Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread

[cooleddie74]

The Defiant in "In A Mirror Darkly, Parts I and II(ENT)" looked pretty damn good. The right set lighting, the right updates of monitors and viewscreen displays, a Federation flag and framed images of past ships named Defiant on the briefing room wall, the Jefferies tubes turned into a navigable network of conduits, circuitry and ship's systems with 21st century lights and texturing. One-up that with more touchscreens on the blinking indicator light displays and constantly changing information readouts and images on the duty station upper monitors and you have a 1966 design that works very, very well in the 2020s.

A lot of the downfalls in TOS tech are in how it was lit and how some of the displays were obviously static artwork and backlit electrical getups. Some tweaking for the 2020s and that design would still look brilliant.

 

[BillJ]

While simply a limitation of the time, the audio computer that we see in briefing rooms and some crew quarters might be designed by the Andorians or Vulcans, who might have an easier time interacting with an audio interface versus video.

 

[fireproof78]

The Defiant in "In A Mirror Darkly, Parts I and II(ENT)" looked pretty damn good.

Yes, but I am talking about technology not looks. TOS always looks good in its setting. But I am working with technology here.

A lot of the downfalls in TOS tech are in how it was lit and how some of the displays were obviously static artwork and backlit electrical getups. Some tweaking for the 2020s and that design would still look brilliant.

The displays are probably my biggest criticism. Things like the work stations would need more visual graphics to support audience understanding of what is being displayed rather than static images. Data cards would need more indication of what's on them, rather than random colors. Buttons would need some measure of identification in order to appreciate their function.

While simply a limitation of the time, the audio computer that we see in briefing rooms and some crew quarters might be designed by the Andorians or Vulcans, who might have an easier time interacting with an audio interface versus video.

Perhaps. And that would be something that is closer to future tech with people using more verbal commands with different devices.

 

[BillJ]

The displays are probably my biggest criticism. Things like the work stations would need more visual graphics to support audience understanding of what is being displayed rather than static images.

I used to run a machine many moons ago that had a TOS like panel for reading information, became pretty intuitive pretty quick.

 

[fireproof78]

I used to run a machine many moons ago that had a TOS like panel for reading information, became pretty intuitive pretty quick.

I have no doubt that if we were actually in universe it would be so. But, we're the audience not the crew. Understanding it from afar is an important facet of conveying sophistication of technology.

 

[cooleddie74]

Maybe the nitpicks of people in an audience who want to know what every button does shouldn't be the producers' concern in any iteration of the franchise? Glad we're on the same page when it comes to more dynamic, information-filled displays but we can't guide audiences by the hand and label everything for them or else computers even 300 years from now need to come with 1980s instruction manuals and stickers to make sure nobody gets lost.

 

[fireproof78]

Maybe the nitpicks of people in an audience who want to know what every button does shouldn't be the producers' concern in any iteration of the franchise? Glad we're on the same page when it comes to more dynamic, information-filled displays but we can't guide audiences by the hand and label everything for them or else computers even 300 years from now need to come with 1980s instruction manuals and stickers to make sure nobody gets lost.

No, of course not. But a visual short hand of what is being tone is helpful. It's not hand holding for the audience to be able to watch and get a sense of what that button does. Again, we live in a world nowadays where technology is a part of daily life, much more so than ever before. Providing some guidance is helpful if you want it to be believable to the audience. Otherwise, the flashing will stand out as a prop. Even my 12 year old notes that when watching Marvel.

 

[KennyB]

The only issue I have with all of Trek after 2009 is the Discovery elevator shafts.....that's it. My litmus test is "do I enjoy it? Does it entertain me?" That's it.

 

[fireproof78]

The only issue I have with all of Trek after 2009 is the Discovery elevator shafts.....that's it. My litmus test is "do I enjoy it? Does it entertain me?" That's it.

