Voyager: The Borg

[Anwar]

BOBW required the Borg to overpower the ENT's new weapons, annihilate an armada of redshirts, and for the ENT-D crew to have both a super-advanced android capable of interfacing with their still-assimilated captive to build up the Borg threat and give the crew their victory. In VOY, had they done a story where VOY was attacked by a Cube but technobabbled a message through Seven of Nine into shutting down the Cube it would've been a hated episode.

First Contact again required there to be a larger armada to get trashed (and sufficiently damage the borg ship first) before taking out the Cube. Later on they fought a smaller much weaker vessel and could realistically win, and it took defeating the Queen (a hated character) to win in the end again.

I've never read "Greater than Sum".

"Scorpion" wasn't a "Voyager vs the Borg" episode, it was a "Voyager is a smaller player in a larger conflict they manage to resolve"; The Borg never targeted VOY until the end when they were already weakened by fighting the 8472. And plus there's plenty of people who hated Scorpion for showing that the Borg could lose in actual combat and consider it the start of their VOY decay.

It could have been done better, if VOY's original aliens had been better accepted and not make them fall back on the Borg whenever they wanted to do a ratings grab story.

Why am I apologizing or justifying VOY? Because you can sit back and watch something you like get trashed into oblivion because it simply wanted to exist, for so long.

 

[Saito S]

I'm not going to go point by point with your latest post, Anwar, because you're just repeating the exact same arguments for like the thousandth time (arguments that have been THOROUGHLY debunked across multiple threads at this point). Just gonna touch on one thing:

Why am I apologizing or justifying VOY? Because you can sit back and watch something you like get trashed into oblivion because it simply wanted to exist, for so long.

Since it is an inarguable, incontrovertible fact that no one in this thread (or the other threads in which we've gone back and forth) who has taken the time to write long, detailed posts arguing with you (such as Withers, RyuRoots, myself, and some others as well) is "trashing the show into oblivion", but rather, simply pointing out things we think could have done better; none of those same people hate the show because it "simply wanted to exist" (in fact, we didn't hate the show at all, as we've said multiple times), but rather, wished the flaws we saw in it weren't present because we WANTED the show to be better than it was... Since these hard facts completely invalidate your reasoning that I just quoted above for why you are being an apologist for bad writing NOW, TODAY, in THIS thread (and others), when arguing with US, I ask you to provide a different reason.

Or, put more succinctly: We do not give a flying fuck about the supposed Voyager haters (if they even existed) who hated the show for simply existing. That's not us. We are here. They are not. Whether or not they hated everything about Voyager is completely irrelevant, as are their reasons for doing so, whatever they might have been.

 

[Anwar]

Since it is an inarguable, incontrovertible fact that no one in this thread (or the other threads in which we've gone back and forth) who has taken the time to write long, detailed posts arguing with you (such as Withers, RyuRoots, myself, and some others as well) is "trashing the show into oblivion"

If you think that complaining about things that happened in every episode, every antagonist in the shows' history, every moment of the ship's exterior shots that show it being in good shape, the development of nearly all the characters through the shows entire run, the premiere episode, the finale, and the supporting cast ISN'T trashing a show into oblivion then you need to look up "bashing" in a media dictionary.

 

[Saito S]

Since it is an inarguable, incontrovertible fact that no one in this thread (or the other threads in which we've gone back and forth) who has taken the time to write long, detailed posts arguing with you (such as Withers, RyuRoots, myself, and some others as well) is "trashing the show into oblivion"

If you think that complaining about things that happened in every episode, every antagonist in the shows' history, every moment of the ship's exterior shots that show it being in good shape, the development of nearly all the characters through the shows entire run, the premiere episode, the finale, and the supporting cast ISN'T trashing a show into oblivion then you need to look up "bashing" in a media dictionary.

If you think that what we have done is complain about things that happened in EVERY episode, EVERY antagonist in the show's history, EVERY moment of the ship's exterior shots that show it being in good shape, and the development of NEARLY ALL the characters through the shows ENTIRE run, then you need to re-read A LOT of posts. And since you opened this can of worms: YOU need to look up "bashing" in a media dictionary, far more than I do. While you're at it, look up "creative", "oblivion", "trashing", "hate", "entire", "middle ground", and "premise".

