DS9 Fans: The Bane of Our Very Existence - Part 9,782

[Guy Gardener]

Like I said, Sisko trashing the Borg all on his own with a runabout is okay. Janeway doing it with a starship is a no-no. Why? Because Sisko is from DS9 and the fandom is a-okay with anything DS9 does.

Voyager was a third the size of the Enterprise D, and a 1/4 the size of the Enterprise E with just a fraction over a tenth the crew compliment... Voyager was more like a runabout than a full sized Star Ship if we want to be honest about how tense every adventure with these people was supposed to be that the crew was expected to shit their pants everytime a new bad guy with a ship of the line and the resources of an entire empire, got up in their grill saying "hell no, keep off our front yard you space bum trash, we don't like your kind around here." ...Y'know like Rambo First Blood, but in Space.

So what if Sisko could thumb wrestle a Flotilla of Borg dodecahedrons into submission, it just makes Voyager sound like a punk with entitlement issues if it's going to wave a flag about how it demands equal suspension of disbelief other shows got, on gratis with no ante.

Taking the low road and being the smaller person, um, Star Ship earns zero sympathy from just about everyone.

O?

Did Enterprise ever bitch and whine about how easy Voyager got it?

 

[startrekwatcher]

You do realise that Enterprise's episodic format was a critical failure, and a failure in terms of ratings, right?

It wasn't that the falling ratings were an indictment of the show's episodic format it was of the writing. Had the episodes been as good as say Dead Stop, Minefield, Regeneration, Future Tense etc then there would be no complaining. By the same token serialization in and of itself doesn't automatically mean great writing. It can be awful like Heroes in season three or the new 90210.

I would argue that the Xindi arc was successful because it possessed the very elements the show was missing--mystery, good writing, interesting aliens, suspense, strong characterization etc. These could have been easily incorporated into standalones and the show would have been entertaining--look no further than TNG.

 

[TheGodBen]

Third season Enterprise was serialized precisely to try to keep an audience, which is why I said shows were serialized. It was serialized better than DS9, which shows Berman's increasing experience. None of this contradicts me, which means you're argumentative for no reason.

I'm not the one who came into this thread with the wonderful argument that "DS9 sucks", I am of the opinion that there is no good or bad when it comes to drama and that everyone is entitled to their opinion. I am entitled to dislike Voyager as much as your are entitled to dislike DS9, I don't see what's so argumentative about that.

As for Berman's experience with serialisation on DS9, he has none, he tried to stop it. For example, he wanted the Dominion war wrapped up in 4 episodes, Ira Behr practically had to lie to him in order to get it to last 2 years.

The notion that Enterprise was more critically praised during its last two seasons is confusing the bbs groupthink with the wider world.

I'm going to have to point this out yet again, but I've been a member of this board now for 9 months. My opinions of Enterprise's final two seasons have absolutely nothing to with what is said on this board, I had independant thought before I ever came here.

That's not what you really think the premise is.

Don't presume to tell me what I really think. It's insulting.

You actually buy into limited resources, Maquis resistance and such nonsense.

I bought into the limited resources "nonsense" because they kept on bringing up the resource "nonsense" during the early seasons. Remember The Cloud? Resistance? Demon? If the resource problems weren't a part of the show, why where they constantly looking for resources or trading for them?

As for the Maquis, I believe that it should have led to greater tension but I don't think the Maquis should have been undermining Janeway all the way home. I think if there was to be some sort of mutiny story it should have been based upon Janeway's decisions in the Delta Quadrant rather than a Starfleet/Maquis split.

I enjoy reading your reviews because they're inadvertently funny.

I don't care so long as I get the views. Thanks for supporting the thread.

You have extremely limited comprehension.

Why, thank you! That was a compliment, right?

(Call me an idiot again and I will notify the post. I have had enough of this crap.)

Why do you troll at such extraordinary lengths?

Because I'm not trolling, I'm giving my opinions and doing my best to be respectful to those who have differing opinions to my own. I don't always succeed, but I do try.

There's nothing at issue besides a TV show.

Exactly, so why are you resorting to insults if it is only a TV show?

When there are real issues, people like you can't wait to stop reading, much less answering.

What? I post in threads that I find interesting regardless of what they're about. I took part in the recent religion thread in GenTrek, for example. Stop presuming you know me.

