Spoilers Has Discovery destroyed the possibility of any positive progression until after the 32nd Century?

[Dryson]

Once the U.S.S. Discovery entered the 32nd century, the timeline of the future was irrevocably altered. What would be interesting to see is, 32nd to 35th century timelines where the Discovery is not present. Only then can we truly measure the effects of Burnham and her mentality of saving the future from a brutal past in which she doesn't want to die.

I can imagine it now; Klingons having succumbed to whatever existence they did in the past, become aware of Burnham and the Discovery jumping into the future and then use a Klingon time crystal to restore the future to it proper timeline, without the Discovery while ensuring the Discovery follows the natural timeline of its past.

Rather intriguing that the Klingons would be the ones to save the entire galaxy at the end.

Federation Starship
Captain, incoming transmission.
Put it on screen.

...We come in peace.

 

[thewanderingjack]

Short answer: no.

Long answer: ofcourse not.

Real-world: if it can make money, it'll get figured out. Star Trek makes money. The whole thing is riddled with paradoxes and plot holes. Adding more won't bother anyone getting paid for it.

In-universe: the plot points you are talking about are in fact some of those very paradoxes and plot holes. Easily spackled over with even more specious writing.

Discovery ended up in the future in the course of preventing a different catastrophic future... so, at any point anyone (past, present or future) can time travel to prevent the time war, the fall of the federation and/or the burn.

 

[Soong-type Android]

Has Discovery destroyed the possibility of any positive progression until after the 32nd Century?

Why should writers hands be tied like that? They should just treat Discovery like an alternate universe like the Kelvin movies.

 

[fireproof78]

No, Discovery has not.

 

[Tuskin38]

Why should writers hands be tied like that?

Because Paramount is treating Discovery as the future of the prime timeline? The writers can't go against the studio's wishes.

 

[Sci]

Has Discovery destroyed the possibility of any positive progression until after the 32nd Century?

No. I mean, it's literally the 32nd Century. It's eight hundred years after the TNG era. That's more than enough time for all kinds of twists and turns in the fortunes of the Federation, even well before the Burn.

 

[TerryTrek]

The Burn was so laughably idiotic. I still can't believe someone actually approved of that story arc.

 

[Racefuel]

The Burn was so laughably idiotic. I still can't believe someone actually approved of that story arc.

The burn in concept is brilliant..warp drive being hard to use because the galaxy is fucked up, etc. Like mass use of the omega particle or the subspace damage from TNG S7, etc.

The burn in practice was *FUCKING STUPID AS SHIT*

 

[urbandk]

The burn in concept is brilliant..warp drive being hard to use because the galaxy is fucked up, etc. Like mass use of the omega particle or the subspace damage from TNG S7, etc.

The burn in practice was *FUCKING STUPID AS SHIT*

Hard disagree. The Burn was like a page straight out of an Ursula Le Guin novel, pure high concept sci fi.

Off the wall stuff like this is what made me fall in love with TOS and Star Trek in general a long time ago.

 

[Sci]

The Burn was so laughably idiotic. I still can't believe someone actually approved of that story arc.

The burn in concept is brilliant..warp drive being hard to use because the galaxy is fucked up, etc. Like mass use of the omega particle or the subspace damage from TNG S7, etc.

The burn in practice was *FUCKING STUPID AS SHIT*

The Burn was a fine story, and as someone who lost his mother about six months after DIS S3 ended, the story of Su'Kal speaks deeply to me. If my grief could have burned down the galaxy, it would have.

 

[Racefuel]

Hard disagree. The Burn was like a page straight out of an Ursula Le Guin novel, pure high concept sci fi.

Off the wall stuff like this is what made me fall in love with TOS and Star Trek in general a long time ago.

Obviously it didn't resonate as it started the downfall of Discovery

 

[urbandk]

Obviously it didn't resonate as it started the downfall of Discovery

What can I say, some of the greatest Trek hasn't been very popular

 

[F. King Daniel]

The burn in concept is brilliant..warp drive being hard to use because the galaxy is fucked up, etc. Like mass use of the omega particle or the subspace damage from TNG S7, etc.

The burn in practice was *FUCKING STUPID AS SHIT*

It has to be because of pewpew war space battle explosion or it's rubbish?

The real burn is the fans whinging about Star Trek since the dawn of the Internet.

 

[thribs]

Not really. Discovery is in a possible future. They could still play around with it if they want

 

[Awesome Possum]

Obviously it didn't resonate as it started the downfall of Discovery

It got two more seasons and two direct spin-off shows.

 

[Tuskin38]

it started the downfall of Discovery

Nope.

 

[urbandk]

The real burn is the fans whinging about Star Trek since the dawn of the Internet.

If we really wanted to be faithful to Gene's vision, we would have found a cure for the Burn by the 32nd century

 

[F. King Daniel]

Not really. Discovery is in a possible future. They could still play around with it if they want

Discovery is THE future. Fans are just clinging to these prequel shows like Picard too tightly.

 

[Racefuel]

A bit of a devils advocate on this one...but if the 32nd century Academy series flops...and if SNW S2 does not, what will that say as to what the fanbase and community wants?

 

[Soong-type Android]

That isn't a very far fetched suggestion.