The technology issue if you did a post-Berman era Trek show?

[fireproof78]

It's a quantity vs. quality issue. If you create so much technology that it is near magical, then you have to invent reasons for it to not work, i.e. holodeck malfunction, transporter malfunction, etc.

Technobabble gets a bad rap because it doesn't allow the characters to go through drama without having to spew a bunch of jargon. It sounds really impressive, but means nothing, and can be very distracting in a story.

I'm not saying get rid of all technobabble, but try to balance it with genuine engaged in real drama and conflict.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I understand that an emphasis on "technobabble" gets in the way of good stories but this is the 24th century we're talking about. Further the people uttering the technobabble have gone through advanced education-engineers, rank officers, scientists and so on. You can't realistically show how supposedly Starfleet can turn rocks into replicators without a little bit of future tech going over the audience's heads.

Why mention it at all? To use Roddenberry's own example, Does Joe Friday explain how his revolver works when he uses it? Same for the tech in Star Trek. No one needs to know the ins and outs Replicator technology for it to be used on the show. All they need to know is you push a few buttons and the replicator spits out a bowl.

 

[Voth commando1]

I don't recall the name of the book it had something to do with literary criticism, or sci fi studies or what not but it summarizes my godhood thesis in a far more academic and systematic fashion.

While I'm not of that opinion personally Trek wouldn't be Trek if that's not the stated end goal. The federation and humanity hope, dream, perhaps even pray that through their efforts, one day they'll be able to speak to Q as he does to them, that one day the immutable laws that govern the universe will no longer be so cold and indifferent, that one day all the beings in all galaxies and universes will sing the same song, think the same way and walk upon the same ladder. That they will be greater than the Q not only in power but more moral, more compassionate, more dynamic, and wise.

That's Trek's Endgame.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't recall the name of the book it had something to do with literary criticism, or sci fi studies or what not but it summarizes my godhood thesis in a far more academic and systematic fashion.

While I'm not of that opinion personally Trek wouldn't be Trek if that's not the stated end goal. The federation and humanity hope, dream, perhaps even pray that through their efforts, one day they'll be able to speak to Q as he does to them, that one day the immutable laws that govern the universe will no longer be so cold and indifferent, that one day all the beings in all galaxies and universes will sing the same song, think the same way and walk upon the same ladder. That they will be greater than the Q not only in power but more moral, more compassionate, more dynamic, and wise.

That's Trek's Endgame.

That is a very strange end game and sounds like it would be more at home in Stargate or Dr. Who universe than Star Trek universe.

 

[Ralphis]

If you're doing a post Nemesis/Voyager show, I think the simplest option would be to retcon the technology to resemble something closer to 23rd century Star Trek, or even 22nd Century. And yes, that would tick a lot of people off, which is why it's a good thing I'm not a showrunner for a Star Trek show (at least not in this timeline).

I just think trying to find an in-universe reason to scale back the technology might cause too many headaches. I could be wrong though.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Retconning the technology really isn't necessary. Just don't have characters standing around giving lengthy dissertations on how [INSERT TECHNOBABBLE HERE] works and just get on with the story at hand.

ENGINEER: In order to break free of the temporal-spatial anomaly, we need to reverse polarize--

CAPTAIN: Just get us out here!

ENGINEER: Oh. Okay.

 

[Brainsucker]

Why technology has become problem in Berman's Star Trek story?

The answer is because The regular casts can't die. They have a very thick plot shield. This reason alone limit how the writers make suspense. as They have to 'save' those characters from their demise in every episodes. Thus the writers were forced to create magical technology just to save the day.

The example of this is what have we saw in Voyager. Where Paris and Captain Janeaway tried a warp 10 ship, but they were evolve into another creature. The story was funny. But guess what. The doctor can save both of them easily, and both of the characters return to human at the end of the day. Just imagine, a holographic doctor in a ship medbay can easily revert two characters from the next human evolution? The doctor is not a magician. He's a God.

I think in order to prevent the technology from become overwhelming is by making the capability of the ship limited. For example, if some characters (regular or not) got some serious sickness, the ship doctor can't always safe the day. They have to limit the equipment of the ship medbay; thus some serious problem / injury / sickness have to be sent into a bigger hospital. Some of them can be saved, but others won't.

The other example is, that a ship with the size of Voyager won't have a very advanced replicator that can replicate everything. Just give the job to the industrial Zone in Earth or other Federation core members planet.