Oh, yes you are.

You too! We reached a peace agreement a few pages back, please don't go back to claiming that I'm saying stuff that I'm not saying.

Then when they DID have recurring villains like Cullah and Seska it was just another negative reaction.

Cullah was a dumbass, but I liked Seska and wish they hadn't killed her off just to wrap up the Kazon story-arc.

It's just double standard wherein VOY gets hated for not doing something and then hated for doing it.

I felt that the Kazon arc had many problems, but I liked that they were trying it out and felt the show lost something when it ended.

Too much money to bring back too often.

Too much money to bring back.

Too much money to bring back.

Too much money, with BSG it was made in Canada and thus could get away with paying less for its extras and the like.

BSG was aired on a cable station and had less than half the audience that Voyager had, trust me, Voyager could have afforded a few extra characters. If your claim was true then Voyager would never have had any guest actors, but they showed up week after week after week...

Plus recurring characters would have confused the common viewer too much who missed the intro episode for these people. Would have cost the show viewers.

Once again, for somebody that believes in the enlightened humanity you seem to have less faith in the common folk than me, a person who believes that humanity is probably doomed. Why is that?

Meanwhile on DS9 we'd have Sisko defeating the Borg all the time with Runabouts and everyone would love it.

When did that ever happen? The only time the Borg showed up on DS9 is the same time that Sisko lost his ship and his wife, so I honestly don't understand what you're on about.

Paramount wanted VOY to be something they could use as episodic TV to easily sell into syndication to make up for money lost on DS9.

Once again Anwar, do you have any proof that DS9 lost money? Because you keep on claiming it and when I ask you for evidence you have none.

It wasn't that the falling ratings were an indictment of the show's episodic format it was of the writing. Had the episodes been as good as say Dead Stop, Minefield, Regeneration, Future Tense etc then there would be no complaining. By the same token serialization in and of itself doesn't automatically mean great writing. It can be awful like Heroes in season three or the new 90210.

I would argue that the Xindi arc was successful because it possessed the very elements the show was missing--mystery, good writing, interesting aliens, suspense, strong characterization etc. These could have been easily incorporated into standalones and the show would have been entertaining--look no further than TNG.

I agree with you completely, and I don't think that it was the episodic nature of Voyager that put me off as much as the fact that the writing didn't suit my tastes. But stj's claim was that serialised storytelling was fundamentally flawed and inferior to episodic story-telling, which is something I completely disagree with.

 

[Anwar]

Like I said, BSG cut costs by being shot in Canada and CGI was cheaper by then to do stuff. So no, it's not the same as if VOY got recurring characters. Guest characters you pay ONCE, recurring you have to pay over and over along with the regulars.

I'm saying that if Sisko had gone off and defeated the Borg with a runabout no one would complain that it ruined the Borg. Double Standard.

And yeah, I showed you have despite it also being a syndicated show DS9's ratings were way lower than TNG's from the near start. That also means loss of revenue.

 

[Pemmer Harge]

I'm saying that if Sisko had gone off and defeated the Borg with a runabout no one would complain that it ruined the Borg. Double Standard.

I would. No double standard.

 

[exodus]

Like I said, BSG cut costs by being shot in Canada and CGI was cheaper by then to do stuff. So no, it's not the same as if VOY got recurring characters. Guest characters you pay ONCE, recurring you have to pay over and over along with the regulars.

I'm saying that if Sisko had gone off and defeated the Borg with a runabout no one would complain that it ruined the Borg. Double Standard.

And yeah, I showed you have despite it also being a syndicated show DS9's ratings were way lower than TNG's from the near start. That also means loss of revenue.

Agreed

Allow me to add, the first and secondary crew of DS9 went thru a war and not one member died do to it, yet one of complaints about Voy. is some find it unrealistic that so few died during Voy's journey in "hostile" space. Double standard again.

 

[TheGodBen]

Like I said, BSG cut costs by being shot in Canada and CGI was cheaper by then to do stuff. So no, it's not the same as if VOY got recurring characters.

You know how many people BSG had in its main cast? 13, according to Wikipedia. And that doesn't include the recurring characters suck as Zarek, Cally, Cavil... which when added up probably bring the show up to having 25 characters. Are you honestly suggesting that Voyager, with more than double the viewers and on network television back in the days when ad revenues were higher, could not have afforded 5 or 6 recurring crew-members?