And for the record: I thought the premiere was "Ok... not terrible, but not very good, either", by the way. Note: NOT TERRIBLE. Not good either, but that hardly qualifies as "hatred". I did think the final ep was pretty bad, but so what. There are some terrible eps in EVERY Trek series.

 

[RyuRoots]

Since it is an inarguable, incontrovertible fact that no one in this thread (or the other threads in which we've gone back and forth) who has taken the time to write long, detailed posts arguing with you (such as Withers, RyuRoots, myself, and some others as well) is "trashing the show into oblivion"

If you think that complaining about things that happened in every episode, every antagonist in the shows' history, every moment of the ship's exterior shots that show it being in good shape, the development of nearly all the characters through the shows entire run, the premiere episode, the finale, and the supporting cast ISN'T trashing a show into oblivion then you need to look up "bashing" in a media dictionary.

Anwar, why don't you actually read other people's posts? I keep asking/telling you to do that, but you really don't seem to want to.

I've said that I thought that other villains and other villain-centric eps were good, that I like several mains, and for christ's sake, I made a "best-of" VOY topic a while ago and have my own "best of Voyager" list just for my own enjoyment. BUT OH WAIT WHO AM I KIDDING ONLY SOMEONE WHO HATES VOYAGER'S EXISTENCE AND EVERYTHING ABOUT IT WOULD SAY OR DO THESE THINGS.

Huge tinfoil hat. Huuuuuuge.

 

[Anwar]

things that happened in EVERY episode

Ship being fixed up after damages, holodeck still functioning, no lack of torpedoes and shuttles, Maquis members getting along with Fleeters

EVERY antagonist in the show's history

Crappy Kazon, defanged Borg, "I hate time-travel" Krenim, "watered-down Predator" Hirogen, ruined 8472, "poorly-developed" Vidiians...

EVERY moment of the ship's exterior shots that show it being in good shape

No lasting damage, ship fixed up between episodes instead of showing every single moment of repair...

and the development of NEARLY ALL the characters through the shows ENTIRE run

"Voyager isn't known for its character development", "not enough supporting characters", "Should have seen the Equinox crew", "Chakotay and Kim"...

then you need to re-read A LOT of posts

Oh I have, I have...

I made a "best-of" VOY topic a while ago and have my own "best of Voyager" list just for my own enjoyment

I'll have to look at that.

 

[Withers]

None of those things you just listed are untrue. In spite of all that I've still seen every episode of Voyager at least four or five times (even the really horrible first two seasons.) I can quote episodes from start to finish without even looking at the screen. I liked Voyager but because of the reasons you just listed I don't like it as much as I might have.

The difference between the two of us is that you pretend nothing was wrong with Voyager- that the list you just jotted down is somehow invalid. What you need to wrap your brain around is the idea that some people (obviously not you) can can have those complaints and still like the show.

-Withers-​

 

[RyuRoots]

things that happened in EVERY episode

Ship being fixed up after damages, holodeck still functioning, no lack of torpedoes and shuttles, Maquis members getting along with Fleeters

EVERY antagonist in the show's history

Crappy Kazon, defanged Borg, "I hate time-travel" Krenim, "watered-down Predator" Hirogen, ruined 8472, "poorly-developed" Vidiians...

No lasting damage, ship fixed up between episodes instead of showing every single moment of repair...

"Voyager isn't known for its character development", "not enough supporting characters", "Should have seen the Equinox crew", "Chakotay and Kim"...

then you need to re-read A LOT of posts

Oh I have, I have...

I made a "best-of" VOY topic a while ago and have my own "best of Voyager" list just for my own enjoyment

I'll have to look at that.

Those didn't happen in every single episode, dude.

lmao what? We've complained about the Kazon and the Borg, but as I recall (I mean, I may have missed a post or two, but) I'm pretty sure neither Saito S nor myself voiced issues with the Vidiians, Krenim, or Hirogen in this thread. In fact, I said the exact opposite, that I thought the Hirogen were effective.

And Withers is exactly right. A lot of what you said I think are legitimate criticisms. BUT I STILL LIKE VOYAGER. I don't LOVE it like I do TNG or DS9, but I think it's a show that has more good than bad in it. But I think I could have loved it if some of its weaker areas were improved more.