A ship can't be too independent just like the USS Voyager in Star Trek Voyager. They should have limitation. 7 years in outer space without support should break down the ship to an extend that they have to downgrade the ship capability (because they can't replace the broken parts along the way), or they have to replace the Federation tech with the Alien ones (from barter, etc, with the local that they met along the way).

So, the main problem is the very thick plot shield that they put into the regular casts and the ship; as they can't die in any way in the show.

Just imagine, if they remove the plot shield (so all regular casts can die in any moment), yet they have to protect the captain from being dying in an episode, would they put Captain Janeaway into the experimental shuttle and let her evolve into a creature? That decision can kill her for sure.

Edit :
For the Ship refit (adding new technology, new weapon, armor, etc), they should put limitation on how the ship crews can do it without the help of heavy equipment that available in a spaceyard. Look at how the Voyager crew can add the futuristic armor easily even without the help of heavy crank, industrial replicator, and other spaceyard heavy tools. If they can do that easily, then what is the purpose of having the drydock in the first place? Everyone can build a ship in the middle of nowhere. As long as they have Voyager around.

 

[Cheapjack1]

Why technology has become problem in Berman's Star Trek story?

The answer is because The regular casts can't die. They have a very thick plot shield. This reason alone limit how the writers make suspense. as They have to 'save' those characters from their demise in every episodes. Thus the writers were forced to create magical technology just to save the day.

The example of this is what have we saw in Voyager. Where Paris and Captain Janeaway tried a warp 10 ship, but they were evolve into another creature. The story was funny. But guess what. The doctor can save both of them easily, and both of the characters return to human at the end of the day. Just imagine, a holographic doctor in a ship medbay can easily revert two characters from evolve to the next human evolution.

I think in order to prevent the technology from become overwhelming is by making the capability of the ship limited. For example, if some characters (regular or not) got some serious sickness, the ship doctor can't always safe the day. They have to limit the equipment of the ship medbay; thus some serious problem / injury / sickness have to be sent into a bigger hospital. Some of them can be saved, but others won't.

The other example is, that a ship with the size of Voyager won't have a very advanced replicator that can replicate everything. Just give the job to the industrial Zone in Earth or other Federation core members planet.

A ship can't be too independent just like the USS Voyager in Star Trek Voyager. They should have limitation. 7 years in outer space without support should break down the ship to an extend that they have to downgrade the ship capability (because they can't replace the broken parts along the way), or they have to replace the Federation tech with the Alien ones (from barter, etc, with the local that they met along the way).

So, the main problem is the very thick plot shield that they put into the regular casts; as they can't die in any way in the show.

Just imagine, if they remove the plot shield (so all regular casts can die in any moment), yet they have to protect the captain from being dying in an episode, would they put Captain Janeaway into the experimental shuttle and let her evolve into a creature? That decision can kill her for sure.

Could be a debate about that. If we had the time.

 

[Brainsucker]

Could be a debate about that. If we had the time.

What debate?

 

[Voth commando1]

I don't think people really appreciate how incredibly advanced Trek is and how if you want to maintain the integrity of the franchise.

The drama is inherently limited by the factors of the setting.

 

[Rahul]

What people don't realize is that all of Star Trek in the 22nd, the 23rd, the 24th, and therefore probably in the 25th century as well all have the same basic technologies:

The starships are faster than light and travel to other planets. There are phasers and shields. The transporter can beam you from a starship to a planet nearby (although not faster than light). You cannot beam through shields. People have communicators, with which they can call their starships in orbit (although not faster than light). There are tricorders/scanning devices. Medical equipment has advanced to heal almost everything. Time travel is known to exist, but not possible with our technology. The food comes from replicators (or "protein resequencers"). The names and changes are only cosmetically.

Only difference between 22nd/23rd and 24th century? The holodeck. Which is neat IMO, and a big part of Star Trek that should return. (And starships like Voyager being now able to land on a planet)

Seriously, any potential Star Trek series in a post Nemesis/VOY setting will abide to the same aforementioned rules. It will only have different names ("quantum torpedo" instead of "photon torpedo") and be more powerful and look more advanced, but only compared to it's predecessor (aka new Tricorders being smaller/holographic, but they will serve the same purpose for the story). They really only need one or two new technologies (like the holodeck once) to convince us it's even farther in the future. Like nanotechnology. Have a tool that's a hammer, and then transforms itselt into a voltmeter like the T-1000. Boom! 25th century.