Guest characters you pay ONCE, recurring you have to pay over and over along with the regulars.

Yes, but they had guest characters showing up episode after episode, and you have to pay for the costs of auditioning them week after week. With recurring roles you just have to pay them for every day they show up, you don't have to go through the process of auditioning them.

I'm saying that if Sisko had gone off and defeated the Borg with a runabout no one would complain that it ruined the Borg. Double Standard.

And I'm saying that's nonsense, if Sisko went out in a runabout and destroyed a cube I'd have said that DS9 jumped the shark, and every other Niner in this thread has said the same thing. Why do you have such a hard time believing us?

And yeah, I showed you have despite it also being a syndicated show DS9's ratings were way lower than TNG's from the near start. That also means loss of revenue.

And I showed you that DS9 had higher ratings than Voyager almost every week, so if DS9 was losing money then Voyager was losing more money.

 

[exodus]

^^Then that answers why Voy. couldn't afford to pay re-accuring cast members.

Nobody gets paid for auditions.

 

[apenpaap]

^No, but it does take time, and I doubt hiring five people to each appear in one episode is much cheaper then hiring one guy to appear in five.

 

[exodus]

^No, but it does take time, and I doubt hiring five people to each appear in one episode is much cheaper then hiring one guy to appear in five.

It is depending on the actor and their salary.

Someone like Vaughn Armstrong would have a higher salary next to the actress that played Tal Celest. However, that's where sweeps weeks come into play. If you noticed the bigger paid actors like Armstrong or Jason Alexander only show up during the start or middle of a season, when TV has sweeps weeks and networks are fighting over who pulls in bigger ratings to earn that budget to afford them. Producers don't get paid extra for auditioning actors because that's expected of them and already factored into their salary.

 

[Anwar]

Which also handily explains lack of secondary characters. Costs more for one guy to appear several times than one time. Also a guest spot would cost less than a recurring one.

 

[kes7]

VOY did have some recurring guest stars. Early on, there were the Kazon/Seska, and later, there were the Borg kids and the Borg Queen. It's not like they NEVER had a story arc or guest characters.

ETA -- and they had recurring guest stars in the form of holodeck characters, too -- Da Vinci, Chaotica, Fair Haven, etc.

 

[Thestral]

Paramount wanted VOY to be something they could use as episodic TV to easily sell into syndication to make up for money lost on DS9...

And yeah, I showed you have despite it also being a syndicated show DS9's ratings were way lower than TNG's from the near start. That also means loss of revenue.

Prove that DS9 was losing money per episode, as in actual statements or figures. You really think Paramount and co., let alone Rick Berman, would have let DS9 get away with paying so much for guest stars that it would have lost them money?

It's interesting that despite heavy promotion and being the flagship show for UPN, Voyager's ratings were still slightly lower, or at best breaking even, than DS9's. So they're bringing in roughly the same amount of money, yet which one's getting the bigger budget and heavier advertising? So who's really losing more money?

So no, it's not the same as if VOY got recurring characters. Guest characters you pay ONCE, recurring you have to pay over and over along with the regulars.

Umm... over and over again as guest characters each time, yes. So bringing Chase Masterson onto the show, say, 10 times at a potentially-slightly-higher-than-standard-guest-star price. Means you're paying one person ten times as a guest star each time. Versus 10 people one time each, at a perhaps-slightly-lower-cost, but you have to figure in the time and money for ten times the auditioning, new prosthetics (potentially), new wardrobe...

Or are you saying it was a mistake to bring Seska, Barclay, Naomi Wildman, Samantha Wildman, Vorik, and Icheb back multiple times?

As for ER and 7th Heaven, they aren't Sci-fi and thus have more viewers.

I'm sorry, how does this in any way refute my point? If anything, it helps me because Trek would've liked to have those show's audiences. Show me how ER and 7th Heaven's ratings suffered because they had a cast of recurring characters, otherwise your statement that "the average viewer is confused by returning characters" is baseless.

People say that what happened in Sacrifice of Angels worked out great with Sisko's own story with the Prophets, so they'd have no problem with him taking out the Borg like nothing. They'd welcome it because it would be a TNG creation being beaten. Picard defeating Dominion soldiers would have had them howling their guts out over the silliness of it all, though. Double Standard and all that.

