Star Trek Online and Countdown Graphic Novel Continuities

Discussion in 'Trek Literature' started by The Super Brando, Dec 28, 2009.

  1. The Super Brando

    The Super Brando Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Is the continuity established by STO and Countdown going to be adhered to by Pocket Books and future novels? Has there been an official statement, or unofficial confirmation, or something else I've missed?

    I've read the Path to 2409 stuff on the STO website, and I'm not sure I like it as the future of Star Trek.
     
  2. PluckyNinja

    PluckyNinja Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Location:
    Canada
    I read a Dev post on the STO boards that said they STO continuity only jives with the books up until Destiny. So there is already a separation.
     
  3. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    The STO continuity is fundamentally inconsistent with the novel continuity in many ways. There's no chance of them converging. (And the continuities diverge well before Destiny, particularly where DS9-related events are concerned.)

    However, Pocket is going to be publishing at least one STO-based novel, The Needs of the Many by Michael A. Martin, next year. The books already encompass multiple continuities -- the main novel timeline, the Shatnerverse, the Crucible trilogy, the Mirror and Myriad Universes -- and are adding Abramsverse novels next year, so it's easy enough to include STO in the mix of separate continuities as well.

    As for Countdown, it's unknown as yet whether the books will incorporate any of its ideas. But there's no reason they'd be obligated to.
     
  4. Rush Limborg

    Rush Limborg Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Location:
    The EIB Network
    Well...I think they would be obligated to, at the very least, incorperate the backstory of Trek XI....
     
  5. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Yes, that goes without saying. Obviously we're talking about material that is original to Countdown, not material that originated in the film and was incorporated into Countdown. The books will have to acknowledge the supernova and Romulus's destruction once they catch up to 2387, but things like Picard becoming an ambassador, Geordi retiring to design ships, Worf joining the Klingon fleet, and B-4 turning into Data 2.0 are not part of onscreen canon and thus aren't automatically binding on the books.
     
  6. F. King Daniel

    F. King Daniel Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    A type 13 planet in it's final stage
    For what it's worth, I think Countdown should be considered a part of (ugh!) "canon".

    That doesn't mean some of the sillier things/mistakes like the Vulcan Praetor need to be (and nor do they need to be "explained away" in a page-wasting exercize). Same for Nero merging with V'ger in the Nero comics, should that ever come up.

    STO can be ignored, apart from the cool uniforms. As can the other TNG comics.

    I think some bright spark needs to do a novel adaptation of Countdown (just don't over technobbable away the supernova thing. Please.)

    Edit: I also think the FAQ needs a bit about Countdown and the novels. It comes up time and again (at least once from me, iirc!).
     
  7. Ayelbourne

    Ayelbourne Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    WTF??

    Anyway, the developers of STO used stuff from the books, whenever they found them interesting. For example, they ignored Destiny because they thought the majority of players would simply like to fight the Borg.

    Some things they did include:
    -the events of Titan: Taking Wing
    -Nan Bacco being Federation president after Nemesis
    -the emergence of the Imperial Romulan State, led by Donatra (Suran, however, is still alive)
    -the Luna class, obviously (it even looks like they're using Sean Tourangeau's design, which is awesome)

    As for Romulus, it seems like they're gonna tie in the Hobus supernova with their main plotline about an ancient big threat surfacing.
    Listen to Nimoys last sentence here:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyrVbt0ktqE&feature=channel
     
  8. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Canon isn't a matter of individual opinion. The Trek canon is what's onscreen. Even the people who wrote the story to Countdown (and the script to the new movie) acknowledge that it isn't canonical.

    What I figure you mean to say is that the books should choose to remain consistent with the events of Countdown. Okay, I can see some arguments for that; the comic is arguably more prominent and better-known than the books and has close ties to the new movie. If the books chose to disregard it, that might lead to confusion or dissatisfaction among much of the audience -- theoretically, anyway.

    But what would it mean for TNG? If the characters took the life paths they followed in Countdown, then by 2387 there'd be no core TNG characters left on the Enterprise but "Data" (and I question whether a B-4 modified to think like Data would actually qualify as Data). I don't see how TNG could continue as an ongoing book series past that point. Unless it pulled a Full Circle and arranged for at least a fair percentage of the old TNG crew to come together once again after Countdown. But while Full Circle/Unworthy came up with a reasonable explanation for that reassembly of the crew, I think it would be contrived to make it happen again with another crew.

    Of course, the books are only in 2381 at this point, and there's no reason that upcoming books would need to race ahead. After all, the DS9 post-finale fiction has covered less than a year's worth of story time since it began eight years ago. So the books could continue for quite a long time before having to decide whether to acknowledge or contradict Countdown.


    Why? It's already been told as a comic.
     
  9. Rush Limborg

    Rush Limborg Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Location:
    The EIB Network
    ^Well...perhaps so we could see what the other chatacters, such as Ezri Dax, or Riker, or Bacco (assuming she's still president then) are doing during those events....