 

[Voth commando1]

What about time ships, slipstream drive and trans warp VOY era Trek clearly shows Technology is progressing.

 

[fireproof78]

What about time ships, slipstream drive and trans warp VOY era Trek clearly shows Technology is progressing.

Which has a net zero impact on the story or the characters.

 

[Rahul]

What about time ships, slipstream drive and trans warp VOY era Trek clearly shows Technology is progressing.

Yeah, technology is progressing: Faster-than-light ships are even faster faster-than-light. But that doesn't really affect the narrative in a bad way. They will still encounter new aliens and unknown planets, they are just further out now. And the timeships clearly were from a much further future, the 29th century.

 

[Jay Everington]

I totally disagree with this notion that any series set beyond DS9/VOY would have to radically advance the technology. I mean, at some point there are limits to how fast technology can advance, even if there is no theoretical limit to how far it can advance eventually. Generally speaking, technological advancement in Trek has been relatively slow in terms of the big picture from what we've seen.

If you look at the speed of tech development between ENT & TOS, the ships are a little bigger, a bit faster, the torpedoes a little more powerful, they have shields, medical tech has presumably advanced a good degree, but is it really THAT radically different? Same with technology between the TOS movies and TNG. You've got holodecks now; the ships are faster (though it's hard to say just how much faster given the new warp scale) and the sensors a little more advanced. You've got a few sentient androids and holograms, but they're not the norm by any means.

Truth be told, if you look at ENT and then at TNG/DS9/VOY, the technology does not advance THAT quickly. If anything, it probably should have advanced a lot more over the span of 200+ years. But in some ways it is compatible with historical patterns. There are some periods of time when technology advances much faster than in others. Just look at the pace of advancement from 1930 to 1950 compared with the previous 100 years. It can be argued that more life-altering new technologies were invented in that one 20 year span than in the entire century prior. Wars tend to advance technology quicker than peace, and there are obviously economic factors as well. I'd imagine technological advancement post-Dominion War takes a hit given the resources it took to wage such a large scale war would likely lead to shortages, even in the Federation.

A show set post-DS9 wouldn't have to feature technology significantly more advanced than what we've already seen. Plus, as has been stated, technology is merely Trek's window dressing. Saying technology on a Star Trek series would hinder storytelling is like saying a police drama produced today would be less entertaining than one made in the 70's because modern forensics makes tracking down criminals too easy. It's only an issue if the writers let it become an issue, and good writers/producers would find a way to turn it to their advantage regardless.

 

[Jayson1]

The technology issue for me is less on how advanced it is and more about how relatable it is and how it can enhance the drama. Like I said above a hammer is more dramatic than a tri-corder. I think what made "TOS" work is they actually didn't relay on it that much because as far a the show was concerned they were less intrested in showing a future but more intrested in showing a more evolved 60's.. What I get afraid of with going to the future is that it will want to explore how things have changed instead of how things are the same but just in a slightly more cool looking landscape. The fewer high concept gadgets you have to deal with means you have to relay on normal human style soultions to solve problems.

Jason

 

[Cheapjack1]

The technology issue for me is less on how advanced it is and more about how relatable it is and how it can enhance the drama. Like I said above a hammer is more dramatic than a tri-corder. I think what made "TOS" work is they actually didn't relay on it that much because as far a the show was concerned they were less intrested in showing a future but more intrested in showing a more evolved 60's.. What I get afraid of with going to the future is that it will want to explore how things have changed instead of how things are the same but just in a slightly more cool looking landscape. The fewer high concept gadgets you have to deal with means you have to relay on normal human style soultions to solve problems.

Jason

co conspiratorially. lol

 

[The Old Mixer]

co conspiratorially. lol

FYI, the friendly that @1001001 gave you here applies in this forum as well. Future posts lacking in both substance and sense may be met with formal Warnings.

 

[Cheapjack1]

FYI, the friendly that @1001001 gave you here applies in this forum as well. Future posts lacking in both substance and sense may be met with formal Warnings.

I'm writing and selling a film trilogy at the moment. You can discuss that and all the other work I'm making for people in the next few years maybe?

 

[The Old Mixer]

I'm writing and selling a film trilogy at the moment. You can discuss that and all the other work I'm making for people in the next few years maybe?

I'm so impressed that I won't hand out a warning for arguing with the mod.