Now you're just spouting silly nonsense.

Allow me to add, the first and secondary crew of DS9 went thru a war and not one member died do to it, yet one of complaints about Voy. is some find it unrealistic that so few died during Voy's journey in "hostile" space. Double standard again.

Umm... umm... Jadzia Dax anyone? Damar? Weyoun (multiple times)? Ziyal? Gowron? Kor? Sloan? Michael Eddington?

ETA:

Producers don't get paid extra for auditioning actors because that's expected of them and already factored into their salary.

You're still not factoring the time and opportunity cost.

Costs more for one guy to appear several times than one time. Also a guest spot would cost less than a recurring one.

What? Show to me where "recurring spot" is paid at a higher wage than "guest spot," or at least high enough to be a factor.

 

[exodus]

Which also handily explains lack of secondary characters. Costs more for one guy to appear several times than one time. Also a guest spot would cost less than a recurring one.

Also I think people over estimate how much Trek actors get paid, which isn't as much as you'd think. It's very, very rare to get paid "Friends" or "CSI" salary.

 

[exodus]

Paramount wanted VOY to be something they could use as episodic TV to easily sell into syndication to make up for money lost on DS9...

And yeah, I showed you have despite it also being a syndicated show DS9's ratings were way lower than TNG's from the near start. That also means loss of revenue.

Prove that DS9 was losing money per episode, as in actual statements or figures. You really think Paramount and co., let alone Rick Berman, would have let DS9 get away with paying so much for guest stars that it would have lost them money?

It's interesting that despite heavy promotion and being the flagship show for UPN, Voyager's ratings were still slightly lower, or at best breaking even, than DS9's. So they're bringing in roughly the same amount of money, yet which one's getting the bigger budget and heavier advertising? So who's really losing more money?

So no, it's not the same as if VOY got recurring characters. Guest characters you pay ONCE, recurring you have to pay over and over along with the regulars.

Umm... over and over again as guest characters each time, yes. So bringing Chase Masterson onto the show, say, 10 times at a potentially-slightly-higher-than-standard-guest-star price. Means you're paying one person ten times as a guest star each time. Versus 10 people one time each, at a perhaps-slightly-lower-cost, but you have to figure in the time and money for ten times the auditioning, new prosthetics (potentially), new wardrobe...

Or are you saying it was a mistake to bring Seska, Barclay, Naomi Wildman, Samantha Wildman, Vorik, and Icheb back multiple times?



I'm sorry, how does this in any way refute my point? If anything, it helps me because Trek would've liked to have those show's audiences. Show me how ER and 7th Heaven's ratings suffered because they had a cast of recurring characters, otherwise your statement that "the average viewer is confused by returning characters" is baseless.

People say that what happened in Sacrifice of Angels worked out great with Sisko's own story with the Prophets, so they'd have no problem with him taking out the Borg like nothing. They'd welcome it because it would be a TNG creation being beaten. Picard defeating Dominion soldiers would have had them howling their guts out over the silliness of it all, though. Double Standard and all that.

Now you're just spouting silly nonsense.

Allow me to add, the first and secondary crew of DS9 went thru a war and not one member died do to it, yet one of complaints about Voy. is some find it unrealistic that so few died during Voy's journey in "hostile" space. Double standard again.

Umm... umm... Jadzia Dax anyone? Damar? Weyoun (multiple times)? Ziyal? Gowron? Kor? Sloan? Michael Eddington?

Dax, Ziyal, Gowron, Kor & Michael Eddington died for other reasons outside of the war.

 

[Thestral]

Allow me to add, the first and secondary crew of DS9 went thru a war and not one member died do to it...

Umm... umm... Jadzia Dax anyone? Damar? Weyoun (multiple times)? Ziyal? Gowron? Kor? Sloan? Michael Eddington?

Dax, Ziyal, Gowron, Kor & Michael Eddington died for other reasons outside of the war.

Jadzia Dax: killed by an enemy agent (Dukat) seeking to gain control of the wormhole to allow Dominion reinforcements to come through. Said agent was inserted while Dax was commanding Deep Space Nine because the fleet(s) were performing an offensive against the Dominion.

Ziyal: killed by Damar as a traitor and saboteur for aiding in lowering the defenses of Terok Nor and allowing Defiant to enter the wormhole while the battle to reclaim Terok Nor was raging.