    As for B-4 and Data, I recall the Vulcan Council referring to Data as a "reconstructed" android.

    I would say, then, that as B-4 sucessfully accessed Data's memories and stuff, Starfleet engineers were able to download all that into a new body--in effect, Data 2.0!
     
  10. JD

    JD Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
    Well, we probably will in one form or another if/when we get to that in the Trek Lit timeline.
     
  11. MNM

    MNM Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Thankfully. Each and every one of those plot points is, to me, completely uninspired.
     
  12. F. King Daniel

    F. King Daniel Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    A type 13 planet in it's final stage
    Personally I'm not sure there are enough core characters left on the Enterprise-E right now.

    There's loads of room for Ashes of Eden-style reunion novels (or comics) set after Countdown.

    As for the Data/B-4 thing - it's no different to Spock's resurrection in STIII, at least mind-wise. Legally, however? That sounds more like a story idea than a complaint.
     
  13. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Actually it's very different. The Genesis-rejuvenated Spock had the same brain capacity as the original Spock. But B-4's brain is far, far cruder than Data's. It would be like transferring Spock's katra into a chimpanzee's brain. The CPU just isn't advanced enough to run the software.

    And as I've said in the past, it always surprises me when people use "Well, it's just like something that's been done before" as an argument in favor of doing something. To me, that's a compelling argument against doing it again.


    I have no idea what you mean by that.
     
  14. David Brennon

    David Brennon Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    ^ Actually, it isn't any different and Spock makes a note of this in Countdown Part Two. Data may not like the term "resurrection" but the fact remains that result was the same. It is not, as you suggest, like putting Spock's katra into the brain of a chimp considering Data is up and about commanding the Enterprise. You may not agree with the way the story was told but that doesn't change the fact that it happened. Data has returned in the Countdown comic and is the same Data that we all remember.

    We don't know exactly how his neural nets were successfully imprinted onto B-4's, but it happened. We can simply leave it at that or look to other media that use this idea to explain it, even though it wouldn't necessarally be the correct answer (I would like to put forward that there is no correct answer since the writers of Countdown never gave one, so all we can do is speculate). Path to 2409 suggests that when Data's mind overtook B-4's that he helped the Daystrom Institute upgrade B-4's brain to Data's standard. That is only one suggestion (one which I personally think is a little over the top), I don't know about any others out there.
     
  15. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    You're arguing backwards, from conclusion to premise. Yes, one story chose to disregard what Nemesis explicitly established about B-4's simplicity and treat his transformation into Data 2.0 as though it were something simple and effortless. I'm saying that I disagree with that story's interpretation and think that it would realistically be a far more difficult matter. Even if it were possible to transform B-4's neural net in such a way that he could be turned into a facsimile of Data, it would not be exactly equivalent to Spock's resurrection because the difficulties that would need to be surmounted would be far greater.

    Also it would be different from Spock's resurrection on one ethically significant level. Spock's katra was placed in body whose mind was "a void." But B-4, however simple his consciousness may be, is a self-aware being, and he would have to essentially die in order for Data to take over his body. I think that's a very profound difference that it would be wrong to overlook.


    It's not a "fact," because these are all invented stories. And Countdown is not canonical. It's one interpretation of what might have been. There's nothing stopping the books from choosing a different interpretation, from taking B-4's story in a completely different direction.
     
  16. Rush Limborg

    Rush Limborg Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Location:
    The EIB Network
    ^As I said, it wasn't necessarily B-4. The one Vulcan in the comic referred to Data as a reconstructed android.
     
  17. David Brennon

    David Brennon Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    I'm not sure what you mean about "arguing backwards, from conclusion to premise". If you'd be so kind as to enlighten me I'd be very grateful. I hate going into an argument blind!

    I don't think that it's safe to assume anything... but you and I have had the assumption argument already.

    We don't know what the process entailed. If could have been easy or it could have been complex. All we have are two panels of page 9 of Countdown Part Two to go by and it doesn't say anything about the procedure. I don't know how difficult it was to imprint Data's neural nets onto B-4's programing... though I'd think it'd be hard (though that is an assumption and bad). My point is we can't judge if Spock's resurrection or Data's return was more or less difficult than the other.

    On a side note, I don't know how realistic Spock's resurrect is either, but I accepted that. Same thing with most Science Fiction, but that isn't the point.

    On the topic of your ethical dilemma, I'm not sure I completely agree. Consider that the mind of Spock on the Genesis Planet may have been blank, but he lived for several days before being rejoined with his katra. What happened to that mind? Were they merged with our Spock upon the rejoining? If so doesn't that mean that the unique individual that was the Genesis Spock gone, joined into the whole of a resurrected Spock? Tuvix made the same type of argument in the episode of Voyager with the same name. Also, who's to say what had happened to B-4 by that point? Star Trek is at its best when dealing with ethical stories... I would personally like to hear this one in full.

