The new/old and same/different thing is tiring and dumb. There are a few immutable realities that are either good or bad depending on your biases, but they are pretty ironclad:
- The streaming marketplace is difficult if you're only concerned about profit and return on investment (which is the driving capitalist force behind the companies that make these shows)
- These companies will make things they believe people want to watch to maximize their profits
- The only way to know if they were successful (by business-minded metrics, not creative ones) is audience construction and retention (did people watch, did they keep watching and thus subscribing)
- You only know this after a show is made and released, not before, so there is considerable risk from this business (not creative) perspective
- To the business people making these decisions "more of the same" is not inherently bad or wrong, in fact it may be more desirable for them because they can rely on already built audiences
- All of this, of course, risks creative stagnation and diminishing returns
From an audience perspective, I can only speak for myself, but:
- If something is well-written, well-made, and entertaining, I could not care less if it is new, old, or "more of the same"
- I am happy when Trek shows reward my long-time fandom
- I am happy when a Trek show surprises me and gets me invested in new settings, characters, etc.
- I am more willing to accept departures from common Trek tropes and conventions when a show is well-written, well-made, and entertaining (the quintessential example of this is DS9 which is a radical departure for a lot of things in the franchise but once it found its footing was very well-written, well-made, and entertaining)
An Academy show can be good! A Legacy show can be good! I would like both and will watch them. I give all Trek a chance and a long leash. I do not know why the fanbase insists on always going to war with itself but it is exhausting.
- The streaming marketplace is difficult if you're only concerned about profit and return on investment (which is the driving capitalist force behind the companies that make these shows)
- These companies will make things they believe people want to watch to maximize their profits
- The only way to know if they were successful (by business-minded metrics, not creative ones) is audience construction and retention (did people watch, did they keep watching and thus subscribing)
- You only know this after a show is made and released, not before, so there is considerable risk from this business (not creative) perspective
- To the business people making these decisions "more of the same" is not inherently bad or wrong, in fact it may be more desirable for them because they can rely on already built audiences
- All of this, of course, risks creative stagnation and diminishing returns
From an audience perspective, I can only speak for myself, but:
- If something is well-written, well-made, and entertaining, I could not care less if it is new, old, or "more of the same"
- I am happy when Trek shows reward my long-time fandom
- I am happy when a Trek show surprises me and gets me invested in new settings, characters, etc.
- I am more willing to accept departures from common Trek tropes and conventions when a show is well-written, well-made, and entertaining (the quintessential example of this is DS9 which is a radical departure for a lot of things in the franchise but once it found its footing was very well-written, well-made, and entertaining)
An Academy show can be good! A Legacy show can be good! I would like both and will watch them. I give all Trek a chance and a long leash. I do not know why the fanbase insists on always going to war with itself but it is exhausting.
