Agreed. As much as there are complaints about Discovery's tone, the idea of a dystopian Federation is one that I don't see going over well, and really not that interesting either.
Please, no more Mass Effect references in science fiction...
What post-Nemesis Trek SHOULD be like
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
A series set around 2417 or so, ten years after a war that shook the Federation to its core but did not break it. As a result, we'll have characters that are a bit more rough & tumble than they were during the TNG-VOY era. They're less idealistic and they may not all get along with one another, but they still exist in a world that's better and more united than ours.
Please, no more Mass Effect references in science fiction...
I always thought that it's been mostly Star Trek and Star Wars.
Should have said "influences" rather than references. Regardless, Mass Effect has overstayed its welcome with me.
I'd be interested in finding out which major sci-fi TV shows and movies were influenced by Mass Effect, and why elements from the series (such as the use of tech skill sets) can't be considered for the Trek franchise.
It's not just TV, but video game design, uniform design, STO, and fan conceps. I can't look up science fiction concepts and inspiration without tripping over ME.
The best way to move forward is also to respect the past.
I would have gone with a series called "Star Trek: Legacy" set in 2400. USS Legacy is the new flagship of the Federation, and the Federation is trying to rebuild after the Dominion War, Borg attacks and Romulan crisis.
Legacy is a prototype ship that can travel into transdimensional realms recently discovered. The ship would be travelling to places that defy our understanding of physics, on a quest to find an ancient alien species.
I would have loved Jason Isaacs as the Captain of this show instead. They can have him as the Captain in the present and have structured flashbacks to his life as a young Lieutenant (played by another actor) during the TNG era, when the Federation was a different entity. It would juxtapose the past and present, as Starfleet rediscovers what it needs to be going forward.
I would have gone with a series called "Star Trek: Legacy" set in 2400. USS Legacy is the new flagship of the Federation, and the Federation is trying to rebuild after the Dominion War, Borg attacks and Romulan crisis.
Legacy is a prototype ship that can travel into transdimensional realms recently discovered. The ship would be travelling to places that defy our understanding of physics, on a quest to find an ancient alien species.
I would have loved Jason Isaacs as the Captain of this show instead. They can have him as the Captain in the present and have structured flashbacks to his life as a young Lieutenant (played by another actor) during the TNG era, when the Federation was a different entity. It would juxtapose the past and present, as Starfleet rediscovers what it needs to be going forward.
In my opinion, one thing they need to do is:
Stop trying to make Star Trek something else!.
Over the years I've been hearing that Star Trek needs to be more like various other series. Now the flavor of the month is Game of Thrones. Good show but Star Trek is Star Trek. I've heard people who wanted Star Trek more like Babylon Five (massive five year story arcs), Dr. Who (the Star Trek time travel series fanatics), and of course as mentioned above Game of Thrones.
Why not just have Trek be Trek?
Stop trying to make Star Trek something else!.
Over the years I've been hearing that Star Trek needs to be more like various other series. Now the flavor of the month is Game of Thrones. Good show but Star Trek is Star Trek. I've heard people who wanted Star Trek more like Babylon Five (massive five year story arcs), Dr. Who (the Star Trek time travel series fanatics), and of course as mentioned above Game of Thrones.
Why not just have Trek be Trek?
Every once in a while there is a pitch for 25th century that intrigues me. While I generally avoid the "flagship" cliche, it does sound semi-interesting from a story point of view. As a small nitpick, I wouldn't use "Legacy" because it feels to past looking, not forward looking.
That aside, I like the idea of a Romulan crisis, with the Federation trying to reach out a hand of friendship. Certainly want to avoid the STO plotline (shudders) but I do think it could be interesting, as well as opening more "new worlds" that were behind the "Romulan curtain" as it were.
However, on the flip side, please no Borg! I am so tired of them and they add nothing to the story and would further drive the wedge of "magic tech" deeper in to the lore.
I can't like this enough. Please, no more Khan.
Yeah. I agree. Although it would have been nice if the villian in Nemesis had been someone from the TNG television series. The Wrath of Rasmussen.