    Lastly, it is a fact. It is a fact in terms of what happened in that story. This topic is talking about that story and Star Trek Online (which, coincidentally, tells us how Data's resurrection happens and how much of a complex procedure it would have been) being incorporated into Pocket's continuity. If they adhered to the Countdown story, then it's be a fact in that storyline and explained somehow. No, there isn't anything stopping someone like you from taking B-4's story somewhere else. I don't think it's likely to happen, but it could happen.
     
  18. Daddy Todd

    Daddy Todd Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Location:
    Utah
    I don't think anyone's arguing that the resurrection of Spock was without ethical and scientific problems; personally, I'd've left him dead after Wrath.

    Resurrecting Data would be even more problematic for any number of reasons, including those that Christopher has brought up. Making the same mistake they made in The Search for Spock doesn't transform it into a good idea.
     
  19. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    We have logic. We have what Nemesis established about B-4. That film made it very clear that B-4 was far too crude to process Data's memories. The logical conclusion is that bringing Data back through B-4 would be anything but a simple process.

    This is why you're arguing backward. You're treating Countdown as the definitive source from which all other argument springs. But it isn't. Nemesis is the definitive source of information on the character of B-4. Nemesis establishes the "facts" about the character. Countdown is a non-canonical interpretation whose portrayal of the Data/B-4 issue is problematical because it disregards the facts and logic established in the movie. If a tie-in overlooks or fudges something that was established in canon, why should the fudge be treated as more authoritative than the canonical information?


    That's a valid point, but I'm speaking in terms of what the films themselves made a point of establishing. TSFS made a point of including the line "His mind's a void" precisely in order to suggest that those ethical questions did not apply. But NEM made a point of establishing B-4 as a distinct entity with his own awareness, however limited. So the evident intent of the filmmakers was different. (The hinted possibility of Data's memories returning within B-4 was inserted at studio insistence; the intent of the script was that the attempt to put Data's memories into B-4 failed due to B-4's intrinsic limitations.)


    Key word, if. You and I are defining "fact" in two different ways here. Yes, it is a fact that there is a comic book called Countdown that postulates Data's resurrection. But since the comic is non-canonical, that is not a "fact" within the Star Trek universe, only a conjecture. It doesn't have to be a "fact" within the continuity of Pocket Books.

    And even if Pocket did conform to Countdown's continuity, I sincerely hope the book in question wouldn't ignore the precedent of Nemesis and treat B-4's transformation into Data 2.0 as something simple and straightforward, because that would be lazy and simplistic. And I sincerely hope it wouldn't be treated as something "just like" Spock's resurrection, because that would be lazy and imitative. It's not so much the possibility of Data's return that I'm objecting to here; though I'd rather not see it happen, I can see the possibility of telling the story in an engaging and challenging way. What I object to more is the assertion that it should be seen as no different from Spock's resurrection. We've already seen that story, so why do it again?
     
  20. David Brennon

    David Brennon Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    I'm going to borrow a line from you. You've completely and profoundly missed my point. Let me try one more time to get my point across, though at this point I'm simply going to be repeating myself and am unsure if that will help.

    The fact I'm talking about, if you go back and read what I said, is simply this: In terms of Star Trek Online and Countdown, Data has returned. That is the fact I brought up six posts back. Nothing more, nothing less. There is no different definition of fact here, Christopher, it's the dictionary definition. If Pocket decided to use Countdown as part of their continuity it would then be a fact for them, but not before the decision to use Countdown (and only if they decided to use the whole thing, but to only use parts of it would be sort of silly if you ask me). I am not saying that they have and it is thus a fact for pocket now. I am saying it is a fact for the COMIC and the GAME.

    I hope that helped to clear that up.

    Now, let's talk about other works that specifically go against what has been put up on screen. The whole post-series Enterprise storyline throws These Are the Voyages out the window, but they are perfectly accepted by most fans I know. What makes that any different? It can be done, and it can be done well if the writer is talented enough.

    I am not suggesting that we simply tell the story of Spock's resurrection in the person of Data. All I've said is that they are similar, something that was written in the comic in question. That is it. All I am saying is that the comic gives us a few lines that give us a glimpse of what we've missed in the intervening five-ish years. Remember, the topic is talking about the possibility of merging the STO and Countdown stories into Pocket's current continuity. Obviously, as you said, STO can't be reconciled with Pocket, but Countdown could. If that was to happen, I'd hope that they'd reconcile everything that happened in Countdown with the Pocket continuity. This includes the return of Data. The prospective author(s) has very little to work with. 1) The facts of the film Nemesis 2) the facts of the comic and 3) if they wanted to use the explanation from Path to 2409. The rest would be up to their own imagination. However they decide to do it (if it ever happens) will be fulfilling to me. If they decided not to use Countdown and go in a totally different direction, that's fine with me too.

    On the topic of the ethical question, I still can't agree with you. I can accept his mind as completely blank when he awoke, but every moment after he had to have grown some sort of consciousness. How else could he have functioned? You also didn't respond to my most important point in this matter: Star Trek is at its best when it is dealing with moral issues.