The elevator shafts are plain stupid. Sorry, there's no getting around that. I can't stand most of Star Trek's turbolift designs anyway, but Discovery took it to a new level that I just ignore. It's not worth the blood pressure rise.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yep. Whatever other disagreements we have on Trek tech those turbolift shafts in DSC are so bad they're either deliberate trolls on the part of the producers to have fun with the hardcore nerds or they're one of the dumbest concepts to come out of Trek in the entire width and breadth of the franchise. Either way they're best to ignore.

 

[fireproof78]

Yep. Whatever other disagreements we have on Trek tech those turbolift shafts in DSC are so bad they're either deliberate trolls on the part of the producers to have fun with the hardcore nerds or they're one of the dumbest concepts to come out of Trek in the entire width and breadth of the franchise. Either way they're best to ignore.

I think it is a deliberate chuckle by the producers because we take things way to seriously as fans. Same with the sign injokes on the ENT-D.

 

[cooleddie74]

That's my hope. Nobody can think those shafts are serious.

 

[fireproof78]

That's my hope. Nobody can think those shafts are serious.

They just took inspiration from The Final Frontier. Since when does the Enterprise has 78 decks?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, stupid knows no decade of Trek.

 

[BillJ]

Understanding it from afar is an important facet of conveying sophistication of technology.

Understand what exactly? Most of Trek science or technology doesn't make a lick of sense and it has never gotten in the way of entertaining stories. We get by with the most basic of basic understanding of this stuff and that understanding is of 100% bolognium.

Maybe it would be good for TV to start making people use their imaginations again instead of feeding them poor versions of science and technology.

It seems like many people are more concerned with canon and, the horrors of horrors, something looking like it might have come from the 1960's than they are with good storytelling.

 

[cooleddie74]

It's a glowing button on a computer console 300 years from now or, heck, even 150. It's fiction. It doesn't have to make perfect sense. You push it, the ship goes faster, a weapon fires or scans are conducted. If an audience can't use their imagination enough to get that then I don't know what to say.

 

[BillJ]

It's a glowing button on a computer console 300 years from now or, heck, even 150. It's fiction. It doesn't have to make perfect sense. You push it, the ship goes faster, a weapon fires or scans are conducted. If an audience can't use their imagination enough to get that then I don't know what to say.

There are days I wonder if Idiocracy isn't too far off on what the future of humanity looks like.

 

[fireproof78]

Understand what exactly? Most of Trek science or technology doesn't make a lick of sense and it has never gotten in the way of entertaining stories. We get by with the most basic of basic understanding of this stuff and that understanding is of 100% bolognium.

Maybe it would be good for TV to start making people use their imaginations again instead of feeding them poor versions of science and technology.

As with many things it's a balancing act. If they spout complete nonsense but I track along with it in the story then it works. I agree we can get by on the most basic understanding, but I also think that it is time we moved past basic, and stop treating as though pure BS is the only thing that can drive the story.

It's a glowing button on a computer console 300 years from now or, heck, even 150. It's fiction. It doesn't have to make perfect sense. You push it, the ship goes faster, a weapon fires or scans are conducted. If an audience can't use their imagination enough to get that then I don't know what to say.

It's not perfect sense. It's somewhere between basic and advanced sense. It's making it accessible enough that the audience doesn't feel lost when looking at it. And, giving the audience a lot more credit in paying attention to the details of the show.

 

[cooleddie74]

It's already accessible enough. It's science fiction and its futuristic computer interfaces that don't exist today. If you're watching Star Trek there's a fairly good chance your attitude is: "some of this is above my head but it's set in the future and it's pretty cool so I'm all in!"

 

[BillJ]

I agree we can get by on the most basic understanding, but I also think that it is time we moved past basic, and stop treating as though pure BS is the only thing that can drive the story.

What BS? Everything... EVERYTHING... in Trek is BS. The technology, the science, they wing it every single week that they are making an episode. A baby made from two people one with iron based blood, the other copper, is totally BS. The transporter is BS. The warp drive is BS.

If you don't like bullshit, then Trek simply isn't for you.