You really need to stop projecting your non-existant hater BS onto us.

 

[Anwar]

They pretty much DID happen in every episode. Maybe this is a minuscule amount of hyperbole but not by much.

Kazon and Borg are the best recalled antagonists whenever anyone wants to trash VOY, but the Hirogen get slammed for being watered-down Predators, the Krenim because Trek fans were sick of time-travel or anything time-related, and the Vidiians for hunting other aliens when they should've been hunting primitive lifeforms on primitive worlds (or the Phage should've been some major plague raging across the DQ instead of affecting one species).

But so far the only complaint from you guys is that they are "under-developed/under-used" which is pretty ironic considering you'd just as quickly slam them for overuse if they WEREN'T over-used...

Hard to believe that anyone who criticized nearly ever aspect of a show in its every episode could consider themselves a fan and that the entire show from premise to casting needed to be changed for them to "love" it.

 

[RyuRoots]

They pretty much DID happen in every episode. Maybe this is a minuscule amount of hyperbole but not by much.

Kazon and Borg are the best recalled antagonists whenever anyone wants to trash VOY, but the Hirogen get slammed for being watered-down Predators, the Krenim because Trek fans were sick of time-travel or anything time-related, and the Vidiians for hunting other aliens when they should've been hunting primitive lifeforms on primitive worlds (or the Phage should've been some major plague raging across the DQ instead of affecting one species).

But so far the only complaint from you guys is that they are "under-developed/under-used" which is pretty ironic considering you'd just as quickly slam them for overuse if they WEREN'T over-used...

Hard to believe that anyone who criticized nearly ever aspect of a show in its every episode could consider themselves a fan and that the entire show from premise to casting needed to be changed for them to "love" it.

Whatever, I don't give a damn what your supposed hatedom says, WE HAVE NOT SAID THAT. Talk to US, the people in this thread.

And especially in regards to the bolded bits, actually, we have told you precisely what we don't like about the Borg and the Kazon. And Anwar, no one here ever said these things. Ever. And I'm getting sick of personal attacks on me for things I have never thought or said.

 

[Saito S]

Ship being fixed up after damages, holodeck still functioning, no lack of torpedoes and shuttles, Maquis members getting along with Fleeters

Those are things I found wrong with the show as a whole. Things one finds wrong with a show as a whole tend to (by their very nature) work their way into many, many episodes. Want another example? In DS9, it was nigh unto impossible to figure out just WHO was responsible for WHAT, both in Ops and on the bridge of the Defiant. People moved from console to console, and did things that one would have thought so-and-so should do, and why is the Doctor manning a bridge console during a battle? And is Starfleet really SO short on manpower that we need Cadet Nog to take a key position? It made a bit more sense once they field promoted him, but yeesh...

Neither that, nor the ongoing problems I had with Voyager, make it so that I hated every ep (or nearly every ep, or even CLOSE to nearly every ep).

Crappy Kazon, defanged Borg, "I hate time-travel" Krenim, "watered-down Predator" Hirogen, ruined 8472, "poorly-developed" Vidiians...

The Kazon were crappy and the Borg DID get defanged. I would point out at this time that you haven't tried to say otherwise. Your entire argument has been based on the notion that yes, the Kazon WERE crappy; yes, the Borg WERE defanged, but those things are ok, because the writers "had no choice." Since you have never given me ANY evidence that you disagree about the crappiness of the Kazon or the defanged-ness of the Borg, what's the problem?

The Krenim were awesome (I never said "I hate time travel". I said that there have been too many time travel stories in Trek. Difference. And "Year of Hell" was by far one of the BEST time travel stories in Trek.) I never said I didn't like the Hirogen. They were excellent villains. 8472 started off great, then when they had an episode which turned them into THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY BEGAN AS, I didn't like them so much. Is that REALLY so hard to understand? The Vidiians weren't poorly developed, and I never said they were. I though they were very effective villains. The one thing about them that really disappointed me was that the Phage was cured in such a hand-waving, nonchalant, "Phage? What's that? Oh! Right... we got rid of that" way in "Think Tank."

No lasting damage, ship fixed up between episodes instead of showing every single moment of repair...

