Spoilers Star Trek: Lower Decks 1x09 - "Crisis Point"

[eschaton]

Again, given the popularity of videogame franchises ranging from Mortal Kombat to Grand Theft Auto, there definitely is a huge market for video games that involve playing the bad guy (or at least, an anti-hero) and killing lots of people. I personally have probably killed over 500 cops/lawmen in the GTA and Red Dead Redemption franchises alone. Would potential players be turned off if the violence was more realistic? Doubt it. Would governments want to restrict or ban such video games? Probably. I have no doubts that if a holodeck existed, right after the sex fantasies the next thing it would be used for would be shoot-em-ups, including those of real people.

There's two points here though. First there's the question of whether violence could ever get so realistic to skeeve people out. I think this is plausible - certainly while some people enjoy gory horror movies, not everyone enjoys them after all.

But the second point is there's a difference between fictionally murdering someone who's a rando versus someone you know. I never, ever feel rage while playing a computer game unless it's literal rage with the game related to fighting the controls/camera or repeated crashes. Or I guess if it's an incredibly hard boss fight I have tried a dozen times to get through, but that's anger at the game for being stupidly hard, not the antagonist. The actual process of killing something isn't really cathartic though - I don't feel anything. Get a checkbox, collect some XP, and move to something more interesting like plot and character development.

 

[NCC-73515]

But I might be a weird outlier here. I have to say that I've been a big fan of computer RPGs for over 20 years. While I like roleplaying, I absolutely can't play against my own morality - I can never bring myself to do an "evil" run within game or even just act like a selfish jerk to NPCs who are being nice to me. I know they aren't real people - that it's all just set up for my amusement - but at the same time I don't have any subconscious desire to be a murderous asshole, so I just play the explorer/do-gooder/hero.

I'm usually the opposite of my real self in games

People have violent thoughts. People have violent fantasies. People act them out in a wide variety of different ways without ever people knowing, or causing harm to another person.

It's like putting someone's photo on a dart board. It only becomes problematic with more realistic animation showing detailed suffering and gore with a real person's face or body.

 

[NCC-73515]

Source: CBS

 

[Michael]

Source: CBS

Saw that on Twitter. Love that poster!

 

[BillJ]

It has amazed me since "Second Contact" how much they can get into a 25 minute episode and it not really feel rushed.

 

[Anduinel]

It has amazed me since "Second Contact" how much they can get into a 25 minute episode and it not really feel rushed.

Yeah. The show does go by *very* fast - as in "blink and you'll miss three jokes and a fistfight" fast - but it's done in a way that makes it feel like that's just the pace of life on the Cerritos. So far as the actual content goes, it seems like we always get all the info we need and a satisfying amount of story.

 

[Sarcastic Vulcan Salute]

There's two points here though. First there's the question of whether violence could ever get so realistic to skeeve people out. I think this is plausible - certainly while some people enjoy gory horror movies, not everyone enjoys them after all.

But the second point is there's a difference between fictionally murdering someone who's a rando versus someone you know. I never, ever feel rage while playing a computer game unless it's literal rage with the game related to fighting the controls/camera or repeated crashes. Or I guess if it's an incredibly hard boss fight I have tried a dozen times to get through, but that's anger at the game for being stupidly hard, not the antagonist. The actual process of killing something isn't really cathartic though - I don't feel anything. Get a checkbox, collect some XP, and move to something more interesting like plot and character development.

Of course some people will be skeeved out by violence, period, and increasingly so as it gets more realistic. But at the same time, there are probably also going to be people who are going to tolerate or even love the violence level. The episode exemplified that with Mariner wanting Tendi to wear holo-Shax's earring even though it would be sacreligious to do that with real Shaxs because that's a symbol of faith (although technically, I think Shaxs wears it on the wrong ear to be a follower of the Prophets unless that has changed) and gross because there was some holo-ear left. Revelling in causing sufferring wasn't something Tendi wanted to do, so she peaced out. It's entirely possible that if Freeman found her way into that program and played Vindicta, she'd enjoy having Holo-Mariner take one for the team.

People's mileage will also vary as to what they might feel from a game. I personally have experienced satisfaction and mowing down GTA cops and seeing how long I can survive. For some people, there might be a difference between murdering a rando and murdering someone they know and work with. But I don't see that difference as inherent. or such that it automatically makes murdering someone you actually know worrisome. It's not like if Holo-Mariner hadn't intervened to stop the "awesome captain-murder" she had planned, that real Mariner would be going around the halls of the Cerritos going "Red rum! Red rum!"

 

[Sarcastic Vulcan Salute]

Saw that on Twitter. Love that poster!

Poor Winger needs a better agent. He doesn't seem to be on the poster at all...

