Strictly speaking, by the 1970s they had already acknowledged 1955 as the cutoff between Earth 2 and Earth 1 Supermen and they were considered 2 different characters. And starting with Crisis on Infinite Earths, DC rebooted every other week almost. Marvel has a better track record for non-reboots in the comics, except for that bit where Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane was erased. Everything that happened in Marvel comics, even the 1940s Captain America comics, still applies to the current version of the comic characters.
Not to mention another franchise: James Bond. After Pierce Brosnan, it got to the point where it was unbelievable that the guy from Dr. No (1962) was the same guy from Die Another Day (2002). Rebooting the series with Daniel Craig as a newly minted 007 in the 2000's was the best thing they could have done.
It's interesting that the first Bond film continuity does end up having a nice arc where Bond starts as a 20 something and ends his last mission as a 60 something just before retirement.
I'm not sure they pegged down the date, at least not in the comics themselves But that's retcon not a reboot Well there was some fudging and retconning hapening to make all of Cap's post 1945 and pre Marvel Age adventures work. Including the invention of three more Captain Americas and a Bucky or two But Marvel usually had the right approach. Peter Parker isn't a man in his seventies because the window dressing was adjusted to to keep him under forty.
Don't misrepresent my words. You selectively edited my argument against your position to claim falsely that it supported your position. I have every right to point out that you did so.
I'm not quite following you. Sean Connery was 32 when he made Dr. No, and Pierce Brosnan was 49 when he made Die Another Day. And there was nothing in DAD that inferred that Bond was retiring from the service. Get over yourself. I pointed out my opinion that CBS should have made DSC a reboot. I don't care that Bryan Fuller wanted it to take place in the TOS continuity; I stated what I thought CBS should have done. My opinion has nothing to do with what you wrote.
That they didn't treat it as a new technology wholesale. It wasn't depicted the same. All we saw was narrow corridors and Klingon 'NPCs' that didn't seem to act intelligently, they just vanished when shot as well instead of falling over. The writers themselves compared it to VR more than an actual holodeck. The emitters were also large and bulky inside the room instead of being the entire room, or hidden in the walls.
Exactly so. It's the nicer looking tech, has more features and feels more real. It's what people insist is why HD is better vs. SD, not because it is a moving picture technology.
Yes, but not a very advanced one, nothing like the recroom seen in TAS or the holodecks in the TNG era.
Yes, but it was using big bulky emitters in the centre of the room instead of being built into the walls like in TAS and TNG era. It had all the visual indications of being a less advanced technology.
It was in one of DC's official reference guides that Nov. 1955, the first appearance of Martian Manhunter, was basically the cutoff date between Earths 1 and 2. Yeah Cap's history is pretty messed up. But it was still not a full on reboot. I had a whole timeline mapped out for Marvel time for myself, how Marvel has done it has changed a bit officially but now it seems to be roughly 5 real world years equals one marvel year. My calculations put it about 18 years in-universe since Spider-Man/Avengers/X-Men were founded, so since Peter Parker started at 15, he's about 33 right now.
But the final product was still a room that could create holograms. I'm not intentionally trying to be snarky here, I'm just pointing out that if the technology to produce something like that existed in the 2260's, then people 100 years later should not be acting as if it's some sort of technology they never had before.
They didn't act like the holodeck was brand new, they talking about how realistic it was, the breeze, the water the smells. Now those last bits clash with TAS as we saw wind working in TAS, but not in Discovery.
The tech to produce everything ever seen in Trek is all there in some form in Enterprise to be honest.
Starfleet had holographic target practice, but the only full on holodeck we saw was an alien technology.
Fair enough. I'm still not quite buying that it took a century just to create breezes and smells, though.
Exactly. It was a level of perfected detail that was as close to real life as possible, including temperature control, environmental changes, and atmosphere. While the human brain is not always great at spotting fakes there is a certain level of verisimilitude that would take perfecting to go from DSC/TAS to TNG.
"Snark" is typically defined by some sort of sarcastic joke. Christopher's words were completely earnest and not sarcastic. Therefore he was not being snarky. I dunno man. Breezes and smells seem like the sorts of things that would be extremely difficult to believably create through artificial means. They seem like the sort of thing that would require extremely refined matter replication technology, down to the point of being able to replicate separate molecules in the atmosphere to carry scents. And I'm still not sure how you create realistic breezes -- that seems like the sort of thing an HVAC system would never be able to gain enough control over atmosphere circulation to duplicate.