Please. NO ONE has ever said that we wanted to see literally EVERY LAST BIT OF REPAIR AND RESUPPLY OMG. We just wanted to see more than we got on the show (which was almost none). Other than that, I addressed this at the top of my post: problem with a thing that crops up in many or most episodes =! hating every episode in which said thing crops up.

"Voyager isn't known for its character development", "not enough supporting characters", "Should have seen the Equinox crew", "Chakotay and Kim"...

"Voyager isn't known for its character development" IS NOT the same thing as saying that NEARLY ALL THE CHARACTERS had crappy development. For the record: out of ten total characters (counting both Kes and Seven), I thought 3 had "excellent" development, 4 had somewhere between "okay" and "good" development, and the remaining 3 had "bad" (or "almost no") character development. So tell me again about how I think that "NEARLY ALL" of the characters had terrible development?

then you need to re-read A LOT of posts

Oh I have, I have...

No, you haven't, you haven't. Frankly, I've seen no evidence that you even read the entirety of all of our posts the FIRST time through them.

None of those things you just listed are untrue. In spite of all that I've still seen every episode of Voyager at least four or five times (even the really horrible first two seasons.) I can quote episodes from start to finish without even looking at the screen. I liked Voyager but because of the reasons you just listed I don't like it as much as I might have.

EXACTLY.

The difference between the two of us is that you pretend nothing was wrong with Voyager- that the list you just jotted down is somehow invalid. What you need to wrap your brain around is the idea that some people (obviously not you) can can have those complaints and still like the show.

EXACTLY.

And here's a thought. What if someone came in and DID say "I hate Voyager. I thought it was a terrible show. I thought ALL the characters sucked and almost every episode was really lame. And the writing was so bad it hurt." So what? Why is that even a big deal? So someone hates a TV show. Ok... and? If someone were to say that exact thing, but of DS9, then oh well, someone hates a show I liked, for reasons that make no sense to me. WHO CARES!?

You really need to stop projecting your non-existant hater BS onto us.

Well said.

 

[Withers]

Hard to believe that anyone who criticized nearly ever aspect of a show in its every episode could consider themselves a fan and that the entire show from premise to casting needed to be changed for them to "love" it.

It's just has hard for me to believe that someone who omits so much of what went on during Voyager's seven seasons actually watched it. Were I you I'd be careful about telling people whether or not they qualify as "fans."

-Withers-​

 

[Anwar]

Whatever, I don't give a damn what your supposed hatedom says, WE HAVE NOT SAID THAT. Talk to US, the people in this thread.

Actually, Withers DID say the show needed totally different writers and a totally different cast. This implies he hated the writers AND the casting.

Your entire argument has been based on the notion that yes, the Kazon WERE crappy; yes, the Borg WERE defanged, but those things are ok, because the writers "had no choice."

What we're arguing about is the "had no choice" bit, I definately think they DIDN'T have a choice and we should all just accept that and get over it. The 8472 also had to taken out of the Trekverse in a totally concluded fashion. You cannot leave Cthulu-like beings to just roam the cosmos.

Those are things I found wrong with the show as a whole

Which isn't any different from "I had problems with the entire/whole show", ie virtually every episode.

"Voyager isn't known for its character development" IS NOT the same thing as saying that NEARLY ALL THE CHARACTERS had crappy development.

Then Withers should have said "Voyager isn't known for developing every single last character it had, central and recurring, though there were those among the central cast who definately got some and I appreciate that."

And here's a thought. What if someone came in and DID say "I hate Voyager. I thought it was a terrible show. I thought ALL the characters sucked and almost every episode was really lame. And the writing was so bad it hurt." So what? Why is that even a big deal?

Try saying that when you go across the net for 15 years putting up with loud-posting nitwits and have to put with them for all that time. You won't be the nicest guy when it comes to further criticisms.

 

[Withers]

Actually, Withers DID say the show needed totally different writers and a totally different cast. He hated the writers AND the casting.

Where did I say that? Since I'm a pretty big fan of the Captain and the Doctor I have a hard time believing I ever said the show needed a completely different cast. Since I think the writers were hamstrung a bit but still managed to produce some classic episodes like Year of Hell and Scorpion I have a hard time believing I ever said the writers needed to be replaced completely. You, Anwar, are the only person that uses the word "hate" in this forum. I can speak for myself and even if I couldn't I would never want you to do so on my behalf. So please don't.