Which major TV shows and movies?
None that I'm aware of, which wasn't really my point.
I just tired of Mass Effect's influences on science fiction in general. Or, maybe its borrowed so heavily from other properties that I see it more. I don't know. I study science fiction design as a hobby so I might be biased. Still don't care for ME though.
Especially since so many of them don't get what made TWOK work.
It had maybe 10-15 minutes of "slow", tense and suspenseful space combat. The rest was character development and the characters investigating something (life on ceti alpha V, Khan, the concept of Genesis, space station Regula, the underground caves). It was a movie with a lot of build up and suspense, something which 80's movies were good at and late-90's movies onwards generally aren't.
I think a majority of Star Trek fans know very little about Mass Effect or what it describes, so why not consider them in post-Nemesis? These include the Federation or even old opponents employing small arms and technology beyond phasers (they've been doing that slowly for star ships), new discoveries about one's origin (also explored readily in works like 2001) but with shattering effects (perhaps even similar to Lovecraft's cosmic nihilism, an idea explored in part in a wide range of works, including Blake's poetry), cliques or factions within the Federation that threaten to fragment it (developed in some episodes and features and implicit in the latest TV series), and more.
Notice that these points are not only seen in Mass Effect and discussed in other sci-fi works but have even appeared in earlier Trek shows or features.
I personally don't care what Star Trek fans "know" or "don't know" regarding Mass Effect. As a general rule, I would like to avoid it.
The struggle with that, as fair of a point that may be, is that since Star Trek has done it before, I would be hesitant to build it around in another show, especially the origins of humanity. Cliques and factions would be more interesting, especially as a fallout from the Dominion War. I certainly wouldn't like a nihilism faction to become the central focus though. I don't mind challenging the thread of optimism running through Star Trek's various iterations, but nihilism is far to common in contemporary society and media. I would rather see it not take center stage.
As for weapons technology, I wouldn't mind seeing different weapons being employed, or other designs based upon contemporary developments (Direct Energy Weapons, rail weapons and the like. I'm sure I'm missing something).
I think I would prefer to see more innovation with technology, with Federation scientists and Starfleet working to integrate Dominion tech and research to their advantage as they rebuild and explore previously unknown territory (Romulan contraction, Cardassian worlds, or even the Breen).
If it has to borrow from other science fiction, rather than building upon established themes from its own series, then I would rather see it use a marine unit, like Halo or Starship Troopers, or a more frontier element, like Firefly.
Yes, let's go there.
Maybe they'll find some sort of doorway, like a gate...in the stars.
The fact that Star Trek borrows from other works and is turned alluded to by others shows that not following such rule makes no sense.
Next, there is obviously a difference between something that's been done and that's hardly be done. In the case of Trek, it's mostly the latter for the points that I raised, as much of the franchise has involved exploration, even for those that had a main story arc that encompasses the series (like Voyager). Film, of course, can be more flexible, especially if one envisions an end to the franchise.
About nihilism being a dominant part of the Trek series or even science fiction in general, I feel that's it's been the other way round.
Technological development is one of my points and puts to question the argument that a general idea of not alluding to Mass Effect or even other works should be followed.
Finally, I agree with the points about Halo and Starship Troopers, but I think that only strengthens my arguments further. That is, one can envision a post-Nemesis Trek that tries to deal with a coming catastrophe related to an "alien astronaut" backstory (similar to Mass Effect or even 2001, and reminiscent of the first Star Trek feature), which involves investigation by military teams (a la Starship Troopers or even Aliens), political intrigue and conspiracy (Mass Effect, Halo, Aliens, and even reminiscent of backstories concerning Khan) that have to use more advanced technology (a la Halo and Mass Effect, and dealt with in numerous Trek episodes but only in one or a few episodes).
Remove all references to Mass Effect in what I wrote and the violation of that general rule remains.
I said I preferred Nihilism not be a part of Trek, since it really hasn't been in the past. I don't think it has ever been dominant in Star Trek.
Then, perhaps, Star Trek should try doing something original?
Similar threads
