Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 2508268" data-attributes="member: 151">On the one hand, that level of gravity control is astounding and (judging from the level of tech present elsewhere in the series) inconsistent.  On the other hand, it's a practical reality to keep the show's budget reasonable.Slug-throwers may not be sexy, like lasers, masers and other techonologies...but it's very efficient and very practical.  A Mass Driver is just a big rock tosser, but is one of the most effective weapons for planetary bombardment, for example.  The same applies with nukes; to the best of our guesswork, things like lasers and such just aren't terribly energy or damage efficient when compared with the good ol' GUN.Another thing to consider is that Galactica's technology is hobbled...by DESIGN.  It's older-technology features were done intentionally to make them, for the most part, hack-proof against the cylons (as was highlighted by Gaeta's ploy earlier this season).  Hardline phones, for example, can't be compromised like wireless signals can; they also don't broadcast, regardless of how secure the signal.I didn't mean to imply that no one had flaws...just that they weren't presented as significant in the context of the shows, generally.  Picard was distant, as a traditional captain, but I don't think he acquired anything resembling a real flaw until after Locutus occured.  "Family", the episode where he returns home, was one of the series' best.  His catharsis in the mud wasn't a character flaw, it was the breaking DOWN of a character flaw, his stoicism in the face of trauma that he refused to face, that defined that moment.  Kirk's behavior was rarely, if ever, represented as a negative.  By today's standards, he's got more than a few...but he was rarely represented as wrong, without the effect of an outside influence.  Quark, Rom and Garrick don't count, IMHO, as they weren't main characters; they were there as contrast to the Federation characters.  Quark was generally a missed opportunity, IMO.  The episode where he chastised Sisko for mankind's arrogance (and pointed out how his race had never had global genocidal wars) was a great kickpoint that was never picked up again.None of that really bothered me, nearly as much as Trek's capacity to 'freeze' characters.  Characters would tend to ignore what could have been significant changes in the same way that major technical changes would be ignored...until season end/beginning, when they'd make their changes.  That's a different style, of course...one reason it's not really fair to compare the two.Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.  I'd hate to see Trek veer too far into the bleak territory of the new BSG; but I'd also hate to see the new BSG become too light.  The tone and stories are much different.  Make no mistake, here: I still love ST:TNG and ST:TOS.  In fact, I look back with great fondness on ST:TNG, and it's crew/family.  But just like some days I'd rather have Pad Thai and other days I'd like a big, greasy double-cheesburger, each appeals to a different taste.  Variety is good, says I.</blockquote>

Verification