Space based video games will probably be around and as long as there are video games, and Trek has already put it's stamp on that media. For instance without Star Trek there would be no Mass Effect. There are already some great Star Wars video games out there. Players in the future are bound to be introduced to Trek through them even if has gone away by then.
Justin Lin is directing Star Trek XIII
- Thread starter Hythlodeus
- Start date
Space based video games will probably be around and as long as there are video games, and Trek has already put it's stamp on that media. For instance without Star Trek there would be no Mass Effect. There are already some great Star Wars video games out there. Players in the future are bound to be introduced to Trek through them even if has gone away by then.
No "probably" about it: there is a great deal of scholarship which places that beyond reasonable doubt.
I won't dispute that some individuals have said that they were inspired by Trek to pursue X field of study or go into Y line of work. However, I think that the degree to which Trek has been an influence on technological development is too often exaggerated.Makarov said:
An important factor to consider for Star Trek and Star Wars is that they're both relatively recent developments. Conversely, The King James translation of the Bible was completed in 1611 and the latest of Shakespeare's plays are believed to date from 1613-1614. Indeed, the influence of Shakespeare's works at the time of his death in 1616 might be a more appropriate thing against which to gauge the influence of Star Trek today.Makarov said:
See how influential it still is four hundred years from now, and you may have something. Speaking only for myself, I'm not so sure that I'd want to bet too much.
Even He wasn't bigger than The Beatles.
Now the question is: Is "Star Trek" bigger than The Beatles?
WWJTKD?
Oh, and let's not forget Aesop's Fables or Grimm's Fairytales. Or Greek myth. Probably ninety percent of the themes and stories in TV shows (and everywhere else) are derivative of themes or stories in one of those three, including in "Star Trek".
I'm more than willing to give credit to "Star Trek" for having an effect on popular culture, but that's as far as I'll go and it's still not as big as some other things.
But your criterion for Shakespeare having influence was that they had to recite/quote Shakespeare. Compare apples to apples.
Didn't we go over all this already?
You made red wine come out of my nose. It has stained my very inexpensive sweatshirt. My wife is not amused. I have to clean up now.
According to "Star Trek", people in the 23rd and 24th centuries are still reading and quoting Shakespeare. But how many people in the 23rd and 24th centuries are still quoting "Star Trek"?
Heck, Star Trek quotes Shakespeare constantly: "Dagger of the Mind," "All Our Yesterdays," "By Any Other Name," "The Conscience of the King," "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth," The Undiscovered Country, and probably half of General Chang's dialogue.
Even Klingons know their Shakespeare!
(Dare I mention that my latest Trek novel is titled Foul Deeds Will Rise, which is a quote from Hamlet?)
And, of course, Star Trek was inspired by Forbidden Planet, which was inspired by The Tempest . . . .
Even Klingons know their Shakespeare!
(Dare I mention that my latest Trek novel is titled Foul Deeds Will Rise, which is a quote from Hamlet?)
And, of course, Star Trek was inspired by Forbidden Planet, which was inspired by The Tempest . . . .
Makarov is debating very well, and taking a lot of heat for this mess I started, and I thank him.
There is a lot I did NOT mean with my very poorly worded premis for my contribution to this Thread, and to rehash and try to correct and clarify would make it worse, I think. Suffice to say, I will make greater efforts to watch my words and posts more carefully in the future. Thank you all for your responses and continued examples to me. I truly appreciate it.
There is a lot I did NOT mean with my very poorly worded premis for my contribution to this Thread, and to rehash and try to correct and clarify would make it worse, I think. Suffice to say, I will make greater efforts to watch my words and posts more carefully in the future. Thank you all for your responses and continued examples to me. I truly appreciate it.
Don't worry about it. It's not a mess, just your usual internet debate. Pretty much standard operating procedure around here.
Well, the thing is, it's not really a debate. It's like thinking the world is flat because all you've seen is your hometown, ignoring or even dismissing the much larger and older round world out there, and then covering your ears when the rest of your hometown tells you that there's so more out there ... like the wheat and the roads from the next town over that your home is clearly benefiting from.
Simpsons? Bah, give me a Family Guy reference in Star Trek and I'll be eternally happy.
Ok so you're saying that that universe makes no sense in terms of motivations, then ?
If you feel Trek is such a trifle, why do you dedicate so much of your time to hang out and post on a fan-forum like this?
Now that I understand what you're refereing to, the scene of Anakin's fall was changed after a 2004 screening of the film where pople didn't understand Anakin's motivation for his turning to the dark side. This is from The Secret History Of Star Wars.
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/theturn.html
That doesn't even make any sense. Am I suppose to automatically elevate Trek to some mythical status because I like it? It is a mostly entertaining TV and movie franchise.
I'm still of the opinion that some people watch Star Trek because they think it makes them look smart or cultured. It does neither.
If you feel nuTrek is such a trifle, why do you dedicate so much of your time to hang out and post on a fan-forum like this?