "fan favourite" and a "war" that quickly morphed DS9 into every Soap Opera cliché. Particularly with Kai and Dukat, in the later going. Rick's instincts to not rock the boat, to play it safe with everything kept STAR TREK alive. He didn't have to be a risk taker and so ... elected not to be, for over 2 decades. What kept the franchise going -- playing it safe, delivering familiar "Comfort Food" to STAR TREK audiences, was the very thing killing it. The "Art" suffered in more ways than one, for this franchise and handing it over to JJ Abrams & his Bad Robot team was the best thing for it. I'm not thrilled with Discovery. I hate the look of it, the supposed "progressiveness" of it (like giving girl characters boy names. Women can keep girly names and still be "strong," or "independent" or whatever the balls, but yeah ... some real forward-thinking going on there). And other "trendy" elements it relies on are trash, but it's trying to offer something new and that's so good to see. So very good to see. It forgives a lot ...

 

[Shawnster]

Star Trek has never been as popular as Star Wars. I asked why in another topic.

The apparent answer is the swashbuckling appeal of Star Wars. It's action - adventure from start finish. It's really not targeting cerebral audiences. It's not known for intellectual stories, pushing social boundaries, or commentary on current events. Those themes might be found in Star Wars, but definitely not like Star Trek.