Then Withers should have said "Voyager isn't known for developing every single last character it had, central and recurring, though there were those among the central cast who definately got some and I appreciate that."

I've written about inherent mobility and character development a bunch of times but that doesn't change the fact- Voyager was not known for its character development, regardless of how you might want to qualify that statement. When Trek is viewed as a whole Voyager isn't what comes up as the example of well developed characters. I stand by it because... it's the truth.

Try saying that when you go across the net for 15 years putting up with loud-posting nitwits and have to put with them for all that time. You won't be the nicest guy when it comes to further criticisms.

If they're even a fraction as headache inducing as the two weeks I've spent talking to you about Voyager they got more than they gave.

-Withers-​

 

[RyuRoots]

Whatever, I don't give a damn what your supposed hatedom says, WE HAVE NOT SAID THAT. Talk to US, the people in this thread.

Actually, Withers DID say the show needed totally different writers and a totally different cast. This implies he hated the writers AND the casting.

Your entire argument has been based on the notion that yes, the Kazon WERE crappy; yes, the Borg WERE defanged, but those things are ok, because the writers "had no choice."

What we're arguing about is the "had no choice" bit, I definately think they DIDN'T have a choice and we should all just accept that and get over it.

Which isn't any different from "I had problems with the entire/whole show", ie virtually every episode.

"Voyager isn't known for its character development" IS NOT the same thing as saying that NEARLY ALL THE CHARACTERS had crappy development.

Then Withers should have said "Voyager isn't known for developing every single last character it had, central and recurring, though there were those among the central cast who definately got some and I appreciate that."

And here's a thought. What if someone came in and DID say "I hate Voyager. I thought it was a terrible show. I thought ALL the characters sucked and almost every episode was really lame. And the writing was so bad it hurt." So what? Why is that even a big deal?

Try saying that when you go across the net for 15 years putting up with loud-posting nitwits and have to put with them for all that time. You won't be the nicest guy when it comes to further criticisms.

And your posts IMPLY you're a paranoid lunatic. That he had problems with the writing (I definitely did) and casting (I personally think some could've been chosen better) doesn't necessarily mean he hates everything about every aspect of both. Or maybe he does! I don't know, I can't speak for him. But EVEN IF HE DID, it is possible to watch a television show and *gasp* not like something about it! YOU need to accept THAT and get over it.

And you're simply factually incorrect. They did have a choice, and you saying otherwise just makes you an apologist for bad writing.

What? No. Problems with the show "as a whole" does not mean that one thinks every episode sucks. Again. Reading comprehension, buddy. It'll really help you in life.

Now you're just arguing semantics which is kind of pathetic. I can't tell if this is just pedantic or if you honestly couldn't tell. Though it fits in line with the lack of reading comprehension.

Oh, shut up about your non-existant hatedom already. We have told you numerous times to give it a freaking rest and talk to US. The people in this thread, Anwar. We REALLY don't care what you've talked to or heard way in the past.

 

[Anwar]

Withers, from the "Did Voyager's Premise inherently hold it back?" topic:

Voyager needed a better cast, more attentive writers.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=3856347&postcount=8

They did have a choice, and you saying otherwise just makes you an apologist for bad writing.

Yeah, they did have choice. They could've simply not done the show. And lately I've been thinking that WAS the choice they should've gone for since there wasn't anything they COULD'VE done to appease anybody.

 

[RyuRoots]

Do you realize how little sense your arguments make and you DELIBERATELY avoid replying to the main points people make, or do you not realize you're doing it? Just curious. Because okay. You didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. My point was that it's perfectly valid for him to have problems with the casting and writing as a viewer of sci-fi and/or television. It's that simple.

And what are you even talking about? Everyone here who's still replying to you (which is amazing considering that this argument isn't even circular, it's Sisyphean) liked more than disliked the show.