Gowron: killed in combat by Worf during a challenge over leadership of the Empire, after his politically motivated poor strategic decisions in the War were leading to unacceptable Klingon losses.

Kor: killed in combat with a Jem'Hadar fleet behind enemy lines, holding them off while General Martok and the rest of his Klingon raiders escaped back to Deep Space Nine.

Michael Eddington: killed in combat with Jem'Hadar on a deep raid into the Badlands to free Maquis prisoners; sent on said raid by Starfleet Command because of a report indicating a devastating cache of missiles.

 

[Anwar]

We're talking directly killed by the war, as in killed in battle with the Jem'Hadar. Ziyal was killed by Damar, Gowron was killed by Worf, Kor basically committed suicide and Eddington met his end becuase he was a terrorist.

 

[Anwar]

Prove that DS9 was losing money per episode, as in actual statements or figures. You really think Paramount and co., let alone Rick Berman, would have let DS9 get away with paying so much for guest stars that it would have lost them money?

It was syndicated, and they had VOY to make up for the money lost on DS9 (and they had their bases covered, in that after the show was done they could easily sell it into syndication thus increasing money made even if the show didn't make tons of cash).

It's interesting that despite heavy promotion and being the flagship show for UPN, Voyager's ratings were still slightly lower, or at best breaking even, than DS9's. So they're bringing in roughly the same amount of money, yet which one's getting the bigger budget and heavier advertising? So who's really losing more money?

VOY was a network show, on a network not everyone got. DS9 was syndicated and thus should have been making more. That it broke even with VOY showed it wasn't.

Umm... over and over again as guest characters each time, yes. So bringing Chase Masterson onto the show, say, 10 times at a potentially-slightly-higher-than-standard-guest-star price. Means you're paying one person ten times as a guest star each time. Versus 10 people one time each, at a perhaps-slightly-lower-cost, but you have to figure in the time and money for ten times the auditioning, new prosthetics (potentially), new wardrobe...

Still less money.

Or are you saying it was a mistake to bring Seska, Barclay, Naomi Wildman, Samantha Wildman, Vorik, and Icheb back multiple times?

And they stopped showing up or were killed off. If they made more money they likely would have kept coming back.

I'm sorry, how does this in any way refute my point? If anything, it helps me because Trek would've liked to have those show's audiences. Show me how ER and 7th Heaven's ratings suffered because they had a cast of recurring characters, otherwise your statement that "the average viewer is confused by returning characters" is baseless.

They didn't suffer because they weren't sci-fi shows and had more of an audience to begin with. If they lost some viewers they could handle it since they still had a bigger audience than VOY ever would. So this is just a case of the common joe liking non-scifi over sci-fi.

Now you're just spouting silly nonsense.

Double standard dude, double standard. It's okay for Sisko to take out a Borg cube with a runabout, but if VOY every destroyed a Jem'Hadar bug fighter there'd be hell to pay from the Niners.

What? Show to me where "recurring spot" is paid at a higher wage than "guest spot," or at least high enough to be a factor.

The slightest bit higher is enough of a difference.

 

[Thestral]

We're talking directly killed by the war, as in killed in battle with the Jem'Hadar.

Mutiple reactions:

Clearly not, since Exodus was willing to accept Weyoun and Sloan, who were not killed in battle with the Jem'Hadar.

Kor and Eddington were directly killed in battle with the Jem'Hadar.

What, do Cardassians no longer count as enemy soldiers in the Dominion War?

You're moving the goalposts here, since the original statement was "the first and secondary crew of DS9 went thru a war and not one member died due to it."

Being killed in combat with an enemy commando on an objective raid, no matter how one-sided the fight, is dying due to war.

Being executed as a traitor and saboteur (ie like the real Maquis in WW2) is dying due to war.

Dying in a coup because your generals think you're doing a piss-poor job of managing the war (ie like the failed Operation Valkyrie) is dying due to war.

 

[Anwar]

Eddington died prior to the war due to his role as a terrorist, Kor basically committed suicide (though it was in a war battle), Ziyal was killed by Damar.

And anyways, Dax was only killed off due to Terry Farrell having some contract dispute not because it aided the story. If not for that then NO ONE in the primary cast would have died. And yet we have Niners calling for the mass execution of VOY's entire cast. Again with the double standard.