• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Seriously, where are the Klingons??

"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 will keep my opinions about the typical behavior of said poster to myself. I’d prefer to drop the matter now.

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.

I was at the Power Plant in Baltimore back when it was an entertainment center for kids in the ‘80’s. They showed a movie where they pumped smells through the ventilation system to coincide with the scenes in the film. And wind enough to blow through my hair when there was wind in the movie. If they could do that in 1980, they could easily do it in the 23rd century.
 
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.
And have it feel realistic, like you're really there. That's the goal, not just "Oh, I smell the ocean."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sci
This is absurd because TOS looks like it was 100 years ago from today. I do not get how anyone can think that cardboard, tiny view screens, a rats nest of wires, ginormous circuit boards with simple circuits on them, etc. looks futuristic at all. You are in a tiny minority for which the appearance of a show from the 1960s, well over 50 years ago and before the proliferation of the integrated circuit and the innovation that drove via Moore's Law has to be respected by writers who are composing scripts on devices that have more computing power than the planet did in 1967 or by set designers that are incorporating AR walls into set that are supposed to be hundreds of years more advanced than the tools they are designing them in. It is insane.
Why would it have to be cardboard? How often do we see wires and circuit boards and why would we see them in detail now? How do you know the buttons weren't advanced holographic multifunctional interfaces? :p

Riker: I didn't believe these simulations could be this real.

For all we know he was talking about the resolution or something. The holograms on Disco in the 23rd century were pretty blurry and the ones in TAS were, well, animated.
Did they have trees with leaves, lakes and waterfalls, dense vegetation, old cars and people who kiss you and leave lipstick behind, etc. in Disco or TAS? That's what Riker and Picard were excited about. It's like someone who only knows Doom suddenly playing Alien Isolation.

People now can also be blown away by crappy game graphics because they don't know better while others are like, 'these graphics suck, this is nothing new.' People do this every generation of games. People who have never put on a VR headset are usually pretty blown away by any VR they see the first time, no matter the objective quality or advancement. It's pretty acceptable that people do this in the future.
People who only know Doom would probably shrug at Minecraft XD
I always thought that holodecks in earlier eras should show pixelated or low-poly objects that look like today's game engines, to show that they're not as hi-res as the TNG ones - like 2D sprites with checkerboard textures in ENT, and Quake 2 quality in TOS :D
You don't have to do a reboot every time you change the sheets on the bed. Superman existed from 1938 to 1986 without a reboot. The creators made adjustments along the way adding and subtracting elements as needed for various reasons. Superman's WWII adventures just stop being mentioned as real time moved away from the 1940s. Superboy was inserted into continuity in late 1940s. His costume underwent changes as did his Kryptonian name. Minor tweeks were made like the Daily Planet and Perry White.
Comic book franchises can't really be compared because they have a different origin, many stories were retold over and over in different formats and with different outcomes, villains stay the same but are different every time, etc. They don't have to fit with each other in a grand scheme or timeline. Trek has managed to do that pretty well most of the time.

Alien Isolation blew me away when I played and replayed it recently. It uses the 1979 designs for everything. Does that affect its atmosphere, story, graphics quality, being "art" or not, or does it only in fact keep it authentic to the movie? ;)
 
Comic book franchises can't really be compared because they have a different origin, many stories were retold over and over in different formats and with different outcomes, villains stay the same but are different every time, etc. They don't have to fit with each other in a grand scheme or timeline. Trek has managed to do that pretty well most of the time.
Hahahahaha. Man you really don't know comics or comics fans. Trust me, comics fandom is even more anal about "details" than Trek fans.
 
Comic book franchises can't really be compared because they have a different origin, many stories were retold over and over in different formats and with different outcomes, villains stay the same but are different every time, etc. They don't have to fit with each other in a grand scheme or timeline. Trek has managed to do that pretty well most of the time.
Hahahahaha. Man you really don't know comics or comics fans. Trust me, comics fandom is even more anal about "details" than Trek fans.
Just for an example of how hardcore we comic book fans are about continuity, I still don't understand how Dr. Abraham Cornelius of Weapon X was shot in the head and killed by Maverick (in 1991/1992's 'X-Men: Mutant Genesis'), with his last words expressing remorse about the damage Weapon X did to Wolverine, then resurfaced without any explanation in 2014's 'Death of Wolverine' as a hate-filled mad scientist bent on recreating the Weapon X project on countless new victims.
 
I will keep my opinions about the typical behavior of said poster to myself. I’d prefer to drop the matter now.



I was at the Power Plant in Baltimore back when it was an entertainment center for kids in the ‘80’s. They showed a movie where they pumped smells through the ventilation system to coincide with the scenes in the film. And wind enough to blow through my hair when there was wind in the movie. If they could do that in 1980, they could easily do it in the 23rd century.
I've been to this kind of projection as well (paired with 3D glasses, they called it 4d cinema), it can be quite immersive.

Star Trek is not Alien and should never, ever, emulate that franchise.
...why?
 
Hahahahaha. Man you really don't know comics or comics fans. Trust me, comics fandom is even more anal about "details" than Trek fans.
Do they say things have to look like in the first drawings of that first comic issue? I did not expect that.
But hey, if so many people across franchises want continuity even in comic books and their various adaptations, can it really be that wrong? :p
 
Do they say things have to look like in the first drawings of that first comic issue? I did not expect that.
But hey, if so many people across franchises want continuity even in comic books and their various adaptations, can it really be that wrong? :p
Yes, they do. There is an "I want them to be as they were when I first encountered them" philosophy. Not unlike fans Star Trek.
 
To be brief it's a terrible franchise that I find no joy in.
well, it’s very different from Star Trek, but some things were very well done. The first movie is a masterpiece and I actually liked the third a lot, not so much what I’ve seen of the rest.
 
I was at the Power Plant in Baltimore back when it was an entertainment center for kids in the ‘80’s. They showed a movie where they pumped smells through the ventilation system to coincide with the scenes in the film. And wind enough to blow through my hair when there was wind in the movie. If they could do that in 1980, they could easily do it in the 23rd century.

I mean if it felt realistic to you, great, but I've never felt like those kinds of systems were realistic. They always felt incredibly fake to me.
 
I mean if it felt realistic to you, great, but I've never felt like those kinds of systems were realistic. They always felt incredibly fake to me.

The point wasn't whether it felt realistic or not. The point was that the technology existed IRL in the 1980's to do that kind of thing, so realistically it would be even more fine-tuned 300 years from now in a fictitious future.
 
The point wasn't whether it felt realistic or not. The point was that the technology existed IRL in the 1980's to do that kind of thing, so realistically it would be even more fine-tuned 300 years from now in a fictitious future.

I'm not persuaded it's physically possible for fake breezes and fake smells to be fine-tuned to the point of fooling the human brain.
 
The point wasn't whether it felt realistic or not. The point was that the technology existed IRL in the 1980's to do that kind of thing, so realistically it would be even more fine-tuned 300 years from now in a fictitious future.
Technological advancement doesn't have a time table.
 
I'm not persuaded it's physically possible for fake breezes and fake smells to be fine-tuned to the point of fooling the human brain.

I’m not persuaded that most of the technology we’ve seen in Star Trek is physically possible.
 
I'm not persuaded it's physically possible for fake breezes and fake smells to be fine-tuned to the point of fooling the human brain.
they used to say the same thing about CGI and artificial intelligence a couple of decades ago.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top