 

[fireproof78]

Probably. I have no doubts that if a holodeck existed, right after the sex fantasies the next thing it would be used for would be shoot-em-ups, including those of real people.

Indeed.

And I think that people are reading way too much in to it.

 

[eschaton]

People's mileage will also vary as to what they might feel from a game. I personally have experienced satisfaction and mowing down GTA cops and seeing how long I can survive. For some people, there might be a difference between murdering a rando and murdering someone they know and work with. But I don't see that difference as inherent. or such that it automatically makes murdering someone you actually know worrisome. It's not like if Holo-Mariner hadn't intervened to stop the "awesome captain-murder" she had planned, that real Mariner would be going around the halls of the Cerritos going "Red rum! Red rum!"

I guess the reason I draw a distinction is throughout most of human history, murdering strangers was generally speaking accepted. It goes back to our tribal psychology - our ability to dehumanize those "outside the circle" as being non-persons. But killing a family member or close companion was basically universally loathed.

 

[fireproof78]

It's a fantasy. If she did it then condemnation would naturally come.

 

[Captain Crow]

RIP Shempo

I always get a little twitch whenever the "Shemp = crap replacement" joke gets used.

Shemp was the original stooge not Curly. Curly replaced him while they were still with Ted Healy. He returned, to the slot that was originally his, due to Curly having a debilitating stroke.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I guess the reason I draw a distinction is throughout most of human history, murdering strangers was generally speaking accepted. It goes back to our tribal psychology - our ability to dehumanize those "outside the circle" as being non-persons. But killing a family member or close companion was basically universally loathed.

Oddly the exact reason why guest rite became a thing. Notably, Hercules was notable for murdering a guy who did this by chopping off guests' legs or stretching them.

 

[RAMA]

This is terrible...when did the main protagonist on Trek become an actual psycho??

3\10

 

[Sarcastic Vulcan Salute]

This is terrible...when did the main protagonist on Trek become an actual psycho??

3\10

Let me first say that I don't think that Mariner is an actual psycho as opposed to someone who has psychological problems.

Not counting times that they were directly under alien influence or the feeling the effects of a disease as one-of situations, I would say that all modern Trek protagonists have had deep-seated psychological problems:

• Picard was mentally broken after BOBW and after Chain of Command, and he was pretty psycho as to the Borg in First Contact
• Sisko suffered PTSD from Wolf 359 and the loss of his wife and thought he was losing his mind half the time because of the Prophets
• Janeway was psycho toward the Starfleet crew she encountered in Equinox
• Archer's deep-seated daddy issues and hatred of Vulcans easily could have had him gunning down people on the holodeck
• Burnham started a whole war because of her psychological issues and also had PTSD from costing the life of her captain.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Well said! For as "perfect" as the world of the Federation is supposed to be, Starfleet definitely appears to be the Land of Misfit Toys. Mariner is hardly the first, and she will never be the last.

Fuck it - I like her - warts and all!

 

[Oddish]

Lower Decks is a parody. And as such, it just gets better and better.

Only downside is how do I write Star Trek parody when these folks are doing it so well already?

 

[fireproof78]

Lower Decks is a parody. And as such, it just gets better and better.

Only downside is how do I write Star Trek parody when these folks are doing it so well already?

Usually with a computer. word processor and keyboard.

 

[RAMA]

I'm grading most of LDS on a curve, mainly because of its very broad humor, even so most of it is pretty underwhelming.

I've never seen any Starfleet officer in the main characters actually be in bloodlust, murderous rage without outside influence. Lorca was possibly the most vicious ever, but he of course, was from the MU.

RAMA

Let me first say that I don't think that Mariner is an actual psycho as opposed to someone who has psychological problems.

Not counting times that they were directly under alien influence or the feeling the effects of a disease as one-of situations, I would say that all modern Trek protagonists have had deep-seated psychological problems:

• Picard was mentally broken after BOBW and after Chain of Command, and he was pretty psycho as to the Borg in First Contact
• Sisko suffered PTSD from Wolf 359 and the loss of his wife and thought he was losing his mind half the time because of the Prophets
• Janeway was psycho toward the Starfleet crew she encountered in Equinox
• Archer's deep-seated daddy issues and hatred of Vulcans easily could have had him gunning down people on the holodeck
• Burnham started a whole war because of her psychological issues and also had PTSD from costing the life of her captain.

 

[Noname Given]

I've never seen any Starfleet officer in the main characters actually be in bloodlust, murderous rage without outside influence. Lorca was possibly the most vicious ever, but he of course, was from the MU.

RAMA

Lt. Worf would like a word...(Rewatch TNG: Reunion)