That Deflector dish is like the CBS logo
Spoilers The new (massive spoiler) ship!
- Thread starter NCC-73515
- Start date
I can’t speak for “we,” but I am complaining that the E and the F don’t look all that different.
There hasn’t been a clear design lineage since Star Trek: Enterprise.
Oh, I dunno about that. I'm rather fond of the clear lineage between the NX-01 and the SNW Enterprise. Plus, love them or hate them, the "no round nacelles" ships from Discovery, have a definite lineage between them.
Last edited:
Other than the nacelles being angular, none of those DSC ships looks like the other. And most of them look like ships that would be operating post-TUC. SNW is starting to get it right, though.
As for the NX-01, my original statement about ENT design lineage was in reference to a 22nd century pre-Federation Earth ship suspiciously resembling a late 24th century Federation Starfleet vessel.
As for the NX-01, my original statement about ENT design lineage was in reference to a 22nd century pre-Federation Earth ship suspiciously resembling a late 24th century Federation Starfleet vessel.
Uh, does anyone recognize that TOS model? Does STO have skin option with visible phasers, or is it a fan-model, or what?
Now that's a nice looking line up of ships. Definitely feel the NX-01 stylings through them all, save for the Shran which is the Oberth of the grouping.Oh, I dunno about that. I'm rather fond on the clear lineage between the NX-01 and the SNW Enterprise. Plus, love them or hate them, the "no round nacelles" ships from Discovery, have a definite lineage between them.
But, yes, need more of those ships. Sad to see them depart.
You're clearly meaning to imply that one criticism would counteract the other, but they actually reinforce each other. The lineage of Enterprise designs is one of strong aesthetic and proportional differences in generations, though I will agree that the C silhouette is perhaps a bit too similar to the D: easily distinguishable, but not as strikingly so as the other generations.
In a Doylist sense, the C served it's purpose well: being similar to the D but clearly older and less well integrated. But Watsonianly, the C is a misstep, too much of a literal merge of A and B elements with the general D outline. The Probert version would have been even worse, insofar as it looks even more straightforwardly like the D. Which is a long way of saying that indeed, it is not unprecedented that successive generations of Enterprise will have a similar silhouette and aesthetic, but it also wasn't necessarily a good choice then either.
A lot of "just be happy and take your medicine" replies tend toward the "you want it to be like old Trek but then complain that it's just like xyz from old Trek", which... yeah, it is good to utilize the good elements of old Trek rather than abandoning them and it is equally good to not mimic the lesser tendencies and missteps of old Trek.
Off topic for this thread, but as a very illustrative point: the SNW monster maroon looked wrong. Not because it wasn't like old Trek, but because the design looked lopsided: the strap wasn't so much a shoulder strap as a weird chest strap because the chest panel was too small so the strap had to reach farther down so it started farther up the back and... it wasn't even how the costume was designed. The drawings are out there, something happened in the fabrication process and it ended up weird, but again, not weird because it's different than the original, weird because it looked like a mistake, which, at least in part, it was.
I like the F, really I do. I don't much like it as the F. It fits right into the FC era Trek aesthetic, but if my brother who loves Trek but doesn't know or care about ships can't tell the E and the F apart while he has no trouble with nil-E, that's not a good hero design. It looks like what it is: a fan design for a derivative licensed work. That's not a pejorative description, that's literally what it is.
Thomas made his own high quality TOS model for use not in STO but a personal project
https://twitter.com/thomasthecat/status/1569910147610476544
The ENT-E is also not the STO model. It's a fan model I think.
There was a Shepard and Magee in the same dry dock complex as the Enterprise in the first episode, out of focus and in the background.
Last edited:
I'd love both.
Heck, throw in a couple of Kelvin-kitbashes, too, there's no reason they wouldn't be around. The more variation we see, the easier it is to accept the outliers and incongruities, and it feels more realistic than every ship being a different arrangement of the same exact saucer, engineering hull, and nacelles. Have two or three different sets of saucers, engineerings, and nacelles, mix it up a bit, it's a big Federation.
Indeed. I grow weary of ship designs and configurations that remind me of bashes I made with MS paint.
I think there used to be an issue with CBS not being able to use the Kelvin ship designs because Paramount owned them, but that was before the merger. I don’t see why SNW couldn’t have the Kelvin show up now, especially since they already referenced it in dialogue. Someone can correct me if my info is wrong.
As for ‘variation,’ I’ve always had the impression that Matt Jeffries originally envisioned that only Starship Class vessels like the NCC-1701 had that configuration, and all ‘lesser’ vessels had completely different configurations. But since this was never actually shown in the show, the TOS films took a different approach which has always been followed since. I for one would love for Starfleet to change its design attributes and come up with ships that look nothing like the usual saucer/nacelle/engineering hull arrangements that we keep seeing all the time.
STO was able to use them without having to talk to Paramount before the merger, they even used that cyborg character from Into Darkness, and they got everything from CBS. Paramount wasn't credited anywhere in the game's fine print.
The Kelvin movies were listed on the CBS Costumer Products website as one of the properties they owned as far back as Into Darkness.
So maybe CBS was allowed to do merchandise/tie-ins with stuff from the movies but just not allowed to make any productions with the stuff. I don't know, the entire thing is very confusing.
Last edited:
I do know that CBS gave Paramount a license to produce the films, but perhaps there was some wording in it where Paramount couldn’t make a TV show of its own based on those films, but video games were fine. Conversely, perhaps Paramount kept the rights to the film assets and therefore CBS couldn’t use them for its shows. I don’t know.
Last edited:
One would think that with them being owned under one parent company those issues would disappear. So, it must be a conscious choice.
What? What did you say?
Such heresy!!!
If they did that the noise from fans who absolutely expect all that would be somewhat audible around the world haha. No you can't have that and no that's another reason why we can't have nice things. /s
On a related note, I wish there were Watsonian dialogue space somewhere to justify that Vorok's battle cruiser from ENT 1.05 and Kohlar's D7 from VOY 7.13 inexplicably use the K'tinga CG model because the hull style originated as a customization pioneered by Vorok's ship, later on to inspire the jury-rigged modifications to Kohlar's generation ship as well as the mass-produced K'tinga.
Nothing like some kitbashing fandom to alleviate annoying Doylist budget limits.
Temporal Cold War. Future Guy's Non-Union Klingon equivalent sold everyone K'Tingas to give the Empire an advantage in the past. Except no one cared.
Similar threads