 

[Saito S]

What we're arguing about is the "had no choice" bit,

EXACTLY. Thank you for proving my point. You call us haters since we say that the Kazon sucked and the Borg were defanged. BUT YOU AGREE THAT THE KAZON SUCKED AND THE BORG WERE DEFANGED. We disagree on WHY those things are the case, but we agree that they were the case. So how the hell can you call us haters for saying things you agree with?

I definately think they DIDN'T have a choice and we should all just accept that and get over it.

We should do no such thing, since it's completely untrue and patently absurd. If you really feel that the writers of Voyager literally had NO CHOICE but to make the Kazon suck and to make the Borg weak... don't ever try to write a book, dude.

The 8472 also had to taken out of the Trekverse in a totally concluded fashion. You cannot leave Cthulu-like beings to just roam the cosmos.

Sure they could. All they had to do is come up with a better story to support it. NO, I'm not going to tell you what it is. I'm not a Voyager writer and I have no interest in sitting down and writing an 8472 story. But the idea that they were too powerful to continue to EXIST in the Trek verse is false. And just because I can't come up with a better story here on the spot doesn't mean that it cannot be done.

Which isn't any different from "I had problems with the entire/whole show", ie virtually every episode.

Except that it's totally different.

A) I believe that some of these things (total lack of showing repair/resupply, endless shuttles, etc) were overall problems with Voyager. The show as a whole would have been better if these problems had been addressed.
B) I liked many episodes of the TV show "Star Trek: Voyager." Overall, I liked slightly more episodes than I disliked. There were also a smaller number of episodes that I absolutely LOVED and consider to be among Trek's best.

Both A and B are true. You can stick your fingers in your ears all you want, and tell me I'm wrong, or lying, or in denial about how I "really" feel about Voyager, or whatever. Doesn't change a thing.

And here's a thought. What if someone came in and DID say "I hate Voyager. I thought it was a terrible show. I thought ALL the characters sucked and almost every episode was really lame. And the writing was so bad it hurt." So what? Why is that even a big deal?

Try saying that when you go across the net for 15 years putting up with loud-posting nitwits and have to put with them for all that time. You won't be the nicest guy when it comes to further criticisms.

I guarantee you I wouldn't react the way you do. Guarantee it.

You seriously let what people say on the internet get to you THAT MUCH? You are seriously THIS bothered by the fact that wherever you went, people just RAAAAAAGGGEED about how much Voyager sucked? Why? Putting aside that I have never, EVER seen any evidence to support the notion that there was anywhere NEAR the level of anti-Voyager vitriol that you claim to have "dealt with", WHY does it bother you so much?

You, Anwar, are the only person that uses the word "hate" in this forum. I can speak for myself and even if I couldn't I would never want you to do so on my behalf. So please don't.

Good point. How many times must we tell you we don't hate the show till you believe it?

Withers, from the "Did Voyager's Premise inherently hold it back?" topic:

Voyager needed a better cast, more attentive writers.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=3856347&postcount=8

Oh come on dude! Seriously?? "Needed a better cast" and "more attentive writers" DOES NOT MEAN that the existing cast and writers completely sucked, all the time, 100%, top to bottom. All it means is that it needed to be better than it was by some unspecified amount.

Look, I know you hate middle ground, but you cannot have an intelligent debate until you get that we are dealing in it - quite often, in fact - and that MOST people deal in it, frequently. "Needed to be better" does not mean "Completely sucked!"

Yeah, they did have choice. They could've simply not done the show. And lately I've been thinking that WAS the choice they should've gone for since there wasn't anything they COULD'VE done to appease anybody.

If they hadn't done the show at all, we wouldn't have gotten great Trek episodes like "Scorpion", "Year of Hell", "Living Witness", "Dragon's Teeth", or "Workforce".

Is THAT what you want? Is that what you would have preferred? For the show to just never have existed at all? Why do you hate Voyager so much, Anwar?

 

[shadowedgalaxy]

How were the Borg overused in VOY? They only appeared like, 8 times in major roles.

 

[Withers]

How were the Borg overused in VOY? They only appeared like, 8 times in major roles.

And if those eight (I think that number might be a little off in one direction or another) appearances didn't end, each time, with the Borg having their asses handed to them in a brown paper sack people probably wouldn't have that complaint. It's not just the sheer number people have an issue with. It's also how they were used in each appearance (or misused as the case may be.)

-Withers-​